The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Fifth Circuit Rules Against Whole Woman's Health in Pending Appeal
Today, the Fifth Circuit decided Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson. I hope to digest the opinion in depth later. For now, here is a summary of the opinion:
First, as to the state officials' appeal. The district court denied the officials' Eleventh Amendment immunity defenses, and they immediately appealed under the collateral-order doctrine. The district court properly stayed proceedings against those defendants. However, the plaintiffs then sought an emergency motion for injunction pending appeal, premised on their argument that the district court's Eleventh Amendment immunity ruling was correct. We previously DENIED that motion and now explain why. S.B. 8 emphatically precludes enforcement by any state, local, or agency officials. The defendant officials thus lack any "enforcement connection" to S.B. 8 and are not amenable to suit under Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908).
Second, as to Dickson's appeal. The district court denied Dickson's motion to dismiss, which relied on standing and other jurisdictional grounds, and Dickson appealed. But the district court declined to stay proceedings against Dickson and proposed to go forward against him alone. Dickson then asked us for a stay, and we temporarily stayed proceedings while considering his request. In the meantime, the plaintiffs moved to dismiss Dickson's appeal. We conclude that jurisdictional issues presented in the proceedings against Dickson are related to the issues presented in the state officials' collateral-order appeal. The notice of appeal therefore divested the district court of jurisdiction over Dickson as well as the officials. See Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982). Accordingly, we DENY the plaintiffs' motion to dismiss Dickson's appeal, and we GRANT Dickson's motion to stay the district court proceedings pending appeal.
Finally, we EXPEDITE the appeal to the next available oral argument panel.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The kooks have spoken. God help the rape victims
It's cute when you try to pretend you care.
Of course I care. I have sisters
They can help themselves. There’s always birth control, including “Plan B”. Not to mention abstinence.
But why take a prophylactic approach when “abortion uber alles” has worked so well?
You're magnanimously giving my sisters consent to abort using plan B after rape...the mind boggles
Sorry to hear that all your sisters were raped and all of them became pregnant just as this law was going into effect. Thoughts and prayers.
OMG, how does a woman 'abstain' from rape
Much like Texas Republicans are going to push a button and rid the streets of rapists. This is fantasyland, fitting for a state known for mega churches rather than education.
Arthur's right for once. Demanding that we eliminate rape instead of counsel people on how to prevent it was stupid when the feminists did it, and the similar comments by Gov. Abbott were just as dumb.
Would this three-clinger panel have ruled similarly with respect to a law establishing a similar system of claims against those who carry guns, facilitate the hiring of Federalist Society members to provide legal services, engage in faith-healing scams or rattlesnake-juggling exhibitions, wear cowboy hats, teach fairy tales in science classrooms, or drawl (other than in parody) while singing?
Other than your presumption they're acting in hypocritical bad faith, is there any basis to conclude that they wouldn't?
I believe they are result-driven culture warriors on the wrong side of history and morality. I would expect them to be more charitable (empathetic) toward gun nuts, superstitious bigots, or Federalist Societeers because they share an ideological and cultural bond with other clingers. I also would expect many of them to be in "Mission From God" mode, and not in the favorable sense.
https://www.picturethisgallery.com/art/how-many-angels-can-dance-on-the-head-of-a-pin/
Thanks for writing up that summary Josh!
To protect their employees the US gov will have to pull out agencies Defense and money...lest the rape victims get harmed adjudications. As powerful as Texas is it cannot support itself because it take so little taxes
Whole Woman's Health still have a 20% shot at drawing friendly panel.
"S.B. 8 emphatically precludes enforcement by any state, local, or agency officials."
Doesn't the entire enforcement mechanism rely on judges hearing the cases, and some officer if the court backstopping collection of the awards?