US Supreme Court Postpones Upcoming Arguments Amid Coronavirus Threat
"The court will examine the options for rescheduling those cases in due course in light of the developing circumstances," the Supreme Court's press office stated.
March 16, 2020 at 10:48 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday announced it will not hold its March oral argument session that was scheduled to begin March 23 for two weeks.
"In keeping with public health precautions recommended in response to COVID-19, the Supreme Court is postponing the oral arguments currently scheduled for the March session (March 23-25 and March 30-April 1)," the court's public information office stated. "The court will examine the options for rescheduling those cases in due course in light of the developing circumstances."
The court said postponement of the argument session in light of public health concerns is not unprecedented. The justices did not hold arguments for October 1918 because of the Spanish flu epidemic. And the court shortened its argument calendars in August 1793 and August 1798 in response to yellow fever outbreaks. Advocates had been preparing at various moot court sessions in recent days, on the chance the court was prepared to keep argument sessions as scheduled.
Despite the deferral of arguments, the justices will go forward with other business. The court will hold its regularly scheduled private conference Friday when the justices go through newly filed petitions and other matters. Some justices may participate remotely by telephone. The court also will release regularly scheduled orders on what petitions have been granted or denied at 9:30 a.m. March 23. That orders list will be available on the court's website.
"With no perfect precedent to go by, the Spanish flu probably does present the best model for the court to handle the coronavirus pandemic. The current data indicates that non-symptomatic individuals—including court staff and law clerks—can transmit the virus," veteran advocate Thomas Goldstein of Washington's Goldstein & Russell wrote in a piece Sunday at SCOTUSblog. "Coronavirus is most dangerous for older people. For a justice to become sick—potentially, to die—would be disastrous."
The Supreme Court building will continue to be open for official business, and filing deadlines are not extended under Rule 30.1, according to the court. The court also is expanding remote working capabilities to reduce the number of employees in the building. The building will remain closed to the public until further notice, as the court announced last week.
Many federal trial and appellate courts around the country are curtailing public access and delaying upcoming hearings, all part of an effort to minimize the spread of the novel coronavirus. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit postponed a week's worth of arguments that were set for March 17 to March 20.
Read more:
Paul Weiss' Brad Karp: We Need Obama, Bush and Clinton to Beat the Coronavirus
'All Hands on Deck' for Labor and Employment Firms Facing Flood of Employer Questions
As Coronavirus Threat Grows, More Courts Curb Access and Limit Oral Arguments
How the US Justice Department Is Responding to Coronavirus Threat
4th Circuit Postpones Oral Arguments as Courts Tighten Restrictions Over Coronavirus
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThese Law Firm Leaders Are Optimistic About 2025, Citing Deal Pipeline, International Business
6 minute read'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readJudicial Appointments After Casey: Observers Wary but Hopeful Bipartisan Spirit Will Continue
Will Khan Resign? FTC Chair Isn't Saying Whether She'll Stick Around After Giving Up Gavel
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 2The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
- 3Distressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
- 4For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 5As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250