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 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
© 2025 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 All'Lack of Independence' or 'Tethered to the Law'? Witnesses Speak on Bondi
4 minute readDOT Nominee Duffy Pledges Safety, Faster Infrastructure Spending in Confirmation Hearing
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 2Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 3‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 4State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
- 5Invoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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