A federal appellate court’s rare decision to leapfrog a three-judge panel and hear an abortion challenge by the full court exposed a sharp division on the bench and provoked an accusation of “procedural hopscotch.”

“Appellants have unabashedly sought to avoid panel review of the merits in a case involving a controversial issue because they dislike its panel’s composition and the panel’s resolution of the stay motion,” wrote Judge Karen Nelson Moore of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in dissent. “In endorsing this game of procedural hopscotch, a majority of the en banc court has embarked on an unsettling course.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]