SCOTUS Grants Cert to Mull NY AG's Ability to Depose Cabinet Sec. in Census Case
The nation's high court set a briefing schedule over the question of a lower court's ability to expand the discovery process, with oral arguments scheduled in February.
November 16, 2018 at 03:41 PM
3 minute read
The U.S. Supreme Court issued an order Friday saying it will take up the issue of whether the New York attorney general may depose U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in its challenge to the Trump administration's plan to include a question on citizenship status in the 2020 census.
The nation's high court granted certiorari to a mandamus petition by the Department of Justice on Friday, setting a schedule for briefings beginning Dec. 17. Oral arguments in the case were scheduled for Feb. 19, 2019.
The Supreme Court's decision to take the dispute comes as the underlying challenge to the census question proceeds at trial in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman declined DOJ requests to postpone the trial ahead of decisions from the Supreme Court, finding that any outcome from the trial would be undoubtedly appealed by the parties regardless. The trial has proceeded apace, despite the DOJ's fast-tracked higher court appellate process.
Currently, oral arguments in the bench trial over the legality of the plan to include the citizenship question rather than use administrative data is set for Nov. 27.
The Supreme Court has already played a pivotal role in the litigation. In October, the court stayed the ability for the plaintiffs, among them the New York Attorney General's Office, to depose Ross as part of the litigation. At that time the court indicated it would likely grant cert on the question of the New York attorney general's ability to depose the cabinet secretary.
Shortly thereafter, the Justice Department leapfrogged the U.S. Court Appeals for the Second Circuit and filed a mandamus petition with the Supreme Court. DOJ attorneys have asked the high court to decide whether Furman can order a wide scope of discovery to probe the decision-making process Ross navigated in formulating the census question.
Challengers argue the discovery is necessary to show that racial animus was at the core of seeking the citizenship status of all census respondents—a move they say would likely result in an under-count that will have a negative impact on communities.
“The trial record closed earlier today and we are confident in the strength of our case,” said the spokeswoman for New York Attorney General's Office. “The record clearly shows that the secretary's decision to demand citizenship status on the 2020 Census is illegal. It's important to note that the Supreme Court's decision to grant cert is specific to the question of extra-record discovery.”
The U.S. Justice Department press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
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
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 AllSplits Among the Departments: What Might Be Ripe for the Court of Appeals
8 minute readRecent Developments Section 1782 Litigation and the Attorney-Client Privilege
8 minute readPreparing for 2025: Anticipated Policy Changes Affecting U.S. Businesses Under the Trump Administration
Trending Stories
- 1How We Won: Samsung Defeats Data Breach Class Action
- 2With Florida’s Lateral Hiring Remaining Steady in 2024, Here’s the Top Hires Throughout the State
- 3Capital Markets Partner Rejoins O’Melveny Ahead of Expected Uptick in Demand
- 4Pharma Company Faces Breach-of-Contract Claim Over $1.3 Million in Unpaid Invoices
- 5KPMG Law Seeks Alternative Business License, Shaking Up Legal Status Quo
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