WWW.DISSERTATION.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Dissertations, online materials
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:   || 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |   ...   | 8 |

«No. _ IN THE Supreme Court of the United States _ WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH; AUSTIN WOMEN’S HEALTH CENTER; KILLEEN WOMEN’S HEALTH CENTER; NOVA ...»

-- [ Page 1 ] --

 

No. ___________________

IN THE

Supreme Court of the United States

_____________________________________________________________________________________

WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH; AUSTIN WOMEN’S HEALTH CENTER; KILLEEN WOMEN’S

HEALTH CENTER; NOVA HEALTH SYSTEMS D/B/A REPRODUCTIVE SERVICES; SHERWOOD

C. LYNN, JR., M.D.; PAMELA J. RICHTER, D.O.; AND LENDOL L. DAVIS, M.D., on behalf

of themselves and their patients, Applicants, v.

KIRK COLE, M.D., Commissioner of the Texas Department of State Health Services;

MARI ROBINSON, Executive Director of the Texas Medical Board, in their official capacities, Respondents.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

On Application to Stay the Mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ___________________________________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION FOR A STAY PENDING THE FILING AND

DISPOSITION OF A PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

STEPHANIE TOTI J. ALEXANDER LAWRENCE

Counsel of Record MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP DAVID BROWN 250 W. 55th Street JANET CREPPS New York, NY 10019

JULIE RIKELMAN

CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS JAN SOIFER

199 Water Street, 22nd Floor PATRICK J. O’CONNELL New York, NY 10038 O’CONNELL & SOIFER LLP (917) 637-3684 98 San Jacinto Blvd., Suite 540 stoti@reprorights.org Austin, TX 78701 June 19, 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

STATEMENT OF FACTS

I. The Challenged Requirements.

A. The ASC Requirement.

B. The Admitting-Privileges Requirement.

II. The Proceedings Below.

III. The Challenged Requirements Would Drastically Reduce The Availability Of Abortion Services In Texas

IV. The Challenged Requirements Do Not Enhance The Safety Of Abortion Procedures.

A. The ASC Requirement

B. The Admitting-Privileges Requirement

–  –  –

ARGUMENT

I. Standard Of Review

II. There Is A Reasonable Probability That This Court Will Grant Certiorari.

III. There Is A Fair Prospect That This Court Will Reverse The Fifth Circuit’s Judgment.

A. The Fifth Circuit Applied the Undue Burden Standard Incorrectly.

–  –  –

B. The Fifth Circuit’s Alternative Holding Concerning Res Judicata Results From a Deeply Flawed Interpretation of Preclusion Doctrine.

–  –  –

IV. Irreparable Harm Will Result From The Denial Of A Stay.

V. The Balance Of Equities Tips In Plaintiffs’ Favor.

CONCLUSION

–  –  –

Am. Civil Liberties Union v. Ashcroft, 322 F.3d 240 (2003), aff’d and remanded, 542 U.S. 65 (2004)

Aspex Eyewear, Inc. v. Marchon Eyewear, Inc., 672 F.3d 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2012)

Atwood Turnkey Drilling, Inc. v. Petroleo Brasileiro, S.A., 875 F.2d 1174 (5th Cir. 1989)

Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of N. New Eng., 546 U.S. 320 (2006)

Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993)

City of Akron v. Akron Ctr. for Reprod. Health, Inc., 462 U.S. 416 (1983)

Deerfield Med. Ctr. v. City of Deerfield Beach, 661 F.2d 328 (5th Cir., Unit B 1981)

Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973)

Edenfield v. Fane, 507 U.S. 761 (1993)

Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987)

Ezell v. City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684 (7th Cir. 2011)

Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007)

Harris v. McRae, 448 U.S. 297 (1980)

Hillman v. State, 232 Ga. App. 741, 503 S.E.2d 610 (1998)

–  –  –

Holt v. Hobbs, __ U.S. __, 135 S. Ct. 853 (2015)

In re J.M.S., 280 P.3d 410 (Utah 2011)

In re Piper Aircraft Corp., 244 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir. 2001)

Islamic Ctr. of Miss., Inc. v. City of Starkville, Miss., 840 F.2d 293 (5th Cir. 1988)

Jackson Women’s Health Org. v. Currier, 760 F.3d 448 (5th Cir. 2014)

Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)

Maher v. Roe, 432 U.S. 464 (1997)

Maryland v. King, __ U.S. __, 133 S. Ct. 1 (2012) (Roberts, CJ., in chambers)

Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968 (1997)

McCormack v. Hiedeman, 694 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2012)

Ohio Forestry Ass’n, Inc. v. Sierra Club, 523 U.S. 726 (1998)

Planned Parenthood Ariz., Inc. v. Humble, 753 F.3d 905 (9th Cir. 2014), cert. denied, 135 S.Ct. 870 ( 2014)

Planned Parenthood Ass’n of Kan. City, Mo., Inc. v. Ashcroft, 462 U.S. 476 (1983)

Planned Parenthood of Cent. Mo. v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 (1976)

–  –  –

Planned Parenthood of Greater Tex. Surgical Health Servs. v. Abbott, 748 F.3d 583

Planned Parenthood of Greater Tex. Surgical Health Servs. v. Abbott, 951 F. Supp. 2d 891 (W.D. Tex. 2013)

Planned Parenthood of Greater Tex. Surgical Health Servs. v. Abbott, ___ U.S. ___, 134 S. Ct. 506 (2013)





Planned Parenthood of Ind. & Ken., Inc. v. Comm’r, Ind. Dep’t of Health, No. 1:13–cv–01335–JMS–MJD, 2014 WL 6851930 (S.D. Ind. Dec. 3, 2014)....... 49 Planned Parenthood of Kan. & Mid-Mo., Inc. v. Drummond, No. 07-4164-CV-C-ODS, 2007 WL 2811407 (W.D. Mo. Sept. 24, 2007)............... 49 Planned Parenthood Se. Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

Planned Parenthood of Wis., Inc. v. Van Hollen, 738 F.3d 786 (7th Cir. 2013), cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 2841 (2014)................passim Roman Catholic Diocese of Dallas v. Sebelius, 927 F. Supp. 2d 406 (N.D. Tex. 2013)

Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996)

Schad v. Borough of Mt. Ephraim, 452 U.S. 61 (1981)

Simopoulos v. Virginia, 462 U.S. 506 (1983)

Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., __ U.S. __, 131 S. Ct. 2653 (2011)

Stanton v. D.C. Ct. of Appeals, 127 F.3d 72 (D.C. Cir. 1997)

Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880 (2008)

–  –  –

United States v. Tohono O’Odham Nation, ___ U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 1723 (2011)

United States v. Windsor, __ U.S. __, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013)

W. Airlines, Inc. v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 480 U.S. 1301 (1987) (O’Connor, J., in chambers)

Wash. State Grange v. Wash. State Republican Party, 552 U.S. 442 (2008)

Wheaton College v. Sebelius, 703 F.3d 551 (D.C. Cir. 2012)

Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole, No. 14-50928 (5th Cir. June 9, 2015) (per curiam)

Whole Woman’s Health v. Lakey, 769 F.3d 285 (5th Cir. 2014)

Whole Woman’s Health v. Lakey, __ U.S. __, 135 S. Ct. 399 (2014)

Williamson v. Lee Optical of Okla., Inc., 348 U.S. 483 (1955)

STATUTES AND RULES

Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 171.004

Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 171.0031

Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 245.003

Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 245.004

Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 245.010

42 C.F.R. § 416.40 – 416.52

42 C.F.R. § 416.41

–  –  –

72 Fed. Reg. 42511 (Aug. 2, 2007)

22 Tex. Admin. Code § 190.8

22 Tex. Admin. Code §§ 192.1 – 192.6

25 Tex. Admin. Code §§ 133.1 – 133.169

25 Tex. Admin. Code §§ 135.1 – 135.56

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 135.2

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 135.51

25 Tex. Admin. Code §§ 139.1 – 139.60

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.4

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.5

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.8

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.22

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.23

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.31

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.33

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.40

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.41

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.42

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.44

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.46

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.48

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.49

–  –  –

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.53

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.56

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.57

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.58

25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.59

38 Tex. Reg. 6536 – 6546 (Sept. 27, 2013)

38 Tex. Reg. 9577 – 9593 (Dec. 27, 2013)

38 Tex. Reg. 9584 (Dec. 27, 2013)

38 Tex. Reg. 9588 (Dec. 27, 2013)

OTHER AUTHORITIES

11A Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2948.1 (3d ed.)

James F. Blumstein, Of Doctors and Hospitals: Setting the Analytical Framework for Managing and Regulating the Relationship, 4 Ind. Health L. Rev. 211 (2007)

Restatement (Second) of Judgments, § 24

Robert Steinbuch, Placing Profits Above Hippocrates: The Hypocrisy of General Service Hospitals, 31 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 505 (2009)................ 20 Tex. Atty. Gen. Op. GA – 0212 (July 7, 2004)

–  –  –

To the HONORABLE ANTONIN SCALIA, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court

of the United States and Circuit Justice for the Fifth Circuit:

Plaintiffs respectfully seek a stay of the Fifth Circuit’s mandate pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari to prevent the abortion clinics that were able to reopen following this Court’s October 14, 2014, order from having to close again. Abortion access in Texas has been sharply curtailed since a 2013 law forced nearly half of the State’s 41 licensed abortion facilities to close.

Without a stay, more than half of the remaining facilities would be forced to close when the Fifth Circuit’s mandate issues on July 1, 2015. This would amount to a more than 75% reduction in Texas abortion facilities in just a two-year period, creating a severe shortage of safe and legal abortion services in a State that is home to more than five million reproductive–age women.

This case concerns the constitutionality of the 2013 Texas law, which the district court found “creates a brutally effective system of abortion regulation that reduces access to abortion clinics [and thereby imposes] a statewide burden for substantial numbers of Texas women,” ROA.2693, purportedly in the interest of women’s health. The district court permanently enjoined two of the law’s requirements after finding that, although they would drastically decrease access to abortion in Texas, they would not enhance the safety of abortion in any way.

Indeed, the district court concluded that the requirements are so incongruous with their stated objective of promoting women’s health that the proffered rationale must be pretextual.

–  –  –

On October 2, 2014, the Fifth Circuit stayed the district court’s judgment pending appeal, forcing over a dozen abortion facilities to close. Whole Woman’s Health v. Lakey, 769 F.3d 285 (5th Cir. 2014). On October 14, 2014, this Court vacated the stay in substantial part, permitting those facilities to reopen. Whole Woman’s Health v. Lakey, __ U.S. __, 135 S. Ct. 399 (2014) (mem.). The Fifth Circuit has now reversed the district court’s judgment on essentially the same grounds as it had granted the stay. Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole, No. 14-50928 (5th Cir. June 9, 2015) (per curiam). Under the terms of its mandate, 10 of the 19 licensed facilities currently providing abortion services in Texas would have to close pending this Court’s disposition of the case and an eleventh would be limited to providing abortions to women residing in four counties using a single physician. In addition, a twelfth facility that has applied to the State’s licensing agency to reopen would be prevented from doing so. Accordingly, the fate of a dozen clinics—and the many women who would otherwise obtain abortions at those clinics—will be determined by the outcome of this motion.

On June 10, 2015, one day after the Fifth Circuit issued its decision on the merits, Plaintiffs filed a motion asking the court of appeals to stay its mandate.

Today, after modifying a portion of its June 9 order, the panel denied the motion for a stay with one judge noting a dissent. Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole, No. 14th Cir. June 19, 2015) (Prado, J. dissenting). If the Fifth Circuit’s mandate is not stayed, any victory achieved by Plaintiffs in this Court would be largely symbolic. Few clinics closed for the duration of the proceedings would be able to

–  –  –

reopen. Thus, the stay requested by Plaintiffs would ensure that the Court is able to grant meaningful relief if it ultimately reviews this case and that the rights of Texas women are protected in the meantime.

–  –  –

I. The Challenged Requirements.

Plaintiffs are challenging two provisions of Texas House Bill 2 (“H.B. 2” or the “Act”), 83rd Leg., 2nd Called Sess. (Tex. 2013), that restrict access to safe abortion services: The “ASC requirement,” Act, § 4 (codified at Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 245.010(a)); 25 Tex. Admin. Code § 139.40, limits the type of facilities in which abortion procedures may be performed by mandating that the licensing standards for abortion facilities be equivalent to the licensing standards for ambulatory surgery centers, and the “admitting-privileges requirement,” Act, § 2 (codified at Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 171.0031(a)(1)(A)); 25 Tex. Admin Code §§ 139.53(c)(1), 139.56(a)(1), limits the pool of licensed physicians who may perform abortions by mandating that those physicians have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.

–  –  –



Pages:   || 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |   ...   | 8 |


Similar works:

«LAW AND MENTAL DISORDER Bloom, Hy, and Schneider, Richard D., Eds., Law And Mental Disorder[:] A Comprehensive And Practical Approach (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2013), i-xxi, 1,422 pp. Reviewed by: DAVID C. DAY, Q.C. (01 July 2015) Introduction At birth of legal memory (03 September 1189), concepts of “mental disorder” and “law” were solitudes; sharing only disregard for personal liberties, which manifested in asylums and gaols. Law’s misunderstanding (or ignorance) of mental disorder, and...»

«COLOR INTERPRETATION AND SOIL TEXTURES ACT PRESENTATION 1 SEPTEMBER 2013 David Hammonds, Environmental Manager Florida Department of Health Division of Disease Control and Health Protection Bureau of Environmental Health Onsite Sewage Programs 850-245-4570 • Materials for the soils training section were  provided by the FDOH, USDA Natural  Resources Conservation Service, Wade Hurt,  Dr. Willie Harris, Dr. Mary Collins, Dr. Rex ...»

«The Intractable Pain Patient’s Handbook for Survival by Forest Tennant, MD, DrPH The Intractable Pain Patient’s Handbook for Survival by Forest Tennant, MD, DrPH © Copyright 2007 Forest Tennant, MD, DrPH VERACT INTRACTABLE PAIN CLINIC 340 South Glendora Avenue; West Covina, CA 91790-3043 626-919-7476; E-mail: veractinc@msn.com; Website: www.intractablepaindisease.com Published by Pain Treatment Topics Glenview, IL, USA http://www.Pain-Topics.org (cover revision June 2007) The mission of...»

«Package leaflet: Information for the patient Vanatex HCT 80 mg/12.5 mg film-coated tablets Vanatex HCT 160 mg/12.5 mg film-coated tablets Vanatex HCT 160 mg/25 mg film-coated tablets Valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide Read all of this leaflet carefully before you start taking this medicine because it contains important information for you.Keep this leaflet. You may need to read it again.If you have any further questions, ask your doctor or pharmacist. This medicine has been prescribed for you only....»

«DATA SHEET SEVREDOL® Morphine sulphate 10 mg and 20 mg tablets Presentation SEVREDOL tablets are capsule shaped, biconvex, scored, film-coated tablets approximately 12 mm in length with the strength on one side and IR on the other side of the score line. The colours of the tablets are as follows: 10 mg blue and 20 mg pink. Uses Actions Morphine is a potent opioid analgesic. It is about 8 times more potent than pethidine and 10 times more potent than codeine. Morphine combines selectively at...»

«PACKAGE LEAFLET: INFORMATION FOR THE USER Valsartan 40 mg Capsules Valsartan 80 mg Capsules Valsartan 160 mg Capsules Valsartan Read all of this leaflet carefully before you start taking this medicine.• Keep this leaflet. You may need to read it again.• If you have any further questions, ask your doctor or pharmacist.• This medicine has been prescribed for you. Do not pass it on to others. It may harm them, even if their symptoms are the same as yours. • If any of the side effects gets...»

«MEDICATION GUIDE Oral Transmucosal Fentanyl Citrate (OTFC) CII (fentanyl citrate) oral transmucosal lozenge 200 mcg, 400 mcg, 600 mcg, 800 mcg, 1200 mcg, 1600 mcg IMPORTANT: Do not use Oral Transmucosal Fentanyl Citrate (OTFC) unless you are regularly using another opioid pain medicine around-the-clock for at least one week or longer for your cancer pain and your body is used to these medicines (this means that you are opioid tolerant). You can ask your healthcare provider if you are opioid...»

«JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS & TECHNOLOGIES Vol. 19/2012, ISSN 1642-6037 ENG signal, optokinetic nystagmus, fuzzy logic Tomasz PANDER1, Robert CZABAŃSKI1, Tomasz PRZYBYŁA1, Dorota POJDA-WILCZEK2 SACCADES DETECTION IN OPTOKINETIC NYSTAGMUS A FUZZY APPROACH The analysis of eye movements is valuable in both clinical work and research. One of the characteristic type of eye movements is saccade. The accurate detection of saccadic eye movements is the base for further processing of saccade...»

«Package leaflet: Information for the user TREVICTA 175 mg prolonged release suspension for injection TREVICTA 263 mg prolonged release suspension for injection TREVICTA 350 mg prolonged release suspension for injection TREVICTA 525 mg prolonged release suspension for injection Paliperidone Read all of this leaflet carefully before you start using this medicine because it contains important information for you.Keep this leaflet. You may need to read it again.If you have any further questions,...»

«Package leaflet: Information for the user Bisoprolol HCT STADA 2.5 mg/6.25 mg, 5 mg/12.5 mg and 10 mg/25 mg film-coated tablets Bisoprolol/ Hydrochlorothiazide Read all of this leaflet carefully before you start taking this medicine becaus it contains important information for you.  Keep this leaflet. You may need to read it again.  If you have any further questions, ask your doctor or pharmacist.  This medicine has been prescribed for you only. Do not pass it on to others. It may harm...»

«PACKAGE lEAFlET: InFORMATIOn FOR THE USER Alventa Xl 37.5 mg prolonged-release capsules, hard Alventa Xl 75 mg prolonged-release capsules, hard Alventa Xl 150 mg prolonged-release capsules, hard Venlafaxine Read all of this leaflet carefully before you start taking this medicine. • Keep this leaflet. You may need to read it again. • If you have any further questions, ask your doctor or pharmacist. •...»

«Gene expression profiling of oral cancer cells chronic exposed to areca nut extract Yi-Chen Li (李宜珍)1, Ann-Joy Cheng (鄭恩加)2 1 Graduate Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, 333, Taiwan 2 Department of Medical Biotechnology and Laboratory Science, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan Abstract Oral cancer is the 6th most frequent cancer in Taiwan. The habit of areca nut chewing is the main etiological factor of oral cancer. To shed light on molecular...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.dissertation.xlibx.info - Dissertations, online materials

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.