Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
State of TEXAS; State of Alabama; State of Arizona; State of Florida; State of Georgia; State of Indiana; State of Kansas; State of Louisiana; State of Mississippi, by and through Governor Tate Reeves;1 State of Missouri; State of Nebraska; State of North Dakota; State of South Carolina; State of South Dakota; State of Tennessee; State of Utah; State of West Virginia; State of Arkansas; Neill Hurley; John Nantz, Plaintiffs - Appellees v. UNITED STATES of America; United States Department of Health; Human Services; Alex Azar, Ii, Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; United States Department of Internal Revenue; Charles P. Rettig, in his Official Capacity as Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Defendants - Appellants State of California; State of Connecticut; District of Columbia; State of Delaware; State of Hawaii; State of Illinois; State of Kentucky, ex rel. Andy Beshear, Governor; State of Massachusetts; State of New Jersey; State of New York; State of North Carolina; State of Oregon; State of Rhode Island; State of Vermont; State of Virginia; State of Washington; State of Minnesota, Intervenor Defendants - Appellants
The court having been polled at the request of one of the members of the court and a majority of the judges who are in regular active service and not disqualified not having voted in favor (FED. R. APP. P. 35 and 5TH CIR. R. 35), rehearing en banc is DENIED.2
In the poll, 6 judges voted in favor of rehearing en banc, and 8 voted against. Judges Smith, Stewart, Dennis, Graves, Higginson, and Costa voted in favor. Chief Judge Owen and Judges Jones, Elrod, Southwick, Haynes, Willett, Duncan, and Engelhardt voted against.
FOOTNOTES
2. Judges Ho and Oldham are recused and did not participate in the en banc poll.
PER CURIAM:
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 19-10011
Decided: January 29, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)