| Azar v. Garza | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Decided June 4, 2018 | |
| Full case name | Alex Azar, II, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. v. Rochelle Garza, as guardian ad litem to unaccompanied minor J. D. |
| Docket no. | 17-654 |
| Citations | 584U.S. ___ (more) |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Temporary restraining order granted,Garza v. Hargan,No. 1:17-cv–02122 (D.D.C. Oct. 18, 2017);vacated in part, D.C. Cir., Oct. 19, 2017;vacated and remanded,874 F. 3d 735 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (en banc) |
| Holding | |
| Judgment below should be vacated and remanded with a direction to dismiss when a federal civil case has become moot while on its way to the Supreme Court. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Per curiam | |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV | |
Garza v. Hargan (Azar v. Garza afterAlex Azar's confirmation asUnited States Secretary of Health and Human Services) was a case before theUnited States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit regarding a juvenileundocumented immigrant in the custody ofU.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement who sought to have anabortion.[1][2][3]
In early September 2017, a seventeen-year-oldJane Doe was apprehended after illegally crossing theMexico–United States border intoTexas.[4]: 1812 As an unaccompanied minor, Jane was placed into care of theOffice of Refugee Resettlement.[4]: 1813 Jane, who was then eight weeks pregnant, was sent to an ORR funded shelter where she decided to have an abortion.[4]: 1813 A Texas judge granted Jane a judicial bypass to the state'sparental consent law and allowed her to seek an abortion on September 25, 2017.[4]: 1813
The ORR refused to allow Jane to leave the shelter to have her abortion.[4]: 1813 In March 2017, new ORR Director Scott Lloyd had forbid federally funded shelters from taking "any action that facilitates" an abortion without his express approval.[4]: 1813 [5] Jane'sguardian ad litem, Rochelle Garza, then sued the ActingUnited States Secretary of Health and Human Services,Eric Hargan, in theUnited States District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging that the government was violating Jane's constitutional right to anabortion in the United States.[4]: 1813
On October 18, 2017, U.S. District JudgeTanya S. Chutkan granted Jane's request for atemporary restraining order, ordering the government to allow Jane to leave the shelter to attend the pre-abortion counseling required by Texas law and to undergo the abortion.[6][4]: 1813 On October 20, a panel of theUnited States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit granted the government's emergency motion tostay Judge Chutkan's order.[4]: 1813 In anunsigned order by Circuit JudgesBrett Kavanaugh andKaren L. Henderson, the court allowed ORR to keep Jane from leaving its shelter to undergo an abortion until October 31, provided that the government "expeditiously" placed Jane in an outside sponsor's custody.[4]: 1814 Circuit JudgePatricia Millett wrote a dissent in which she argued the majority was imposing an undue burden on abortion in violation ofWhole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt (2016).[4]: 1814
On October 24, the fullen banc D.C. Circuit reversed the panel majority, reimposing the district court order requiring the government to grant Jane access to an abortion.[7][4]: 1815 Judge Millet added a concurrence reiterating the arguments in her earlier dissent.[4]: 1815 Judge Henderson dissented, arguing that an undocumented immigrant is not a "person" under theUnited States Constitution and so does not have rights under theDue Process Clause.[4]: 1815 Judge Kavanaugh, joined by Judges Henderson andThomas B. Griffith, dissented, defending the panel decision.[4]: 1815 That day, District Judge Chutkan amended her order to allow Jane's abortion to proceed "promptly and without delay".[4]: 1815 Jane had her pregnancy aborted on October 25.[4]: 1815
On November 3, 2017, theSolicitor General of the United States,Noel Francisco, petitioned theSupreme Court of the United States for a writ ofcertiorari to vacate the D.C. Circuit's ruling and moved for sanctions against Jane's lawyers at theAmerican Civil Liberties Union.[8] Francisco accusedDavid D. Cole of professional misconduct for not informing the Justice Department that Jane's abortion procedure had been rescheduled to earlier than anticipated.[8] According to Francisco, this wrongfully prevented the government from seeking an emergency order from the Supreme Court blocking the procedure.[8]
On June 4, 2018, the Supreme Court granted review andvacated the judgment on the ground that the claim forinjunctive relief granted by the lower court had becomemoot when the girl followed through with the abortion. Vacating the lower court decision prevents it from having any value asprecedent.[9][10] The Court did not grant the government's request for sanctions against Jane's attorneys.[11] The opinion was unsigned.
On December 18, 2017, Judge Chutkan granted relief to two additional pregnant girls in ORR care who had sued for access to an abortion.[12] On March 30, 2018, Judge Chutkan certified the pregnant girls' lawsuit as aclass action and ordered the government to provide access to abortions to all girls in ORR's custody.[13]