Cameron, Att'y Gen. of KY v. EMW Women's Surgical Center

Whether a state attorney general vested with the power to defend state law should be permitted to intervene after a federal court of appeals invalidates a state statute when no other state actor will defend the law.

In attempting to defend Kentucky law, in regard to a contested abortion bill, Petitioner filed a motion to intervene. Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to review the judgement of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in denying Petitioner’s motion to intervene. Petitioner raises several points, but most notably seeks to have the Court vacate the judgement below and remand for further consideration, citing the Court’s recent decision in June Medical Services, L.L.C. v. Russo, 140 S. Ct. 2103 (2020). The Sixth Circuit denied Petitioner’s motion to intervene, affirming the lower court’s judgement. Petitioner argues that this has now become an issue of sovereignty. Petitioner believes that State has a substantial interest in enforcing their own respective laws. As follows, Petitioner, therefore believes, that the State should be allowed to decide who can defend these laws. Petitioner argues that the Sixth Circuit’s decision is unjustifiable. Petitioner believes that under state law, they should be able to defend legal issues, as they see fit. Therefore, Petitioner asks the Court to grant certiorari, as well as vacate and remand the judgement below, in accordance with the recent June Medical decision.