Summary
This Sixth Circuit per curiam opinion addresses whether an appeal of a preliminary injunction against Tennessee’s Underage Abortion Trafficking Act is moot. Because the district court subsequently entered a permanent injunction resolving the merits of the plaintiffs' claims, the court finds that no live controversy remains. Consequently, the appellate court dismisses the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Article III.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Tennessee’s appeal of the preliminary injunction is moot.
Holdings
- The appeal is moot because the district court has resolved the merits and issued a permanent injunction, extinguishing any live controversy.
Key quotations
“Our jurisdiction is limited to “Cases” and “Controversies.” U.S. Const. art. III, § 2.” (at 2)
“A live issue no longer exists on appeal, and the appeal becomes moot, when an intervening event makes it impossible for us to “grant ‘any effectual relief’ . . . in favor of the appellant.”” (at 2)
“Because the district court resolved the merits of this case, “no status quo remains for us to maintain.”” (at 3)
Factual background
Tennessee enacted the Underage Abortion Trafficking Act prohibiting adults from intentionally recruiting, harboring, or transporting pregnant unemancipated minors for the purpose of concealing or obtaining an abortion. Plaintiffs Rachel Welty, a family‑law attorney, and Aftyn Behn, a social worker, sued eleven district attorneys alleging the recruitment ban violated their First Amendment free‑speech rights and was unconstitutionally vague. They obtained a preliminary injunction, which was later superseded by a permanent injunction after summary judgment.
Procedural history
The district court granted a preliminary injunction against Tennessee's Underage Abortion Trafficking Act, later entered summary judgment for the plaintiffs on free‑speech claims and for Tennessee on vagueness, and issued a permanent injunction. Tennessee appealed the preliminary injunction; while the appeal was pending, the district court resolved the merits, rendering the appeal moot.