Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-601_bq7c.pdf
Page Number: 4

4  CAMERON v. EMW WOMEN’S SURGICAL CENTER, P. S. C. 

Syllabus 

case.  United Airlines, Inc. v. McDonald, 432 U. S. 385, 394.  Because 
the attorney general’s need to intervene did not arise until the secre-
tary  ceased  defending  the  state  law,  the  timeliness  of  his  motion 
should be assessed in relation to that point in time.  NAACP v. New 
York, 413 U. S. 345, distinguished.  Pp. 10–12. 

(3) The panel’s finding that granting intervention would prejudice 
respondents  was  similarly  flawed.    While  the  attorney  general’s  re-
hearing petition pressed an issue (third-party standing) not raised in 
the secretary’s appellate briefs, allowing intervention would not have 
necessitated resolution of that issue.   See, e.g.,  McDonald, 432 U. S., 
at 394.  Moreover, respondents’ loss of its claimed expectations around 
election of a  Governor  with a  history  of  declining  to  defend  abortion 
restrictions is not cognizable as unfair prejudice in the sense relevant 
here.  Pp. 12–13. 

831 Fed. Appx. 748, reversed and remanded. 

  ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., 
and THOMAS, GORSUCH, KAVANAUGH, and BARRETT, JJ., joined.  THOMAS, 
J., filed a concurring opinion.  KAGAN, J., filed an opinion concurring in 
the judgment, in which BREYER, J., joined.  SOTOMAYOR, J., filed a dis-
senting opinion.