Source: https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/01/relist-watch-134/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 06:42:14+00:00

Document:
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relists.
I’m traveling today, so I’m going to be more summary than usual. The April calendar already appears to have a full complement of 12 cases, but the court in theory could add to it with this Friday’s grants. Admittedly, if it does so, petitioners won’t have the full 30 days to file reply briefs before oral argument. After this Friday, the court’s next scheduled conference isn’t until February 15 – almost a month from now. And any cases granted at that conference will definitely be considered next fall.
Just one criminal law case among the relist rolls this week: Kahler v. Kansas, 16-6135, a capital case that addresses whether the Sunflower State’s effort to revise its courts’ consideration of the insanity defense violates the Eighth and 14th Amendments. But don’t be watching the order list for this case just yet – after relisting it for this Friday’s conference, the court called for the record. While that is a sign the court is looking very closely at this case, it means the court won’t consider it at conference again until the record has arrived and the justices have had a chance to review it.
In the “burying the lede” department, we have six other new relists. All involve challenges to Trump administration policies, and all involve the unusual procedure of requesting “cert before judgment” – that is, seeking Supreme Court review before the relevant court of appeals has ruled in the case. Three cases – Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 18-587, Trump v. NAACP, 18-588, and Nielsen v. Vidal, 18-589 – involve the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Under that program, DHS would refrain from taking immigration actions against people brought to the country as children, and those people would be eligible for work permits. Three other new relists involve challenges to the Defense Department’s policy respecting transgender service members, under which those found to have gender dysphoria would generally be barred from military service: Trump v. Karnoski, 18-676, Trump v. Jane Doe 2, 18-677, and Trump v. Stockman, 18-678.
In all six cases, a stay has been entered barring the administration from implementing the policy, and the solicitor general seeks cert before judgment to allow speedy review. Barring expedited briefing or a special May sitting, this Friday represents the last real opportunity for these cases to be heard this term.
That’s all for this week. Thanks again to Tom Mitsch for compiling the relists.
Issues: (1) Whether the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether DHS’ decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.
Issue: Whether the district court erred in preliminarily enjoining the military from implementing nationwide the 2018 policy of Secretary of Defense James Mattis under which transgender individuals would be permitted to serve in the military, while individuals with a history of a medical condition called gender dysphoria would be disqualified from military service unless they meet certain conditions.
Issue: Whether the Eighth and 14th Amendments permit a state to abolish the insanity defense.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.