Court Opinion

ID: 9919356
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-18 01:00:42.199419+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:04:58.644443
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
             for the Fifth Circuit                            United States Court of Appeals
                            ___________                                Fifth Circuit

                                                                     FILED
                             No. 23-50632                     January 17, 2024
                            ___________                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                     Clerk
United States of America,

                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                 versus

Greg Abbott, in his capacity as Governor of the State of Texas; State
of Texas,

                                      Defendants—Appellants.
              ______________________________

              Appeal from the United States District Court
                   for the Western District of Texas
                        USDC No. 1:23-CV-853
              ______________________________

          ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

       (Opinion December 01, 2023, 5 Cir., 2023, 87 F.4th 616)

Before Richman, Chief Judge, and Jones, Smith, Stewart,
Elrod, Southwick, Haynes, Graves, Higginson, Willett,
Ho, Duncan, Engelhardt, Oldham, Wilson, Douglas, and
Ramirez, Circuit Judges.
                                  No. 23-50632

Per Curiam:
       A member of the court having requested a poll on the petition for
rehearing en banc, and a majority of the circuit judges in regular active service
and not disqualified having voted in favor, to hear this case en banc,
       IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en
banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will
specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs. Pursuant to
5th Circuit Rule 41.3, the panel opinion in this case dated December 01, 2023,
is VACATED.

                                       2