Tomorrow morning, the Supreme Court will file its opinion in Taking Offense v. State of California. (Briefs here; oral argument video here.)
When the court granted review, it looked like the court would decide a hot-button issue — “Did the Court of Appeal err in declaring the provision of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Long-Term Care Facility Residents’ Bill of Rights (Health & Saf. Code, § 1439.51) that criminalizes the willful and repeated failure to use a resident’s chosen name and pronouns unconstitutional on its face under the First Amendment?” Later, the court indicated it might avoid answering that question, asking for supplemental briefing on whether the case should have been dismissed on lack-of-standing grounds. More about the case here, here, and here.
It’s taking Taking Offense a long time to be decided. Review was granted in November 2021, the supplemental briefing was ordered in May 2023, and, although the case was argued six months ago, additional, post-argument supplemental briefing that the court required restarted the 90-day clock for issuing the opinion.
The Taking Offense decision is significant not only for that case, but also for a high-profile writ petition that has been back-burnered waiting for the decision. The petition — Office of the State Public Defender v. Bonta — was filed 19 months ago. It challenges California’s death penalty system based on the claim the system is being administered in a racially discriminatory manner. Eight months ago, the court “deferred” action on the petition “pending consideration and disposition of a related issue in Taking Offense.” The “related issue” is apparently the one concerning standing.
The Taking Offense opinion can be viewed tomorrow starting at 10:00 a.m.
