Last week, the Supreme Court relisted a case involving some transsexual prisoners’ claims that the State of Wisconsin violated their right to adequate medical care by failing to provide them with hormonal therapy. The case is Smith v. Fields, No. 11-561. Both the Federal District Court and Seventh Circuit found in favor of the prisoners, concluding that the prison’s failure to provide the hormonal therapy amounted to deliberate indifference of serious medical needs under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment. (The Seventh Circuit opinion is here).
The State of Wisconsin filed a petition for certiorari. Instead, of denying the petition, as the Court does routinely in over roughly 90% of the paid docket, the Court relisted the case: meaning it will be reconsidered by the Court at its next conference. As per normal procedure, the Court gave no indication on why the case was relisted. But John Elwood at SCOTUSblog speculates (if you can even call it that): “I am going to go out on a limb here and say that I bet that decision is getting a close look in certain chambers.”
To put it differently, the lower court decision is getting a fresh look most likely in the chambers of the Chief, and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito (possibly Kennedy, too). It will be interesting to see if the Court takes the time to do something with this case because it does not scream for plenary review, and the Court has its hands full writing some whopper opinions that must be finished between now and the end of June.