Grady v. United States
Petition for certiorari denied on June 27, 2022
Issue: Whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act imposes a
burden on the government to demonstrate that it
has actually considered and rejected the efficacy of
less restrictive measures before adopting the challenged practice (in this case, prosecution of Clare Grady, Carmen Trotta, and Martha Hennessy) as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 1st, 3rd, and 9th Circuits would
require, or whether the persons claiming under RFRA
the infringement of their religious freedoms bear the
burden to provide alternative means which the government need merely refute, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 8th and 10th
Circuits would hold, and as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit held
below.
| Date | Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding) |
|---|
| Feb 11 2022 | Application (21A421) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 20, 2022 to March 24, 2022, submitted to Justice Thomas. |
| Feb 16 2022 | Application (21A421) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until March 23, 2022. |
| Mar 23 2022 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 25, 2022) |
| Apr 21 2022 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 25, 2022 to May 25, 2022, submitted to The Clerk. |
| Apr 22 2022 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 25, 2022. |
| May 23 2022 | Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed. |
| Jun 06 2022 | Reply of petitioners Clare Therese Grady, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| Jun 07 2022 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/23/2022. |
| Jun 27 2022 | Petition DENIED. |
