Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
William E. Henry v. Steven T. Marshall, Attorney General of Alabama
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 21-11483 · judgment August 18, 2022
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
Nearly 33 years ago, this Court decided Butterworth v. Smith, 494 U.S. 624 (1990), holding that grand jury secrecy laws restricting a grand jury witness from disclosing their own testimony after the conclusion of the grand jury are unconstitutional. The Butterworth majority’s consideration of such secrecy laws did not, however, address the constitutionality of grand jury secrecy laws that prohibit a witness’s disclosure of their own “experience” before the grand jury. Id. at 629 n.2. The question presented is: Whether Alabama’s Grand Jury Secrecy Act restricts a grand jury witness’s public disclosure of their own testimony – including information known to the witness before testifying and information learned as a result of appearing as a witness – after they have appeared as a witness violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
William C. White II
Boles Holmes White, LLC
For respondent
Edmund Gerard LaCour Jr.
Office of the Attorney General
Proceedings
- Mar 20 2023Petition DENIED.
- Mar 01 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/17/2023.
- Feb 21 2023Waiver of right of respondent Steven Marshall to respond filed.
- Feb 15 2023Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 20, 2023)
- Jan 20 2023Application (22A654) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until February 15, 2023.
- Jan 17 2023Application (22A654) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 16, 2023 to February 15, 2023, submitted to Justice Thomas.