Missouri v. United States

_________________
_________________
1 Cite as: 601 U. S. ____ (2023)
Statement of G
ORSUCH, J.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 23A296
MISSOURI, ET AL. v. UNITED STATES
ON APPLICATION FOR STAY
[October 20, 2023]
The application for stay presented to JUSTICE KAVANAUGH
and by him referred to the Court is denied.
J
USTICE THOMAS would grant the application for stay.
Statement of J
USTICE GORSUCH, with whom JUSTICE
ALITO joins, respecting the denial of the application for stay.
With the understanding that the district court “prohib-
ited” only “implementation and enforcement” of H. B. 85 by
the State of “Missouri and its officers, agents, and employ-
ees” and “any others in active concert with such individu-
als,” App. to Emergency Application 29a, I agree with the
denial of the application for a stay under the present cir-
cumstances. An injunction purporting to bind private par-
ties not before the district court or the “challenged” provi-
sions “themselves,” however, would be inconsistent with the
“equitable powers of federal courts.” Whole Woman’s
Health v. Jackson, 595 U. S. 30, 44 (2021).