Bostock v. Clayton Cnty.

140 S. Ct. 34, 204 L. Ed. 2d 1191
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bostock v. Clayton Cnty.. Read the opinion of the Court — 139 S. Ct. 1599
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided September 11, 2019·No. No. 17-1618·Published

Opinion

The joint motion of petitioner in No. 17-1618 and respondent in No. 17-1623 for divided argument is denied. The motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument is granted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bostock v. Clayton Cnty., 140 S. Ct. 34, 204 L. Ed. 2d 1191 (U.S. 2019).

140 S. Ct. 34 (Bostock v. Clayton Cnty.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.