Talk:California v. Texas

Consolidated with Texas v. California
Hi. It looks like, somewhat confusingly, there are two different cases being consolidated here (source):


 * 19-840 — California, et al. v. Texas, et al.
 * 19-1019 — Texas, et al. v. California, et al.

My reading of  is that 19-840 (California v. Texas) is the head case now ("Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 19-840."). Consequently, I've made Texas v. California a redirect to this article. There are older cases named California v. Texas (volumes 437 and 457) that we'll need to disambiguate. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I think I addressed this in third-party sources. the TX v CA is Texas et al asking the court (in Feb 2020) to not take up CA et al.'s case (filed in Jan 2020) as not ripe, but if they took it up, they provided some questions to ask. Because they presented a full petition of writ of cert rather than just a brief, it comes up as looks like two cases consolidated as one, but more exacting, just two petitions consolidated as one. --M asem (t) 18:54, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

tense
Should this open with "California v. Texas is a United States Supreme Court case that dealt…"? —  Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 21:23, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Technically yes, the case is open as it was remanded back to the 5th, but given that the ruling was that Texas et al had no basis to bring the suit to bear in the first place, that basically rules this case closed, so past tense is appropriate. --M asem (t) 21:59, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Missing word makes a sentence meaningless
In the sentence, "The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the ruling that the individual mandate was unconstitutional, but it that the mandate might be severable from the rest of the ACA", there is a word missing between "but it" and "that the mandate might be severable". I think it should be "disagreed", but I am reluctant to change it based just on gut feeling. Can somebody with the requisite knowledge fix it, please? 2001:BB6:4713:4858:C900:3058:315E:DAB6 (talk) 13:23, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Fixed. --M asem (t) 13:40, 18 June 2021 (UTC)