Emergency application
Doctors' speech about Covid
Pierre Kory, MD v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California
What did the Court do?
The Court denied the request on January 21, 2025, so nothing changes while the case continues in the lower courts.
Emergency rulings are temporary and do not decide the underlying case.
What's being asked
Doctors Pierre Kory, Le Trinh Hoang, Brian Tyson, and two organizations ask the Supreme Court for an emergency injunction against California officials. The organizations are Physicians for Informed Consent and Children’s Health Defense. The doctors argue California officials threaten to investigate and discipline doctors for giving patients COVID-19 information and recommendations that go against mainstream views. They say this policy violates doctors’ First Amendment rights.
What the Court did
The Court refused the emergency injunction; Justice Kagan denied (turned down) the application. The record does not say how the justices voted or give a reason.
What it means
This temporary emergency ruling does not decide who wins the underlying First Amendment dispute. The record identifies the Ninth Circuit as the lower court but gives no details about further proceedings there. It lists no related Supreme Court merits case and no argument date.
Sources
Facts on this page come from the Supreme Court docket, orders, and opinions for No. 24A670. The answers restate that record in plain words; explainer copy is written from the record and the filings only.