Mullin v. Al Otro Lado · ¶179

To avoid this jurisdictional problem, the majority points to the voluntary-cessation exception to mootness. It maintains that the Court has jurisdiction because “respondents have not carried their burden to establish that it is ‘absolutely clear’ that the Government would not ‘reimpose’ metering if it could.” Ante, at 8, n. 7 (quoting West Virginia v. EPA, 597 U. S. 697, 720 (2022)). But we have “given mixed signals concerning how likely recurrence needs to be for this exception to mootness doctrine to apply.” W. Baude, J. Goldsmith, J. Manning, J. Pfander, & A. Tyler, Hart and Wechsler’s The Federal Courts and the Federal System 250–251 (8th ed. 2025). And, here, the Government has not expressed an intent to reinstate metering; it states only that “it seeks to retain the option of reviving the practice.” Brief for Petitioners 7 (emphasis added).

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.