The Ares Auditorium has reached capacity and a wait list has been started.

Requests for reservations may be made at http://www.law.arizona.edu/news/faculty/rsvpregistration.cfm. Your name will automatically be added to the wait list.

A live videostream of the oral arguments will be available in Room 168 at Arizona Law on a first-come, first-served basis. A very limited number of seats may be available in the Ares Auditorium shortly before court begins and will be filled on a first-come, first-served basis from those in the videostreaming room.

Compliance with the security protocol and conduct guidelines of the Court is mandatory. Courtroom attire is required. Click here for further details.

Please arrive early. Those with confirmed reservations must check in at the tables in the Lewis and Roca Lobby and bring the admission ticket sent with the reservation confirmation. University ID or other photo ID in the same name as that on the confirmation ticket is required.

Doors to the Ares Auditorium and the videostreaming room will open by 9:30 a.m. You must go through security each time you enter. No backpacks, purses, bags, laptops, or electronic equipment allowed (except cell phones, which must be turned OFF). There will not be a secured storage area for your belongings, so please make your own arrangements. Please note that no food or drink will be allowed.

The cases to be heard include:

ASU Students for Life v. Crow, in which the Arizona State University Students for Life appeal from the Arizona district court’s summary judgment in its action challenging the constitutionality of ASU’s insurance requirement for off-campus groups or entities and ASU’s “one-zone” reservation requirement. Students for Life is an officially recognized student organization at ASU with a stated purpose of educating the student body about prolife issues from conception to natural death. ASU requires liability insurance for any event involving a third party on campus. Case 08-15905

Gonzalez v. State of Arizona, in these consolidated actions, plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief barring enforcement of the voting-related provisions of the Arizona Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act, enacted as Proposition 200 by the state’s voters in 2004. Prop. 200 requires proof of citizenship to register to vote and proof of identification to vote in person on election day. Plaintiffs alleged that the requirements violated the Equal Protection Clause. Plaintiffs appeal from the Arizona district court’s summary judgment and bench trial judgment. Cases 08-17094, 08-17115

Briefs are on reserve at the Daniel F. Cracchiolo Law Library.

At the end of the final argument, the judges will be available to answer general questions from audience members. While judges are prohibited from answering questions about pending cases, they can discuss Court operations and the decision-making process.