Claude.ai on Capable of Repition Yet Evading Review

 Here is how Clause explains this exception to the mootness doctrine:

 

Claude, please write a 300 word explanation of the Supreme Court's mootness doctrine of capable of reposition yet evading review.

RD

Here is a 298 word explanation of the Supreme Court's mootness doctrine of "capable of repetition, yet evading review":

The "capable of repetition, yet evading review" doctrine is an exception to the mootness doctrine in Supreme Court cases. Mootness requires a case to involve an ongoing, live controversy throughout all stages of litigation. If the issues become moot, there is no longer a justiciable case or controversy.

However, under the capable of repetition doctrine, a case will not be dismissed as moot if the harm is capable of happening again yet would evade judicial review given its inherently limited duration.

For example, in Roe v. Wade, the Court held that although the plaintiff's pregnancy had ended, the issues over abortion restrictions were capable of repetition with future pregnancies yet would continually evade review during the short window of any individual pregnancy.

Likewise, in elections cases, restrictions on candidates or ballot access often would expire before litigation fully concludes. But under this exception, cases can still be heard if the plaintiff is likely to face the restrictions again in future elections, even if the immediate dispute has passed.

The capable of repetition doctrine recognizes that some legal issues arise in situations that are necessarily time-limited, like pregnancy or an election cycle. If standard mootness applied, major constitutional issues could go perpetually unresolved. By allowing exceptions for disputes likely to recur in a manner resistant to appellate timelines, this doctrine aims to ensure timely resolution of such transient but substantial questions.