Whether, pursuant to United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36 (1950), this Court should vacate the court of appeals' judgments granting writs of mandamus

QUESTION PRESENTED The Governor of Texas, in reliance on the COVID19 pandemic, issued an executive order that banned nearly all abortions in Texas for at least a month, and potentially far longer. A federal district court twice entered temporary restraining orders against the executive order as applied to certain previability abortion care. In so doing, it found that the executive order did not serve the state’s asserted goals of preserving personal protective equipment or hospital capacity and that petitioners were likely to prevail on their claim that the order imposed an undue burden on their patients’ constitutional right to obtain an abortion. Despite those well-supported findings, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit twice intervened in just over two weeks’ time, granting two writs of mandamus to dissolve the TROs. The day after the Fifth Circuit entered its second mandamus order, and before petitioners could seek this Court’s review, the Governor replaced the challenged executive order with a new one that permitted Texas abortion providers to resume services. At that time, petitioners’ claims for injunctive relief became moot. The question presented is whether, pursuant to United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36 (1950), this Court should vacate the court of appeals’ judgments granting writs of mandamus.