General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHeaded for the Supreme Court doesn't mean it will ever get there.
They have to decide there is merit to hearing it again. With a unanimous lower court decision, who knows if the Supremes will accept it.
annabanana
(52,791 posts)Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)Eyeball_Kid
(7,432 posts)If it's not unanimous against Trumpy, it will be 7-1 or 6-2 at the worst. The SC is very well aware that Trumpy is trying to bully the Courts. They'll shove a lesson down his throat.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)If he revisits his "Second Amendment solution" threat, we will be in business.
Stallion
(6,474 posts)nm
asiliveandbreathe
(8,203 posts)Now..some things start to become more clear..especially with Flake and McCain wanting a 12th circuit court and split up the 9th...
That way they could fill the bench with Republicans..and rein in Washington State
Thanks to Don Viejo earlier - I would love to see the pop #'s and land mass they would create with a 12th..versus the 9th now....
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/1016177272
Stallion
(6,474 posts)...the SCOTUS generally is more likely to take a case where there is an actual conflict among the Circuit Court of Appeals
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)The relevant statute, 28 U.S. Code § 1253, says: "Except as otherwise provided by law, any party may appeal to the Supreme Court from an order granting or denying, after notice and hearing, an interlocutory or permanent injunction in any civil action, suit or proceeding required by any Act of Congress to be heard and determined by a district court of three judges." The 3-judge panel treated the appeal from the TRO as the equivalent of an appeal from a preliminary injunction, as the original order had no expiration date. If it's effectively a preliminary injunction, this statute should apply, and the government could make a direct appeal rather than having to petition for a writ of certiorari as in most cases.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)sides had already agreed to calendaring for the hearing on a Preliminary Injunction as early as next week.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)of this case, the district courts order possesses the qualities
of an appealable preliminary injunction. The parties
vigorously contested the legal basis for the TRO in written
briefs and oral arguments before the district court. The
district courts order has no expiration date, and no hearing
has been scheduled. Although the district court has recently
scheduled briefing on the States motion for a preliminary
injunction, it is apparent from the district courts scheduling
order that the TRO will remain in effect for longer than
fourteen days. In light of the unusual circumstances of this
case, in which the Government has argued that emergency
relief is necessary to support its efforts to prevent terrorism,
we believe that this period is long enough that the TRO
should be considered to have the qualities of a reviewable
preliminary injunction.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,732 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)the 9th. (Alito and Thomas in dissent.)
Stinky The Clown
(67,808 posts)That's a pretty sound drubbing for the shitgibbon.