IN OTHER NEWS ... something I'm noticing about the ban EO litigation ...
-
-
I imagine, in addition to the standing ruling, Justice (and the White House) would v much like to see this part of the 9th Cir ruling gone:pic.twitter.com/boVvOKoadk
-
Hence the focus, in the 9th Circuit and elsewhere, on vacating the 9th Circuit ruling.
-
Q: why request that the en banc request be postponed if they're that burnt about the existing order?
-
Because they couldn't get it vacated now. They're hoping they could once a new one is issued.
-
sorry if I'm not following- because unlikely to be successful at en banc, or at SCOTUS? Or are you implying another reason?
-
why couldn't they get it vacated at en banc? B/c new order moots issue? Or because unlikely to succeed on merits of PI appeal?
-
They'd have to win an en banc vote for rehearing first, then hold briefing and maybe arguments, then win a stay ruling. Not likely.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
having sourced plaintiffs for a 14th/10th case on marriage rights, I just want to mention that it's not falling off a log
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
meaning that whatever steaming pile they throw out next moots the current litigation & new facts/plaintiffs can resume fight?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Until order is issued and reviewed by court, the DOJ request can only be considered 'chutzpah'.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There is caselaw saying that if appellant voluntarily renders case moot, decision shdn't be vacated.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.