Did you see? Feds Say #SCOTUS Is "Likely" To Hear Travel Ban Case, Even Though They Haven’t Filed There:https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/feds-say-supreme-court-is-likely-to-hear-a-case-they-havent?utm_term=.rj4knqkdM …
-
-
As to that specific point, however, I also think differently, noted here:https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/869973037403090944 …
-
Eh, I don't think SCOTUS is so petty as to deny cert just because the government is publicly predicting that cert will happen.
-
It's a lot more complicated than that. It has to do with the posture they're coming into the court already, and the underlying issues here.
-
I think DOJ v much should be seeking to come to SCOTUS in as clean of a way as possible — & they want to avoid frustrating the judge in MI.
-
That's just best-practices 101: tee up issues for cert cleanly, with min baggage (doctrinal or otherwise); & don't irk a fellow Art 3 judge.
-
And yet. Here we are.
-
Boy howdy, are we ever.
-
Here's hoping DOJ ignores our wise counsel and continue tripping over their own—aaaand it's bedtime for me!
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Dammit, that'll larn me!
"Your honor, put this case on ice until out appeal is decided." "Uh, would that be the appeal you haven't filed?" -
Yeah, like, there ~easily~ are ways they could have worded it the would have meant me only noting their discovery-related aims, but this ...
-
... was drawing inferences without informing the judge that will give a v big opening for the plaintiffs in opposing the stay request.
-
Seriously! I'd love to be the one drafting that oppo motion
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.