My two cents: Kennedy order seems to be purely procedural. I don't think it means anything, except a short delay of the inevitable. #SCOTUS
-
@AppellateDaily@rickhasen actually, per FRAP 41 the mandate is stayed anyway by the filing of ID's motion until CA9 says otherwise, right?
@gcehk @AppellateDaily If it is already issued is it recalled?
-
-
@rickhasen@AppellateDaily Not sure, just says "stayed" in the rule -
@gcehk@rickhasen This is, of course, a stay request after cert pet already denied. Not fresh snow. -
@AppellateDaily@rickhasen@gcehk FRAP 41(d)(1) stays mandate "unless the court orders otherwise." CA9 ordered otherwise so (d)(1) n/a. -
@smmarotta@AppellateDaily@rickhasen when did the court so order? The motion for stay was filed after the mandate issued, no action since -
@gcehk@AppellateDaily@rickhasen By ordering mandate issue forthwith. Can't stay once issued, but court can recall (or SCOTUS can). -
@smmarotta@AppellateDaily@rickhasen OK, thanks. So AMK should have "recalled" in his order, not "stayed"? -
@gcehk@AppellateDaily@rickhasen Hard to get nuance of app. proc. in 140 char. Mandate ends COA juris., but SCOTUS can stay w/o recall. -
@gcehk@AppellateDaily@rickhasen So CA9 recall mandate & stay. SCOTUS can stay. Distinction lrgly irrelevant. Bottom line: no#ssm yet. - 1 more reply
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.