Ninth Circuit may review yesterday's panel order http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/2017_0210_ninth_circuit.pdf …
-
although there's a procedure for the full court (25? active judges) to hear case. I don't think that's been successfully called /4
Many more D-appointed than R-appointed judges on court, but some of the D-appointed are less liberal. Still seems like long shot /5
-
-
But if it is granted, the 11-judge panel could skew more conservative than 9th Circuit as a whole, so there's a chance /6
-
Today's order makes both sides' briefs due 2/16. Not clear if Trump Admin could withdraw if Pres issues new EO mooting case /7
-
But if case gets mooted it is hard to see a vote for an en banc in any case /8
-
But even if 9th Circuit denies dissent, it is possible a judge will write a dissenting statement to support Trump EO on the record /9
-
and that might be what this is all about /10
-
If you want to impress your non-lawyer friends (1) sua sponte - judge's own request (not party) (2) dissental http://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/i-say-dissental-you-say-concurral … /11
-
to be clear, this could have come from any active or senior 9th Cir. judge---not likely the 3 judges on unanimous panel /12
-
Bottom line: just when you thought it was time for drinks Friday afternoon, there's more work to do /13
#appellatetwitter -
Interesting alternative reason from
@chris_j_walker to go en banc: to get rid of 3-judge panel opinion: https://twitter.com/chris_j_walker/status/830203910694518785 … /14 - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Acting like this is a D vs R issue completely misrepresents the case.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I don't know, the entire court may want to thump the Donald.
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.