Interesting scotus orders this am...

[Aardvark86]

Denials of cert in...
- case where potential juror struck for perception of traditional beliefs, where a party was a lesbian (unanimous, perhaps in part due to procedural fleas, but Alito statement noting appropriateness of merits for review.)
- TJ case on racial consideration in magnet high school admissions

Nothing I could see in Trump cases, though I suspect that could be subject to a separate order at some point given emergency docket.

Note tomorrow, opinions in argued cases forthcoming.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

Denials of cert in...
- case where potential juror struck for perception of traditional beliefs, where a party was a lesbian (unanimous, perhaps in part due to procedural fleas, but Alito statement noting appropriateness of merits for review.)
- TJ case on racial consideration in magnet high school admissions

Nothing I could see in Trump cases, though I suspect that could be subject to a separate order at some point given emergency docket.

Note tomorrow, opinions in argued cases forthcoming.

Also rejected three red states’ request to intervene in the 5th Circuit mifepristone case.

 

[goldmom]

Fleas?

 

[Aardvark86]

Also rejected three red states’ request to intervene in the 5th Circuit mifepristone case.

yeah, there were a surprisingly high number of things like this and declinations of amicus briefs in some of the 'sexy' cases. Almost made me wonder whether they were getting a bit fed up.

For my money, the states really don't have much of an interest supporting intervention in these proceedings; it's a simple matter of the review of the FDA approval. (Full disclosure: industry schill speaking here)

 

[Aardvark86]

Fleas?

Procedural problems in their lower court history that make them inappropriate vehicles to consider an otherwise potentially worthy substantive issue. (For example, while 95% of the people on this site don't believe this, there is actually still a reluctance on the part of the court as a whole to take on cases that don't present actual cases or controversies, cases where the party bringing the claim isn't the right one to do so, and cases where a decision on the merits could be perceived as unnecessary overreach given that they could have been disposed on procedural grounds without reaching said merits).

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

yeah, there were a surprisingly high number of things like this and declinations of amicus briefs in some of the 'sexy' cases. Almost made me wonder whether they were getting a bit fed up.

For my money, the states really don't have much of an interest supporting intervention in these proceedings; it's a simple matter of the review of the FDA approval. (Full disclosure: industry schill speaking here)

And whether that review was timely requested … ;-)