Drake (NJ carry permits) files for cert with SCOTUS

Nope, our Drake case isn't in there. Here's the listing for what was distributed for conference on April 18th so something like this will show up in "granted" or "denied":

https://certpool.com/dockets/13-827

We're not dead yet...looks like what happened was, they got too busy Friday to get to it OR there's a bitter argument brewing over it. Danged if I know which, I would hope for the former. So it's held for the next scheduling conference.

In the overall scheme of things it may mean nothing.

Sigh.
 
Jim March has it right -- you can see at his link that we've been distributed / re-listed for this Friday (which probably again means next Monday).
 
Some are speculating that a SCOTUS justice(or 2) is wanting to wait to see what happens with the CA9 cases. But CA9 doesn't move quickly, so if we see the case re-listed again, then maybe they are waiting for that.
Otherwise it may just be a fence sitter wanting to dig into the briefs further.
 
press1280 said:
Some are speculating that a SCOTUS justice(or 2) is wanting to wait to see what happens with the CA9 cases
Click to expand...

And some have speculated that CA9 is waiting to see if SCOTUS grants cert to Drake. Sounds like a recipe for the next Palmer, where nothing will happen for years and years. :(
 
JimDandy said:
Isn't CA9 on a timer? X number of days to en banc, then off to SCOTUS with it if applicable?
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't appear so. Michel & Assoc. published a flow chart for the whole en banc procedure, and as Murphy's Law would have it, the reality of the situation is more complicated than their flow chart.

Every entry on the flow chart does have a time limit associated with it, but we're stuck on the entry node to the flow chart, because the 9th haven't decided on the whole intervenor thing wrt the Attorney General. Once they've made that decision (which appears to have no time limit), and the AG then makes the en banc request, everything is timed from that point forward, unless some exceptional stuff happens.

The 9th is unique in that it has one of the judges serve as en banc coordinator, and that coordinator does have the power to halt the en banc process for "good cause" (sounds like the wording that got this whole thing started ;) ) for indefinite periods of time. So if the aforementioned exceptional stuff happens, we could see more delays, but other than that, once the AG's request is dealt with we're on the clock.

There are many theories about why they haven't already dealt with her request, and as you probably know, they include waiting to see if SCOTUS takes Drake...
 
Interesting observation from SCOTUSblog today:
Earlier this week I remarked that all of this week’s grants came from among the ranks of the relists, and noticed similar instances earlier this year. But as the eagle-eyed Hashim Mooppan pointed out to me, the relist streak has been far longer and more consistent.
Click to expand...
Then goes on to speculate that re-listing may now be in practice a provisional decision to grant.
 
To add a bit of detail from ScotusBlog:
Over the last nine Conferences, the Court has granted a dozen cases for argument next Term, each one of which was relisted at least once . . .

If indeed the Court has adopted a policy of relisting cases before granting, it may be akin to a “stop, look, and listen” after a provisional decision to grant – intended to give the Justices and their clerks additional time to review grant candidates for vehicle problems or other concerns. Maybe the Justices decided after dismissing three cases as improvidently granted this Term that they need one last check before giving a case the nod . . .
Click to expand...
So, if their speculation is accurate, it's good news.
 
Some have said it's been re-listed again for this Friday, May 2, but that is not reflected in the latest orders. Seems fair to say it's in limbo.
 
When will we likely hear what happened on May 2nd?

Edit: From Scotus Blog: On Monday at 9:30 a.m. we expect orders from the May 2 Conference, followed by one or more opinions in argued cases at 10:00. We will begin live blogging at this link starting at 9:15.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top