>LITERALLY the result of Brunson is the exact premise of the collection of Q drops. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
That's a fine viewpoint, Anon. But please bear in mind that Brunson's petition goes to conference tomorrow. Nothing more, nothing less. If four or more justices agree that the petition deserves a hearing, the petitioner will be granted a hearing at a later date. We've patched up enough anons with hopium-related trauma already.
>This part confuses me.
Some people have read too much in to the fact that the Solicitor General of the US waived a response. The US is not a defendant in the case, and it is routine for the Solicitor General to waive a response in cases the SG staff does not believe will be granted a hearing at conference. Tomorrow is a conference day on the Supreme Court's calendar. The judges do not take the bench. The meet in a conference room to discuss petitions. 'Brunson' is a petition they will discuss in conference tomorrow.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/legendkeyinfo.aspx
Conference Days: The Justices meet in a private conference to discuss cases argued earlier that week. The Justices also discuss and vote on petitions for review. The building is open to the public but the Justices do not take the Bench.
"If the petition in your case is so plainly meritless that the Court will not need the assistance of a brief in opposition, you may wish to waive your response. The solicitor general and state attorneys general often do this."
Opposing Certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court
ABA Litigation Manual, 3d ed.
In 2010, there were 5,910 petitions for a Writ of Certiorari filed with the Supreme Court, but cert was granted for only 165 cases. That is a success rate of only 2.8%.
https://supremecourtpress.com/chance_of_success.html
>while i applaud your effort anon, not convinced.
Hopium hangovers are prolonged and painful, Anon. I'm not trying to convince anyone. I'm simply helping anons off of the ledge and back into the room in a pre-emptive and responsible manner.
>what are the consequences of SCOTUS not taking the case?
Nothing. The justices review petitions routinely. They accept about 3% of the petitions they receive in an average year.
>you are here to say "take your meds" and generally be a naysayer.
I'm not. I've been through more than five years of hopeful, exuberant anons cheerleading dates and times and decodes. I've seen them crushed and despondent. I'm advising caution in the face of hype regarding Brunson. There is a process. I pray the case succeeds. That process requires the petitioner being granted a hearing during tomorrow's conference. The success rate is 3% or so for petitioners being granted a hearing.
>we won't know anything until Monday!
Thought there was a gas leak. It was the datefags deflating!
>This Brunson case was submitted under National Security.
Negative. The rule allows a case to skip the appellate process and for the petition to be presented to the justices at conference tomorrow in this instance. The invocation of the rule was justified by 'national security' as part of the petition process. The SC justices have total control over whether they agree to hear the case.