>The Brunson hopium pushers
If they are hoping that four or more justices will agree that the petitioner is granted a hearing at today's conference, we can join them. It does seem that many are expecting, hoping, or hyping for much more, though. Yesterday's statement by the Brunson's was clear. An announcement of any petitions granted a hearing will take place on Monday.
>>18090088
>THE CAPS IS TO BE VERY CLEAR.
You can either use all caps or you can be taken seriously, Anon. The choice is yours.
>anybody know what time the Brunson case is being heard?
No hearing. The petition is to be reviewed in conference today. SC announces petitions granted hearings next Monday.
>voting on the Brunson case today?
They don't actually vote on the case today, Anon. If the petition makes it through conference today - that is if four or more justices support the petition for a hearing - we won't know until Monday. If the court grants the petitioner a hearing, then the MSM might make some noise.
>in the fine print can mccarthy give all his votes to DJT?
He can strong-arm his supporters into voting for another nominee. He can make any kind of backroom deal, but I don't think he could somehow transfer votes already cast and recorded in favor of him to another nominee.
>whatever list I'm on…
Sounds like your 'priors list' is the problem, Anon. Any felonies? Past convictions?
>By what mechanism does it move forward or get denied? A vote today?
There is a regular scheduled conference for the court today. Petitions are routinely reviewed in conferences. The court has three conference days scheduled this month, for example. There is no bench vote today by the court and there is no hearing. Rather the petition under review in conference requires the support of four or more justices to be granted a hearing. There will be an announcement on Monday on petitions granted hearings. Only about 3% of petitions are granted hearings.
>what are the stats for docket items being reviewed, and are you sure yur stats are correct?
There are thousands of petitions processed by the Solicitor General and Supreme Court annually.
From the SC website:
The Term of the Court begins, by law, on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October of the next year. Each Term, approximately 7,000-8,000 new cases are filed in the Supreme Court. This is a substantially larger volume of cases than was presented to the Court in the last century. In the 1950 Term, for example, the Court received only 1,195 new cases, and even as recently as the 1975 Term it received only 3,940. Plenary review, with oral arguments by attorneys, is currently granted in about 80 of those cases each Term, and the Court typically disposes of about 100 or more cases without plenary review.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/courtatwork.aspx
Regarding the Solicitor General waiving comment:
"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
During the Court’s 2012 Term (the 2013 Term will be completed later next month) the Court disposed of a whopping 7602 petitions and granted only 92 petitions for oral argument – a rate of 1.21%. That figure does not count GVRs – the grant of a petition for certiorari, vacation of the lower court’s judgment, and remand of the case.
That doesn’t seem much better than a snowball’s chance, right? If we separate petitions into two commonly analyzed categories – paid petitions and petitions filed In Forma Pauperis (IFP) – the grant rate changes considerably.
During the 2012 Term, 82 of the 1503 paid petitions filed were granted – a rate of 5.46%. IFP petitions, which made up the bulk of the Court’s docket (80.2%), were granted at a rate of .01% (6099 IFP petitions were disposed of vs. the 10 that were granted).
https://www.cocklelegalbriefs.com/blog/supreme-court/not-the-long-shot-you-thought/
>So they vote today. Isn’t that newsworthy?
It's a conference in which petitions are reviewed, Anon. It's something they handle thousands of times per year. If the petition is granted there may be news on Monday. Then a hearing would be scheduled for later.
>This vote will go on until supreme court makes a decision on brunson case
There's no case yet. There's also no hearing scheduled.
>Why do you answer questions that aren’t asked? Why do you ignore questions that are asked?
The MSM stuff? Whose side are they on? How does one answer why they are not abuzz about the Brunson petition? Do you expect them to confirm what you know or what you want to happen? I don't follow the MSM nor do I seek their approval.
>or they could kick off the EBS
COGCON alerts would come first. It's just a petition review in a routine conference, though. It will be significant only if the petitioner is granted a hearing which will be announced on Monday.
>Ketchup
That explains things Senator Kerry. Thank you. I'll try again.
The Brunson petition will be reviewed in conference today, Anon. Nothing more, and nothing less. The court will announce on Monday the results of today's conference. We should all hope the petitioner is granted a hearing during today's conference.
>You just answer questions that were never asked.
My apologies for the miscommunication, Anon.