Anonymous ID: 72a1bf Oct. 14, 2018, 6:46 a.m. No.3473413   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3416 >>3422 >>3437 >>3443 >>3485 >>3549 >>3565 >>3598

This is a little disappointing…

 

Unlike Gorsuch, Kavanaugh Jumps Into SCOTUS Cert Pool

 

In an early sign of his pledge to be a “team player” on the U.S. Supreme Court, new Justice Brett Kavanaugh has decided to join the court’s “cert pool,” a system for sharing law clerks to screen the thousands of incoming petitions for review.

 

SCOTUS clerks are 'gatekeepers'

The cert pool is controversial. Critics assert that it gives enormous gatekeeping power to individual clerks, and lawyers grumble that it is difficult to explain to clients that their costly petition was viewed by only one law clerk before cert was denied. When asked, justices in the pool have said they don’t rely solely on the clerk memo for making their decisions.

 

https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2018/10/11/unlike-gorsuch-kavanaugh-jumps-into-scotus-cert-pool/

 

Gorsuch, like Alito, will not join cert pool

According to the Times, clerks for justices who don’t participate in the pool review all of the cert petitions filed each year—about 7,000 in all. Gorsuch’s decision is an early sign of his “independence and work ethic,” the article says.

 

The 'Cert Pool' denies justice

Some have suggested that law clerks in the cert pool are reluctant to recommend a cert grant because they don’t want to appear foolish if a case is later dismissed as improvidently granted.

 

A 2007 study found the percentage of cert recommendations by the pool has declined as more justices participated. Some commentators believe the cert pool has contributed to the drop in the number of cases heard each year by the court.

 

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/gorsuch_joins_alito_in_breaking_with_this_arrangement/

Anonymous ID: 72a1bf Oct. 14, 2018, 6:49 a.m. No.3473422   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>3473413

>>3473413

>A 2007 study found the percentage of cert recommendations by the pool has declined as more justices participated. Some commentators believe the cert pool has contributed to the drop in the number of cases heard each year by the court.

 

>law clerks in the cert pool are reluctant to recommend a cert grant because they don’t want to appear foolish if a case is later dismissed as improvidently granted.

 

I would like to know why this doesn't go both ways? Why don't the Justices find cases that are

IMPROVIDENTLY DENIED? I KNOW THERE IS AT LEAST ONE IN THE HISTORY OF THE COURT THAT WAS IMPROVIDENTLY DENIED