You’re wrong. That isn’t what amicus curae means. It isn’t an open invitation for other lawyers to come help. It means exactly what I said and the case before the US Supreme Court is over. Today’s denial of cert was their one and only ruling on the case. Hence the dissents filed by Thomas and Alito.
You don’t know whatever it is you think you know, but feel free to believe what you would like, based on the reliable sources of 8kun.
Did you even bother to read the link and see the attached definitions for both Amicus Curiae and Certiorari, as well as the explanation on how granting Certiorari is meaningless when lower courts have no rulings to even supply?
I KNOW the definitions, son. I was a lawyer for nearly fifty years. I think I’ve got a handle on this. But you go on and try to tell me how it all works.
I’ll tell you again, an Amicus brief is a “friend of the Court” brief filed by a non-party. They aren’t parties who come into the case. The cases are over as far as the Supreme Court is concerned. The ruling of the lower courts stand. That’s what denying certiorari means. Again, believe whatever you like.
Usually when people default to belittling their opponent its because they're wrong and desperate. You honestly don't speak with a tone of confidence but with a tone of arrogance. So I'm going to choose to not believe your baseless and sourceless claims spoken from arrogance, and will instead believe the ones with bases and sources spoken with sincerity.
I'll trust that you're an experienced lawyer. my questions to you are:
why is the court allowing these amicus briefs if case truly denied?
when a case is truly dismissed there's no additional filings unless say the court wanted the parties to write the judgement for judge's review as i think happens rarely. the decision allows only a couple of specific state legislative groups to file.
what case info would SCOTUS want or need from any LOWER court, which appears to be the purpose of granting writ?
is it not possible that the judges will consider the case based only on the briefs once they are received? seems odd they wouldn't allow parties to file, but perhaps there's some genius legal maneuver here that leaves most black hats thinking the case is done
if nothing else we must admit it would be extremely strange to allow briefs BEFORE issuing a final decision
This website aggregates notables from anons on 8kun, it isn't what you think it is.
The court is allowing the Republicans to file for Amicus Curiae so others can come in to assist the court in the case.
It's amazing how you claim that this is meaningless.
You’re wrong. That isn’t what amicus curae means. It isn’t an open invitation for other lawyers to come help. It means exactly what I said and the case before the US Supreme Court is over. Today’s denial of cert was their one and only ruling on the case. Hence the dissents filed by Thomas and Alito.
You don’t know whatever it is you think you know, but feel free to believe what you would like, based on the reliable sources of 8kun.
Did you even bother to read the link and see the attached definitions for both Amicus Curiae and Certiorari, as well as the explanation on how granting Certiorari is meaningless when lower courts have no rulings to even supply?
I KNOW the definitions, son. I was a lawyer for nearly fifty years. I think I’ve got a handle on this. But you go on and try to tell me how it all works.
I’ll tell you again, an Amicus brief is a “friend of the Court” brief filed by a non-party. They aren’t parties who come into the case. The cases are over as far as the Supreme Court is concerned. The ruling of the lower courts stand. That’s what denying certiorari means. Again, believe whatever you like.
Usually when people default to belittling their opponent its because they're wrong and desperate. You honestly don't speak with a tone of confidence but with a tone of arrogance. So I'm going to choose to not believe your baseless and sourceless claims spoken from arrogance, and will instead believe the ones with bases and sources spoken with sincerity.
I'll trust that you're an experienced lawyer. my questions to you are:
when a case is truly dismissed there's no additional filings unless say the court wanted the parties to write the judgement for judge's review as i think happens rarely. the decision allows only a couple of specific state legislative groups to file.
is it not possible that the judges will consider the case based only on the briefs once they are received? seems odd they wouldn't allow parties to file, but perhaps there's some genius legal maneuver here that leaves most black hats thinking the case is done
if nothing else we must admit it would be extremely strange to allow briefs BEFORE issuing a final decision