Brunson - CERTIORARI DENIED
SEE TOP COMMENT!
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/010923zor_p860.pdf
Page 5
22-380 BRUNSON, RALAND J. V. ADAMS, ALMA S., ET AL.
And this should surprise no one....
Well, actually it is surprising. There were multiple opportunities to kill the case quietly before it ever made it to conference... which would have been a much more logical way to do things.
It is not a complex case at all. Why help the case get all the way to a conference vote, only to reject it? That is the surprising part. If it had no merit, it should never have made it far enough through the process to get to a vote in the first place.
What this tells me is that the case serves some other purpose (in the movie) that we don't know about yet.
What do you mean? Not granting cert is the earliest the SCOTUS can kill a case, right? Are you saying they could have rejected it for not paying filing fees or something?
What does the clerk do?
Something similar to what federal court clerks do. Primarily, their role is to sift through the thousands of petitions and mark the cases worthy of being granted time. “It's the most basic task, and the constant thing that you do – during the summer it's practically your only task.” The petitions that lawyers write very cleverly argue why their cases should be granted; the clerk's job is “to screen out those that are legitimate and write bench memos on what we think about the case.”
https://www.chambers-associate.com/where-to-start/getting-hired/scotus-clerkships
Exactly - and Brunson did not make it through this initial weed out process. It was disposed of at the earliest opportunity.
Clerk is more powerful than the judge.
You don't think all 9 justices have to vote on every single case that gets submitted to the SC, do you? No, there is a process to weed out the thousands of cases sent to the SC. Only a small percentage are accepted from those thousands to be voted on in conference.
If the case had no merit, the logical thing to do would have been to not accept it (weed it out) before it made it to a conference vote in the first place. That is what most people expected to happen - which is why it was surprising when it was accepted (the first time under Rule 11, before the 10 Circuit made its ruling afterward).
What process is that? The weed out process?
The Justices have clerks who comb through the 7,000 or so petitions brought every year for one of merit, then they summarily vote to deny the rest. Brunson was one of about 300 in the order today.
Look at the docket for the Brunson case. There was no action by the court to do anything, other than the clerk of the court refusing to accept some amicus briefs because they missed the deadline. This is the first actual action SCOTUS has taken on this case - there was no order to accept or any such thing.
Not dooming, just spitting facts.
Someone insisted it was granted cert already.
It was not; the docket is not secret and is publicly available. You can see it was never granted cert on the docket.
Rejecting it at that point is a better fake news story for their devotees. They venerate the Supreme Court and its actors way too much.
Yes, maybe I don’t understand the process but I was thinking the same thing.
But thet would not have had the emotional payoff this has. They wanted your hopes up so the maximum payoff for the black pills would be greatest. This is like a tug of war...the WH pull and we get some wins and then the DS pulls and we lose some. All performative.
The theory suggested by some was that it served as a loaded gun deterrent for a desperate lame duck Congress who might try a last minute court packing or term limits. If Nancy tried something like that then scotus could send Congress home. Not all but just the corrupt ones.