Sorry, in answer to the second part of your question, SCOTUS is an appellate court only; it doesn’t hold trials exactly, it only looks at questions of law on appeal from lower courts (except in very rare cases). So they are really interested in the decision of the lower court and the questions of errors of law that are presented. Those are the only things taken up by SCOTUS, not the entire case top to bottom, so they may only look at a narrow issue. That’s what they were doing here.
So the information they would need from the lower court is minimal, and would be alleged by the party appealing the ruling of the lower court: what is it that you think that the court got wrong in applying the law in that case?
In all likelihood the Amicus briefs have already been submitted. The parties who submitted them knew the Court would grant them leave (permission) to submit them so they submitted them in advance. They were considered along with the briefs of each party in making the determination whether to grant cert. That is likely all the Justice looked at before giving his/her opinion to the other Justices.
Submitting Amicus briefs is VERY common is SCOTUS cases, especially high profile ones. I only worked on one, and it was to submit an Amicus brief. The Court considers them but of primary importance are the briefs of the parties....Amicus briefs are really not that important.
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.
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.
The title is a link to an article. Perhaps you didn’t see that? I’m talking about the article.
This website has no idea what it is blathering about. “Amicus curae” means “friend of the court.” What it means in this case is that the Supreme Court gave leave for two amicus briefs to be filed....those are briefs filed by non-parties who want to argue one side of the case. Those were filed here. The Court read them, and that’s it. The cases are over.
And you’ll know for the future that whomever runs this website doesn’t know their a** from their elbow.
Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch were the only ones in minority.
Normally, yes, could have been 5-4 decision and fourth Justice just chose not to put name on dissent, but here if four justices wanted to hear they would have, so only the three.
Edited because I forgot about four Justice standard.
Denied them all.
The Supreme Court has declined to hear the appeals. The rulings of the lower courts stand. Trump loses.
They will not hear the appeals.
I will not accept this.
Cert denied in all cases.
Cert denied in all cases.
Serious question: what do we make of Trump, then? This has long been a sore point and something that people bring up all the time. There’s no question the man is a serial adulterer and he’s on his third wife. I don’t know how to account for that.
That isn’t true and there was a whole thread about this on here when Biden went to Milwaukee.
Who goes after a twelve year old dog? Champ is a good boy.
I get what you are saying. All I am saying is that the Supreme Court has already considered this exact question and decided differently. Your fight is with them, not me.
THIS IS A WINTER STORM. I’m sorry Texas is being hit so hard, but, sheesh. Biden didn’t cause this, Trump didn’t cause this, China didn’t cause this....it’s just a storm.
All dogs are good dogs. Well, most dogs. And his dogs seem to be good dogs. Do not take it out on the dogs. This is the point I’m getting at.
You might be one of the few to put a premium on the facts. Bless you.
Not that at all. I’m well aware. McConnell is playing both sides, but my point is that he actually CAN. Trump can only send out petty press releases at this point, and then, what? He’s not going to torch the entire Republican Party, his own party, because he’s pissed at McConnell. The letter clearly states that he wants to be at the head of the party, not separate from it.
Opine all you want...I’m just telling you that the only time the Supreme Court has ruled on the issue they’ve said it’s a no-go. Make of that what you will.
“aren’t factually accurate”
This is the very definition of the word “lie.”