The top 8 teams presented oral argument in Moody v. NetChoice.
"Surreptitious Steps" to draw a Carter appointee in a deep red state demonstrate why the Judicial Conference's policy would not work.
The Shadow Docket giveth, The Shadow Docket taketh away
The worst offender is not Jim Ho, but Carl Stewart.
The center of the Court wants to push back on temporary administrative stays and the Fifth Circuit.
Rather than addressing bankruptcy and patent forum and judge shopping, on which there is a large bipartisan consensus, the Judicial Conference rushed through a botched proposal in response to political pressure and Twitter noise.
It will be harder for conservative litigants in blue states and liberal litigants in red states to obtain statewide relief. It will be harder for conservative litigants in red states to obtain nationwide relief. Liberal litigants will have virtually unchanged odds to obtain nationwide relief.
A general power to issue orders to judicial employees does not trump a specific power for district courts to make their own rules about case assignments.
And how many of those judges have issued national injunctions?
"It is Congress that decides how cases should be assigned in the inferior courts and Congress has already spoken on this issue in an enacted statute."
The way to depoliticize the courts is to depoliticize the courts.
The Chief Justice and his associates target only one type of forum shopping in response to political criticism through a secret policy that will not be released for months.
Last week I spoke at UT about the case before it was decided. Today I spoke at A&M after the case was decided.
Even under the Trump v. Anderson per curiam opinion, Section 3 can be raised as a defense without the need for federal implementing legislation. But the Supreme Court may still avoid ruling on the merits.
From the outset of the litigation, Blackman & Tillman's argument was that Griffin's Case bars the relief sought by the Colorado voters.
Professor Shugerman's argument that the 1793 Hamilton Document, that is, a list of "every person holding any civil office or employment under the United States, (except the judges)," was intended to ensure compliance with the Constitution's Sinecure Clause lacks support.
But the "Court will not take the Bench."
20 Teams of HS Students presented oral argument in Moody v. NetChoice
Professor Shugerman's argument that the 1793 Hamilton Document, that is, a list of "every person holding any civil office or employment under the United States, (except the judges)," was intended to ensure compliance with the Constitution's Sinecure Clause lacks support.