{"id":7951,"date":"2022-10-31T09:45:03","date_gmt":"2022-10-31T16:45:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951"},"modified":"2022-10-31T09:45:03","modified_gmt":"2022-10-31T16:45:03","slug":"no-new-scotus-cases-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951","title":{"rendered":"No New SCOTUS Cases"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The U.S. Supreme Court issued an <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/orders\/courtorders\/103122zor_l537.pdf\">orders list<\/a> from last week&#8217;s conference. No new cases were taken up for full briefing and argument. There were no opinions of the Court issued and no opinions dissenting from denial of certiorari.<\/p>\n<p>In other words, the orders\/opinions aspect of today&#8217;s session was boring. All attention is on the oral argument in the school admission affirmative action cases being argued today.<\/p>\n<p>Tomorrow, the Court will hear argument in <em>Jones<\/em> v. <em>Hendrix<\/em>, No. 21-857, asking whether Congress left a huge loophole when it cracked down on successive collateral petitions by federal prisoners. We think not. CJLF&#8217;s amicus brief is <a href=\"https:\/\/cjlf.org\/program\/briefs\/JonesM.pdf\">here<\/a>. Unfortunately, the Solicitor General has gone over the hill and joined the defendant on the main point, although disagreeing on the details and the application to this case.<\/p>\n<p>Also on tomorrow&#8217;s docket is <em>Cruz<\/em> v. <em>Arizona<\/em>, No. 21-846, regarding the way Arizona has treated past capital cases where the trial court refused to inform the jury that the defendant would not be eligible for parole if sentenced to life in prison.<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>Here is a practice tip for <em>pro se<\/em> litigants in the Supreme Court. If you want the high court to review your case, it is a thoroughly bad idea to name seven of the nine Justices as defendants in the action. They must recuse themselves, the Court lacks a quorum, and the judgment is automatically affirmed. See <em>Weidrick<\/em> v. <em>Biden<\/em>, No. 22-5162, on today&#8217;s orders list.<\/p>\n<p>Not that they were likely to take this case anyway. This paragraph gives the flavor of the petition:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The primary purpose of this action is to allow Petitioner to immediately and safely confer with her attorney of 5 years, Mark J. Geragos, for purposes of stopping named and unnamed Respondents\u2019 terrorism of Petitioner. Named and unnamed Respondents have engaged in terrorist activity against Petitioner 24\/7 for 32 V2+ years and continue to do so. Named and unnamed Respondents daily forge pro-terrorism material making it appear it is Petitioner\u2019s, then threaten to arrest Mr. Geragos; prosecutors Letitia A. James, New York Attorney General and Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., former Manhattan District Attorney et al if they speak to Petitioner for purposes of stopping this terrorism.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Uh-huh. I wonder why Mr. Geragos, Ms. James, and Mr. Vance aren&#8217;t joining this petition if they are being illegally threatened with arrest.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The U.S. Supreme Court issued an orders list from last week&#8217;s conference. No new cases were taken up for full briefing and argument. There were no opinions of the Court issued and no opinions dissenting from denial of certiorari. In other words, the orders\/opinions aspect of today&#8217;s session was boring. All attention is on the oral argument in the school admission affirmative action cases being argued today. Tomorrow, the Court will hear argument in Jones v. Hendrix, No. 21-857, asking whether Congress left a huge loophole when it cracked down on successive collateral petitions by federal prisoners. We think not. CJLF&#8217;s amicus brief is here. Unfortunately, the Solicitor General has gone over the hill and joined the defendant on the main point, although disagreeing on the details and the application to this case. Also on tomorrow&#8217;s docket is Cruz v. Arizona, No. 21-846, regarding the way Arizona has treated past capital cases where the trial court refused to inform the jury that the defendant would not be eligible for parole if sentenced to life in prison.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[56],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7951","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-u-s-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v25.8 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>No New SCOTUS Cases - Crime &amp; Consequences<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"No New SCOTUS Cases - Crime &amp; Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The U.S. Supreme Court issued an orders list from last week&#8217;s conference. No new cases were taken up for full briefing and argument. There were no opinions of the Court issued and no opinions dissenting from denial of certiorari. In other words, the orders\/opinions aspect of today&#8217;s session was boring. All attention is on the oral argument in the school admission affirmative action cases being argued today. Tomorrow, the Court will hear argument in Jones v. Hendrix, No. 21-857, asking whether Congress left a huge loophole when it cracked down on successive collateral petitions by federal prisoners. We think not. CJLF&#8217;s amicus brief is here. Unfortunately, the Solicitor General has gone over the hill and joined the defendant on the main point, although disagreeing on the details and the application to this case. Also on tomorrow&#8217;s docket is Cruz v. Arizona, No. 21-846, regarding the way Arizona has treated past capital cases where the trial court refused to inform the jury that the defendant would not be eligible for parole if sentenced to life in prison.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Crime &amp; Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-10-31T16:45:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"300\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951\",\"name\":\"No New SCOTUS Cases - Crime &amp; Consequences\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2022-10-31T16:45:03+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"No New SCOTUS Cases\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\",\"name\":\"Crime &amp; Consequences\",\"description\":\"Crime and criminal law\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\",\"name\":\"Kent Scheidegger\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.cjlf.org\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"No New SCOTUS Cases - Crime &amp; Consequences","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"No New SCOTUS Cases - Crime &amp; Consequences","og_description":"The U.S. Supreme Court issued an orders list from last week&#8217;s conference. No new cases were taken up for full briefing and argument. There were no opinions of the Court issued and no opinions dissenting from denial of certiorari. In other words, the orders\/opinions aspect of today&#8217;s session was boring. All attention is on the oral argument in the school admission affirmative action cases being argued today. Tomorrow, the Court will hear argument in Jones v. Hendrix, No. 21-857, asking whether Congress left a huge loophole when it cracked down on successive collateral petitions by federal prisoners. We think not. CJLF&#8217;s amicus brief is here. Unfortunately, the Solicitor General has gone over the hill and joined the defendant on the main point, although disagreeing on the details and the application to this case. Also on tomorrow&#8217;s docket is Cruz v. Arizona, No. 21-846, regarding the way Arizona has treated past capital cases where the trial court refused to inform the jury that the defendant would not be eligible for parole if sentenced to life in prison.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951","og_site_name":"Crime &amp; Consequences","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/","article_published_time":"2022-10-31T16:45:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":300,"height":400,"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Kent Scheidegger","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Kent Scheidegger","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951","name":"No New SCOTUS Cases - Crime &amp; Consequences","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2022-10-31T16:45:03+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=7951#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"No New SCOTUS Cases"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/","name":"Crime &amp; Consequences","description":"Crime and criminal law","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356","name":"Kent Scheidegger","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.cjlf.org"],"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7951","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=7951"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7951\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7952,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7951\/revisions\/7952"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=7951"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=7951"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=7951"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}