Breaking News

Re-list (and hold) watch

Yesterday, the Court granted cert. on the thrice-relisted Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, 10-553 (and accordingly, the twice-relisted Weishuhn v. Catholic Diocese of Lansing, 10-760, which presents the same issue, is likely being held for it).  From last week’s list, Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Jackson, 10-735, definitely looks like a hold at this point, probably for Wal-Mart v. Dukes, 10-277; and Vargas-Solis v. United States, 10-6866, and Setser v. United States, 10-7387, both are definitely being held.

The Court has relisted for a second time in Kiyemba v. Obama, 10-775.  Plus, the Court has relisted for the first time in two cases.  To my lights, both Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington, 10-945, and Stovall v. Miller, 10-851, involve pretty clear splits that the Court eventually will have to resolve, so the relists in those cases may reflect the Court’s efforts to decide on the best vehicle for doing that.  Green Party of Connecticut v. Lenge, 10-795, looks like it is being held, possibly for the Arizona campaign finance cases that were argued yesterday.

If a case has been relisted once, it generally means that the Court is paying close attention to the case, and the chances of a grant are higher than for an average case.  But once a case has been relisted more than twice, it is generally no longer a likely candidate for plenary review, and is more likely to result in a summary reversal or a dissent from the denial of cert.   Hosanna-Tabor is an exception to this rule, but I still think it’s a decent rule of thumb.

Title: Kiyemba v. Obama (relisted after 3/18 and 3/25 Conferences)

Docket: 10-775

Issue(s): Whether petitioners have a habeas corpus right to be brought into the United States and released, outside the framework of the fed­eral immigration laws and in contravention of specific statutory restrictions on their transfer to the United States, when they have been granted habeas corpus re­lief and received appropriate offers of resettlement from two different countries but have declined to accept those offers.

Certiorari stage documents:


Title: Green Party of Connecticut v. Lenge (held after 3/25 Conference, possibly for Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Bennett, 10-238, and McComish v. Bennett, 10-239).
Docket: 10-795
Issue(s): Whether Connecticut’s campaign finance law discriminates against minor-party candidates by imposing onerous qualifying requirements and including a trigger provision that provides a major-party opponent with an offsetting grant when a minor-party opponent reaches a threshold level of contributions.

Certiorari stage documents:


Title: Stovall v. Miller (relisted at 3/25 Conference, possibly so case can be considered with Greene v. Fisher, 10-637, which raises the same issue)
Docket: 10-851
Issue(s): (1) Whether the Sixth Circuit erred in concluding that “established law” for purposes of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) is based on the law in effect when the state conviction becomes final; and (2) even if reviewed de novo, did the Sixth Circuit err in concluding that the suicide note here was “testimonial” under principles explained in Crawford v. Washington, such that Miller was entitled to relief.

Certiorari stage documents:

Note: Goldstein, Howe & Russell, P.C. serves as counsel to the petitioner in the following case.

Title: Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington
Docket: 10-945
Issue(s): Whether the Fourth Amendment permits a jail to conduct a suspicionless strip search whenever an individual is arrested, including for minor offenses.

Certiorari stage documents:

Recommended Citation: John Elwood, Re-list (and hold) watch, SCOTUSblog (Mar. 29, 2011, 11:40 AM),