Is here — gun-lake-band-cert-opposition
MichGO’s cert petition is here, as are links to the lower court materials.
Supreme Court
Seminole Tribe v. Florida House of Representatives Cert Petition
WaPo Article on the Sixth Circuit
From WaPo (courtesy of Con Law Prof Blog):
CINCINNATI — In June 2005, two federal appellate judges here ordered Joseph Arnold released from a 21-year prison sentence after ruling that there was no credible evidence he had threatened to shoot his girlfriend’s daughter with a pistol.
But Arnold’s relief was fleeting. Prosecutors appealed to all of the judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. And the full court, dominated by appointees of President Bush and other Republican presidents, reversed the initial appellate ruling, saying the evidence presented by prosecutors was sufficient to merit Arnold’s conviction.
Other criminal defendants, including some on death row, remain in federal prisons for the same reason: After initial appellate verdicts that their convictions or sentences were unjust, the last word came from Bush’s judicial picks on the 6th Circuit. Acting in cooperation with other Republican appointees on the court, they have repeatedly organized full-court rehearings to overturn rulings by panels dominated by Democratic appointees.
Larry Plamondon and the Keith Case Redux
Larry Plamondon, a member of the Grand River Band of Ottawa Indians, is profiled in the new paper by Trevor Morrison on the Supreme Court case, United States v. District Court (the Keith case, named after Judge Damon Keith). Here is a link to the paper (via Legal History Blog), which is part of the Presidential Power Stories book.
And it’s great to see Larry’ autobiography, Lost from the Ottawa (available at Nokomis), featured in an important piece of legal scholarship.
Obama Judicial Appointments and the Supreme Court
Today’s WaPo article on the possibility that President Obama’s judicial appointments to the federal courts of appeal might reshape much of American law raises a few interesting questions, perhaps ones that can be empirically assessed over the course of his administration.
According to the article, 56 percent of the current federal court of appeals judges were appointed by Republican presidents, and Obama could flip that. But the Supreme Court’s current conservative bent is unlikely to change much during his term, even if it stretches two terms.
My hypothesis is that the Roberts Court, assuming more and more appellate court decisions are “liberal,” will grant cert in more and more cases to counteract the trend. The Ninth Circuit, which is still a majority Democrat appointed bench, is the circuit most reversed by the Court right now.
I think there must be a relation to the general conservatism of the lower courts and the lack of cases in which the Roberts Court grants cert. It might only be 10-15 cases a year, but that’s still pretty significant.
Navajo Nation and Office of Hawaiian Affairs Oral Argument Dates
From SCOTUSblog:
Mon., Feb. 23:
U.S. v. Navajo Nation (07-1420) — federal government duty to protect Indian tribe’s mineral rights
Rivera v. Illinois (07-9995) — effect on conviction of erroneous denial of peremptory challenge to a juror
Tues., Feb. 24:
Burlington Northern v. U.S. (07-1601) and Shell Oil v. U.S. (07-1607) — liability for cleanup of toxic waste dump (cases consolidated for one-hour hearing)
Carlsbad Technology v. HIF Bio, Inc. (07-1437) — Circuit Court authority to review District Court order returning case to state courts
Wed., Feb. 25:
Hawaii v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs (07-1372) — authority of a state to sell state lands
Flores-Figueroa v. U.S. (08-108) — proof needed under federal identity theft law
Slate on Petition Stage Amicus Briefs before the Supreme Court
From Slate:
In its last term, the U.S. Supreme Court heard fewer cases than it has in any single term in more than 50 years. This means that getting your case heard at the high court is about 10 times harder than getting into Harvard. How do you up your odds? Just as a recommendation letter from a well-placed alum gets attention from an admissions office, a supportive brief from an advocacy group, sent to the court at the stage when it’s deciding whether to take a case, flags a case for the justices.
Each year, parties that have lost in the lower courts file about 9,000 petitions for a writ of certiorari (cert for short) in which they beg the court to hear them. The Supreme Court has nearly complete discretion over which cases it will take. Last term, only 69 cert petitions resulted in arguments before the justices. The lucky few were more likely to have gotten a helping hand from a friend-of-the-court brief, filed by an outside group with an interest in the case’s outcome. Influence, in this sense, is all about timing. Amicus briefs, as they’re known, tend to pile up on both sides of a case once the court takes it, all competing for the justices’ attention. But the amicus briefs filed before the court grants cert are much rarer, and, accordingly, more influential. Yet this is a tool that liberal groups often fail to use.
David Frederick as the Next Solicitor General?
Here is the article.
David Frederick argued Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land and Cattle Co. on behalf of the Long Family, and did a great job. He is also the author of Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy.
United States Merits Brief in United States v. Navajo Nation
Here.
Harrah’s v. NGV Gaming Cert Petition
The questions presented are:
1. Does the Dictionary Act’s rule that words used in the present tense also include the future tense, unless the context indicates otherwise, only apply if the statutory text at issue is ambiguous?
2. Does the term. “Indian lands” as used in 25 U.S.C. §§ 81 and 2701-2721 include both land that “is held by the United States in trust for an Indian tribe” and land that “will be held in trust by the United States for an Indian tribe”?
Here is the brief — harrahs-v-ngv-gaming-cert-petn
And here is the lower court opinion — guidiville-band-v-ngv-gaming
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.