Latest Breaking News

onenote

(45,573 posts)

23. Convenient? It's simply the date of the first scheduling conference of the fall SCOTUS term

Thu Jul 31, 2025, 11:43 AM

Jul 31

It's the date on which they will decide whether to grant or deny a very large number of pending petitions for cert that weren't acted on before the end of the prior term. If the past is any guide -- and it probably is -- they will grant a relative handful of cert petitions, including some filed "in forma pauperis" -- and will deny hundreds upon hundreds of other petitions and also issue orders granting or denying various other motions such as motions to file under seal, motions for rehearing, etc etc.

Whether they grant or deny Maxwell's petition -- which the Trump DOJ has opposed -- is an open question.

And, FWIW, here'a an example of what the order emanating from the opening scheduling conference in September will look like:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/100724zor_4gdj.pdf

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Ms. Toad rictofen

46 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court sets date to consider whether to review Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal [View all] LetMyPeopleVote Jul 30 OP

Normal Smilo Jul 30 #1

Convenient? It's simply the date of the first scheduling conference of the fall SCOTUS term onenote Jul 31 #23

What??? chelsea0011 Jul 30 #2

She filed a petition for certiorari raising a legal issue. onenote Jul 30 #5

You know.... Like they do. PuraVidaDreamin Jul 31 #26

The fact you don't understand standard court procedure doesn't make it a conspiracy. onenote Jul 31 #29

We shall see PuraVidaDreamin Aug 1 #44

NOTHING is normal with this fucking court bluestarone Jul 30 #3

All that is being considered is a petition for certiorari. SOP onenote Jul 30 #6

Isn't This Caused By The Recent Supreme Court Ruling DallasNE Jul 30 #15

No. onenote Jul 30 #16

This guarantees the story will continue to have legs 303squadron Jul 30 #4

Just for the record, WHO decided? bluestarone Jul 30 #7

The shadow docket knows.............. turbinetree Jul 30 #8

This isn't a shadow docket case. Its a run of the mill petition for certiorari -- onenote Jul 30 #10

Thanks............. turbinetree Jul 30 #14

Nothing was decided. It was a standard administrative move scheduling the conference at which the petition onenote Jul 30 #9

Your right, i do nopt understand how Supreme court works, BUT bluestarone Jul 30 #11

No. A decision on whether to hear her case won't be made until September when the court considers her petition onenote Jul 30 #12

TYVM! I always thought before any decision a judge had to decide to hear a case. bluestarone Jul 30 #13

So repubs want to have Hornedfrog2000 Jul 31 #17

Not what the case is about. And the administration has opposed her petition for cert. onenote Jul 31 #19

How does Jughead Jul 31 #18

Average Americans file petitions for cert all the time. Around 8000 to 10,000 per year. onenote Jul 31 #20

Sorry, but i'm still confused, by this comment, "the rest are denied" bluestarone Jul 31 #27

The court -- assisted by their clerks -- reviews the petitions and if at least four justices deem a petition cert-worthy onenote Jul 31 #30

Ok, so four SC justices reviewed this? (with their clerks) bluestarone Jul 31 #32

No. Ms. Toad Jul 31 #39

I'm not asking question to argue with you, but rather trying to understand exactly their process. So my final questions bluestarone Aug 1 #45

At the scheduling conference all nine justices consider each pending petition for cert. onenote Aug 1 #46

Would you further explain. . . UniqueUserName Jul 31 #28

I don't know if it merits being one that will be granted. We won't know if it is or isn't granted until early October onenote Jul 31 #31

Sorry but again i'm saying bluestarone Jul 31 #33

No - Ms. Toad Jul 31 #38

No it couldn't. onenote Jul 31 #40

Thanks for doing the heavy lifting here. n/t Ms. Toad Jul 31 #41

Thanks. I'm actually a member of the supreme court bar and have participated -- but not argued -- onenote Jul 31 #42

I hit a couple of threads on it yesterday or the day before. Ms. Toad Jul 31 #43

It has NOT been granted. Ms. Toad Jul 31 #37

My brother, Ms. Toad Jul 31 #35

I wonder if any of the Supremes have visited any Epstein properties? 70sEraVet Jul 31 #21

The appropriate parties will be paid dlk Jul 31 #22

G O P stands for MW67 Jul 31 #24

Elites get to have their case go to the Supreme Court. SidneyR Jul 31 #25

Don't know, maybe some of these judges bluestarone Jul 31 #34

First - the court has NOT yet decided to hear her case. Ms. Toad Jul 31 #36