We’ve had some news out of a couple of rogue inferior courts. The level of gymnastic skill exercised by these courts rivals anything ever seen at the Olympics.
On the good news front, the Supreme Court will hear the Range petition for writ of certiorari today. There are three potential answers we can get back: 1) A granting of cert., 2) A denial of cert., 3) A holding pattern where they don’t grant or deny.
When the Court heard Bruen they had a number of Second Amendment cases waiting for a decision on cert. Right after Bruen the Court Granted Cert, Vacated the inferior courts’ opinion, and Remanded the case back to the lower court.
We have had another case docketed requesting a writ of certiorari, Caulkins v. Pritzker out of IL. I’m not very knowledgeable about this case yet. Now that it is at the Supreme Court, I can read the legal filings and find out what’s happening.
One of the short stories about this case is that it went to the Illinois Supreme Court. Two of the judges on that court were asked to recuse themselves because they had accepted a million dollars each from governor Pritzker for their election. This is in violation of the $500,000 limit, but Pritzker did a little hand waving, and it was allowed.
The two judges refused to recuse themselves. They said that it would not influence their opinion on the case. And then sided with the state against The People.
Thus, this petition includes a due process claim as well as Second Amendment claims.
In other news, the Supreme Court issued their code of conduct. I’ve read about half of it and will likely write something about it for tomorrow’s article.
Thank you for all the feedback this week on everybody’s articles.
The comments are open. Please give me some suggests for articles. Yesterday morning’s article was difficult as I had writer’s block.
A professional author friend of mine explains writer’s block as such: Your job doesn’t allow writer’s block. Your job is to write. If you think you have writer’s block, write something, anything. That is what happened.
OH! I almost forgot, that little piece of lawyering had a layer I had missed on the first go around. There were multiple cites to Friedman v. City of Highland Park, Ill. All of those cites were to judges and justices saying how wrong Friedman was. There are cites from Justice Thomas, for example.
The author of the Friedman opinion was Judge Easterbrook. The same judge who was the ghostwriter for the Seventh Circuit court’s opinion that Bevis v. Naperville is requesting a rehearing en banc. That is just a delightful snarky slam on Easterbrook.
