December 24, 2009
Two notable end-of-year appeals to SCOTUS
Thanks to How Appealing, I saw these two articles reporting on notable new sentencing appeals come from state officials to the US Supreme Court:
From the San Jose Mercury News here, "Schwarzenegger makes last plea to U.S. Supreme Court in prison case"
- From the Louisville Courier-Journal here, "Sex-offender case appealed to U.S. Supreme Court"
Because the Supreme Court has so far dodged the California prison litigation, I am not sure Schwarzenegger is likely to get the Justices to take the case up now. Similarly, though the sex offender case from Kentucky presents SCOTUS with a first opportunity to consider sex offender residency restrictions, I have an inkling that the Justices may be inclined to GVR the Kentucky AG's appeal after the Court addresses various ex post facto issues in the pending Carr case (which concerns sex offender registration requirements).
UPDATE: In this post at C&C, Kent indicates that the Schwarzenegger appeal provides "very little to decide, as this is one of those rare cases where Congress has provided for an appeal rather than a writ of certiorari. It is not in the Court's discretion to take it or not. If they have jurisdiction, they have to take it." I trust Kent's judgment here, though I suspect the Justices can figure out a way to dodge this case if they really set their mind to it. Remember, SCOTUS is not final because it is infallible, it is infallible because it is final.
December 24, 2009 at 11:36 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Two notable end-of-year appeals to SCOTUS:
personally i think the one from california is a crock! based on this statement!
"The judges have ordered the state to reduce the prison population to 137 percent of capacity, a move that would force at least 37,000 inmates from the system by 2012."
137% so they will be over 37% Sorry that is also a no-no....I know if a calif gov inspector walked into a bar or restaurant and it was 37% over capacity the DOORS WOULD BE LOCKED! Sorry if we can't do it...THEY CAN'T
AS for the idiot Nazi AG in Kentucky i'm suprise he was stupid enough to appeal...Isn't he in the loot! State govt's have been jumping through hoops for years to keep these cases OUT of the Supreme Courts hands...The one in maine is a pefect example. they are withholding publishing the order for over 3 months to give the state time to fix the law. So the ruling can be tossed because it's MOOT!. So sorry a law is either ILLEGAL or it's NOT! the courts are not allowed to invalidate PART of the law. Which is what's going on in Maine...the court knows if the ruling stands the ENTIRE law is GONE!
Posted by: rodsmith3510 | Dec 24, 2009 4:31:55 PM
The Governor of California should be on the steps of the legislature begging for more money to pay for the keep of those they lock up behind bars. The lesson of Andersonville was that if you can not feed them, take care of their medical needs or house them humanely, then you have to let them go. It is a crime not to release the prisoners and a crime to lock them up under conditions which the court has recognized as illegal. Part of the Governor's plan is to pay other states to house them. That costs money. The Governor was born in a country which committed atrocities under the Third Reich. Part of that plan included shipping Gypsies and Jews from Vienna and all parts of Austria off to camps in other countries. After the war the good citizens then turn around and act like victims of the Anschluss. The Supreme Court should deny this appeal in short order before they sit down to Christmas dinner.
Posted by: mpb | Dec 25, 2009 10:54:26 AM