Greer v. Moon, No. 20-cv-00647 (D. Utah Sep. 16, 2020)

[obsdj]

For those keeping an eye peeled on Cox v. Sony, the parties have requested an extension of time for the briefs to be filed. These are the requested deadline dates:


See attached for the letter submitted to the SCOTUS clerk. I'm guessing Hardin's anticipated amicus brief will be filed either in support of Cox or in support of neither party, in which case his deadline to file will be seven days after Cox files their brief. Not a lot of time for him to pull it together!

 

[Fetch!]

I'm guessing Hardin's anticipated amicus brief will be filed either in support of Cox or in support of neither party, in which case his deadline to file will be seven days after Cox files their brief. Not a lot of time for him to pull it together!

SCOTUS with that low-key Tsundere energy for all the poor "Friends of the Court" hoping for a crumb of acknowledgement.
They must really get absolutely buried under these briefs on the big-name cases.

 

[cromit]

Judges face elections

Not these, they’re appointed by the Senate (if district) or hired based on the recommendation of a committee (magistrate). And the only way to forcibly remove a constitutionally-appointed judge is through impeachment. Not all states have elections for their state-level judges, or not for all tiers of the system. And even if there are elections, governors retain the power to make interim appointments in the case of death or retirement.

All this to say that the judges in this case are deliberately as insulated from politics as possible, so they can make the difficult, correct-but-unpopular rulings, but it also makes them pretty far removed from accountability to the people who suffer for their incorrect rulings.

 

[Harvey Danger]

Whoever posted a link to the Courtlistener RSS feed upthread really did me a solid. Don't have to F5, just let the machine do the work.

That was a callback to the Vic Mignogna case, that spent nearly 2 years waiting for an appeal judgement before they affirmed the district judge's retard ruling. The Appeals court dropped their decisions on Thursdays, leading to many Thursdays of hopeful spam even less informative than this thread (if you can believe such a thing).

Point is the length of time it takes a judge to give a decision does not positively correlate to that decision's quality.

 

[obsdj]

All this to say that the judges in this case are deliberately as insulated from politics as possible, so they can make the difficult, correct-but-unpopular rulings, but it also makes them pretty far removed from accountability to the people who suffer for their incorrect rulings.

They may not have to answer to voters, but they do care very much about being overruled by the appeals courts.

Meanwhile, SCOTUS quickly agreed to the requested briefing deadlines for Cox v. Sony. Just a bit over a month away for petitioner's brief. It would be funny if we got to see Hardin's amicus before we see the resolution of this case.