Thursday, March 27, 2008

Fun: Split on the Supreme Court’s Role?

Within the last week, it appears that a circuit split is developing on whether Supreme Court decisions provide helpful guidance. Compare United States v. Carty, 2008 WL 763770, *21 (9th Cir. Mar. 24, 2008) (en banc) (“The Supreme Court is in the business of resolving circuit splits, not inviting them.”) with Card v. City of Everett, 2008 WL 783783, *26 (9th Cir. Mar. 26, 2008) (Fernandez, J. concurring) (“I applaud Judge Wardlaw’s scholarly and heroic attempt to create a new world of useful principle out of the Supreme Court’s dark materials. Alas, even my redoubtable colleague cannot accomplish that.”) (discussing establishment clause principles) and Robbins v. Hendrick, 2008 WL 747132, * (10th Cir. Mar. 21, 2008) (“We are not the first to acknowledge that the new formulation is less than pellucid.”) (discussing Twombly). Will the Supreme Court grant cert to issue a split plurality opinion that it offers clear and instructive help to the appellate courts?

In other news, this blog has just passed 1000 unique visitors and gone international, having recently received visits from Australia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Canada. Most visitors still come from the United States Federal Courts, accounting for over 200 unique visits. Many thanks to all of those who have helped me to start up, especially (all links on sidebar) Appellate Law & Practice, California Blog of Appeal, Obsidian Wings, Sentencing Law & Policy, and Southern Appeal. If anyone has any feedback, or would like to see more coverage of any particular issue, feel free to either email me or comment below.

No comments: