This is known as a spit of certiorari
Mrs. Alito reportedly had quite a day outdoors on January 20, 2021. www.nytimes.com/2024/05/28/u...
May 28, 2024 at 11:59 PM
This is known as a spit of certiorari
BREAKING: SCOTUS takes up 3 new cases, including a challenge to PrEP and contraception coverage that led to an order from Judge Reed O’Connor, affirmed by the 5th Circuit, that would end a wide variety of preventative care coverage under the ACA.
Background: www.lawdork.com/p/biden-admi...
Background: www.lawdork.com/p/biden-admi...
January 10, 2025 at 10:55 PM
BREAKING: SCOTUS takes up 3 new cases, including a challenge to PrEP and contraception coverage that led to an order from Judge Reed O’Connor, affirmed by the 5th Circuit, that would end a wide variety of preventative care coverage under the ACA.
Background: www.lawdork.com/p/biden-admi...
Background: www.lawdork.com/p/biden-admi...
Compare and contrast.
December 18, 2024 at 6:04 PM
Compare and contrast.
#BREAKING: #SCOTUS *denies* certiorari in one of the two E. Jean Carroll cases ("Carroll II," to the folks who follow closely).
That presumably clears the way for Carroll to collect the $5 million judgment (the $83.3 million judgment in Carroll I remains under appeal):
That presumably clears the way for Carroll to collect the $5 million judgment (the $83.3 million judgment in Carroll I remains under appeal):
www.supremecourt.gov
June 29, 2026 at 1:32 PM
OK, now that I've eaten something and am sitting down ...
Come off it. Onder's brief cannot be serious.
Yes, and this is why the Supreme Court's Sept. 10 order was — and remains — dispositive for the 2026 election.
Come off it. Onder's brief cannot be serious.
Yes, and this is why the Supreme Court's Sept. 10 order was — and remains — dispositive for the 2026 election.
September 23, 2026 at 6:41 PM
OK, now that I've eaten something and am sitting down ...
Come off it. Onder's brief cannot be serious.
Yes, and this is why the Supreme Court's Sept. 10 order was — and remains — dispositive for the 2026 election.
Come off it. Onder's brief cannot be serious.
Yes, and this is why the Supreme Court's Sept. 10 order was — and remains — dispositive for the 2026 election.
Alito, joined by Thomas and Gorsuch, suggest that public schools violate the Constitution when they help a student transition (by acknowledging them as trans) without their parents' knowledge or consent.
Would force schools to out trans kids to their parents. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
Would force schools to out trans kids to their parents. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
![SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
JONATHAN LEE, ET AL. v. POUDRE
SCHOOL DISTRICT R–1
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
No. 25–89. Decided October 14, 2025
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Statement of JUSTICE ALITO, with whom JUSTICE
THOMAS and JUSTICE GORSUCH join, respecting the denial
of certiorari.
I concur in the denial of certiorari because petitioners do
not challenge the ground for the ruling below. But I remain
concerned that some federal courts are “tempt[ed]” to avoid
confronting a “particularly contentious constitutional questio[n]”: whether a school district violates parents’ fundamental rights “when, without parental knowledge or consent, it encourages a student to transition to a new gender
or assists in that process.” Parents Protecting Our Children, UA v. Eau Claire Area School Dist., 604 U. S. ___,
___–___ (2024) (ALITO, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari) (slip op., at 1–2) (citing Troxel v. Granville, 530 U. S.
57, 70 (2000) (plurality opinion)). Petitioners tell us that
nearly 6,000 public schools have policies—as respondent allegedly does—that purposefully interfere with parents’ access to critical information about their children’s genderidentity choices and school personnel’s involvement in and
influence on those choices. Pet. for Cert. 24. The troubling—and tragic—allegations in this case underscore the
“great and growing national importance” of the question
that these parent petitioners present. Parents Protecting
Our Children, 604 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 1).](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreibznytltv7mexkfzlraxhxhcwvilqwad7bmgdmbtd643ln7wd375y)
October 14, 2025 at 1:34 PM
Alito, joined by Thomas and Gorsuch, suggest that public schools violate the Constitution when they help a student transition (by acknowledging them as trans) without their parents' knowledge or consent.
Would force schools to out trans kids to their parents. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
Would force schools to out trans kids to their parents. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
LAND BACK FUCKERS—Gorsuch and Thomas, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari
November 10, 2025 at 7:42 PM
LAND BACK FUCKERS—Gorsuch and Thomas, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari
By a 6–3 vote, and with no opinion, the Supreme Court throws out a lower court decision denying qualified immunity who killed an unarmed, mentally ill man by using "bodyweight force" to restrain him. All three liberals dissent. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
April 20, 2026 at 1:37 PM
By a 6–3 vote, and with no opinion, the Supreme Court throws out a lower court decision denying qualified immunity who killed an unarmed, mentally ill man by using "bodyweight force" to restrain him. All three liberals dissent. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
#BREAKING: Over dissents from Justices Sotomayor, Kagan & Jackson, #SCOTUS grants a stay in the Slaughter case (allowing President Trump to remove the last Dem member of the FTC), *and* grants certiorari "before judgment" to decide whether to formally overrule its 1935 ruling in Humphrey's Executor.
September 22, 2025 at 7:15 PM
#BREAKING: Over dissents from Justices Sotomayor, Kagan & Jackson, #SCOTUS grants a stay in the Slaughter case (allowing President Trump to remove the last Dem member of the FTC), *and* grants certiorari "before judgment" to decide whether to formally overrule its 1935 ruling in Humphrey's Executor.
This is a big one: SCOTUS will *not* revisit its precedent allowing states to create "bubble zones" that limit protests outside abortion clinics. Thomas and Alito dissent.
Very surprising—I really thought they'd overturn those precedents after Dobbs. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
Very surprising—I really thought they'd overturn those precedents after Dobbs. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
![The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. JUSTICE
ALITO would grant the petition for a writ of certiorari.
JUSTICE THOMAS, dissenting from the denial of certiorari.
In Hill v. Colorado, 530 U. S. 703 (2000), this Court upheld a state law restricting peaceful speech within 100 feet
of abortion clinics. It was clear at the time that Hill’s reasoning “contradict[ed] more than a half century of well-established First Amendment principles.” Id., at 765 (Kennedy, J., dissenting); see also id., at 742 (Scalia, J., joined
by THOMAS, J., dissenting). A number of us have since described the decision as an “absurd,” “defunct,” “erroneous,”
and “long-discredited” “aberration” from the rest of our
First Amendment jurisprudence. See City of Austin v.
Reagan Nat. Advertising of Austin, LLC, 596 U. S. 61, 86–
87, 92, 103–104 (2022) (THOMAS, J., joined by GORSUCH and
BARRETT, JJ., dissenting) (internal quotation marks omitted). We have long stopped applying Hill. See, e.g., City of
Austin, 596 U. S., at 76. And, a majority of this Court recently acknowledged that Hill “distorted [our] First Amendment doctrines.” Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U. S. 215, 287, and n. 65 (2022). Following our
repudiation in Dobbs, I do not see what is left of Hill. Yet,
lower courts continue to feel bound by it. The Court today
declines an invitation to set the record straight on Hill’s defunct status. I respectfully dissent.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreicle74qq6asiii2dfd6g7gqo35wbkzt2vncdmooobhdrfhafgqai4)
February 24, 2025 at 2:38 PM
This is a big one: SCOTUS will *not* revisit its precedent allowing states to create "bubble zones" that limit protests outside abortion clinics. Thomas and Alito dissent.
Very surprising—I really thought they'd overturn those precedents after Dobbs. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
Very surprising—I really thought they'd overturn those precedents after Dobbs. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
NEW: SCOTUS won’t stop Texas from killing Ker’Sean Ramey today. There were no noted dissents.
September 23, 2026 at 5:08 PM
NEW: SCOTUS won’t stop Texas from killing Ker’Sean Ramey today. There were no noted dissents.
Monday's grants of certiorari "before judgment" in the TPS cases were the 25th and 26th since 2/2019—after #SCOTUS hadn't done it once in the prior 15 years.
Today's "One First" looks at why this shift is happening—and why, although it's preferable to unexplained stays, it still has lots of costs:
Today's "One First" looks at why this shift is happening—and why, although it's preferable to unexplained stays, it still has lots of costs:
217. The Virtues and Vices of "Certiorari Before Judgment"
The Supreme Court is granting certiorari "before judgment" more than ever before. That may be better than the alternatives, but is it healthy in the long term?
www.stevevladeck.com
March 23, 2026 at 11:35 AM
Monday's grants of certiorari "before judgment" in the TPS cases were the 25th and 26th since 2/2019—after #SCOTUS hadn't done it once in the prior 15 years.
Today's "One First" looks at why this shift is happening—and why, although it's preferable to unexplained stays, it still has lots of costs:
Today's "One First" looks at why this shift is happening—and why, although it's preferable to unexplained stays, it still has lots of costs:
New: The Supreme Court DENIES Kim Davis' request to overturn Obergefell, the marriage equality decision. No noted dissents. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
November 10, 2025 at 2:31 PM
New: The Supreme Court DENIES Kim Davis' request to overturn Obergefell, the marriage equality decision. No noted dissents. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
The Supreme Court grants four new cases. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
June 2, 2025 at 1:36 PM
The Supreme Court grants four new cases. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
NEW: The Supreme Court declines to review the constitutionality of state laws that ban assault weapons. Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch would take up the case. Kavanaugh says the laws are likely unconstitutional but the issue needs to percolate further. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
June 2, 2025 at 1:34 PM
NEW: The Supreme Court declines to review the constitutionality of state laws that ban assault weapons. Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch would take up the case. Kavanaugh says the laws are likely unconstitutional but the issue needs to percolate further. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
Certiorari "before judgment" is how #SCOTUS takes up a full appeal *before* the intermediate federal courts have heard it.
It used to be exceedingly rare. For instance, there wasn't a *single* grant of such expedited review b/w August 2004 & February 2019.
This is the *23rd* such grant since then.
It used to be exceedingly rare. For instance, there wasn't a *single* grant of such expedited review b/w August 2004 & February 2019.
This is the *23rd* such grant since then.
#BREAKING: Over dissents from Justices Sotomayor, Kagan & Jackson, #SCOTUS grants a stay in the Slaughter case (allowing President Trump to remove the last Dem member of the FTC), *and* grants certiorari "before judgment" to decide whether to formally overrule its 1935 ruling in Humphrey's Executor.
September 22, 2025 at 7:43 PM
Certiorari "before judgment" is how #SCOTUS takes up a full appeal *before* the intermediate federal courts have heard it.
It used to be exceedingly rare. For instance, there wasn't a *single* grant of such expedited review b/w August 2004 & February 2019.
This is the *23rd* such grant since then.
It used to be exceedingly rare. For instance, there wasn't a *single* grant of such expedited review b/w August 2004 & February 2019.
This is the *23rd* such grant since then.
As the post notes, I was the lawyer the last time they granted rehearing on certiorari.
July 1, 2026 at 3:11 PM
As the post notes, I was the lawyer the last time they granted rehearing on certiorari.
The Supreme Court will review an objectively insane 5th Circuit decision that prohibited states from counting ballots that were mailed before Election Day but arrive shortly after. (More than half the states have such laws.)
www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
November 10, 2025 at 2:44 PM
The Supreme Court will review an objectively insane 5th Circuit decision that prohibited states from counting ballots that were mailed before Election Day but arrive shortly after. (More than half the states have such laws.)
www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
And now the Supreme Court has denied my writ of certiorari. So I’ll have to keep giving the court their favorite Temptation treats.
September 14, 2025 at 9:26 PM
And now the Supreme Court has denied my writ of certiorari. So I’ll have to keep giving the court their favorite Temptation treats.
This preposterous application should have a probability of success of less than zero
July 1, 2026 at 2:39 PM
This preposterous application should have a probability of success of less than zero
The Supreme Court sets aside lower court decisions upholding convictions for bribery related to the FIFA scandal because the Trump administration decided to dismiss those criminal cases "in the interests of justice." The FIFA prosecution ends in a whimper. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
January 12, 2026 at 2:40 PM
The Supreme Court sets aside lower court decisions upholding convictions for bribery related to the FIFA scandal because the Trump administration decided to dismiss those criminal cases "in the interests of justice." The FIFA prosecution ends in a whimper. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
Can't have a family without a little certiorari with benefits first.
January 24, 2026 at 8:55 PM
Can't have a family without a little certiorari with benefits first.
NEW: The Supreme Court will once again consider the legality of Trump's attack on birthright citizenship, this time (likely) on the merits.
December 5, 2025 at 6:52 PM
NEW: The Supreme Court will once again consider the legality of Trump's attack on birthright citizenship, this time (likely) on the merits.
Alito calls on the Supreme Court to overturn years of Confrontation Clause precedent that bars the introduction of out-of-court testimonial statements unless the witness testifies live. Would be a revolution for the Sixth Amendment, and terrible for defendants. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
March 24, 2025 at 1:36 PM
Alito calls on the Supreme Court to overturn years of Confrontation Clause precedent that bars the introduction of out-of-court testimonial statements unless the witness testifies live. Would be a revolution for the Sixth Amendment, and terrible for defendants. www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...