Freshwater: Tick, tock, tick, tock ...

Posted 30 September 2014 by Richard B. Hoppe

John Freshwater's application to the Supreme Court of the U.S. for a writ of certiorari was placed on the Court's docket for Sept 29, 2014, yesterday. According to the Court's web site

Scheduled order lists are posted on this Website on the day of their issuance, while miscellaneous orders are posted on the day of issuance or the next day.

It's now Sept 30, but no order list for the 29th has yet been posted. Two Miscellaneous Orders are posted (one granting a stay of a lower court's ruling on the Ohio (Republican) Secretary of State's election finagling of early voting), but nothing on Freshwater is up.

15 Comments

https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 30 September 2014

Let's not rush things.

Surely another decade or two isn't too much for a clear case of using public money and compulsory schooling to preach about baby Jesus.

Glen Davidson

harold · 30 September 2014

Is this kind of delay common?

I can't help noting that the Ohio supreme court also took an unusually long time.

I suspect that this case causes division and agonizing on the right. They don't want to let it go. But it's very hard for them to come up with a justification.

W. H. Heydt · 30 September 2014

As I understand it (IANAL), SCOTUS gets about 10,000 requests to hear cases each year and typically hears about 100. Last year (according to report I was looking at), they handed down 67 decisions.

Thus, the sheer random chance that they would take on the Freshwater case is on the close order of 1%.

In addition, it takes the votes of 4 justices to accept a case. One would surmise that the justices (having good ideas who would vote which way) are likely to assess the chances of getting the result they might desire against the general strength of the issues presented in the case.

I don't think they'll take the Freshwater case, it being minor, messy, and weak. (And, indeed, it wouldn't surprise me if they duck the 800-lb gorilla of same-sex marriage cases for now, too.)

harold · 30 September 2014

W. H. Heydt said: As I understand it (IANAL), SCOTUS gets about 10,000 requests to hear cases each year and typically hears about 100. Last year (according to report I was looking at), they handed down 67 decisions. Thus, the sheer random chance that they would take on the Freshwater case is on the close order of 1%. In addition, it takes the votes of 4 justices to accept a case. One would surmise that the justices (having good ideas who would vote which way) are likely to assess the chances of getting the result they might desire against the general strength of the issues presented in the case. I don't think they'll take the Freshwater case, it being minor, messy, and weak. (And, indeed, it wouldn't surprise me if they duck the 800-lb gorilla of same-sex marriage cases for now, too.)

The optimists have been proven wrong already by the fact that the case got this far. The optimists predicted that the Ohio supreme court wouldn't take the case. I'm not a pessimist - I do expect Freshwater to lose in the end, although I wouldn't put much money on it. It's already been shown that the process is slow and agonizing, and that Freshwater has supporters at the highest level. This should have been a unanimous decision against Freshwater at the Ohio level, and it wasn't. And we know it isn't at the SCOTUS level either. Some of the most powerful people in the country strongly support Freshwater. Freshwater is a far bigger threat than Jason Lisle or Ken Ham. Assuming Freshwater loses, AIG's openly religious stuff can't be legally taught in public schools as science. Freshwater is the one who's claiming that the constitution permits the government (not just the Kentucky government) to favor his sect over others. And he's taken that claim to the highest court in the land. I'll be cautiously optimistic - cautiously - until this thing is over.

chemdude · 1 October 2014

The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has changed their tradition of granting certiorari. In a nut shell they are doing a double check before they grant certioriai and aren't issuing orders the following day. See the editors note on www.scotusblog.com

chemdude · 2 October 2014

The orders list is out, Freshwater isn't on it. Can it finally be over?

Richard B. Hoppe · 2 October 2014

Where is it? It's not on the SCOTUS publication site. That's the official publication site. I'll note that the scotus blog petitions list includes only those cases the blog is watching.

chemdude said: The orders list is out, Freshwater isn't on it. Can it finally be over?

cmb · 2 October 2014

From today's Washington Post online article by Robert Barnes,
" Supreme Court takes no action on same-sex marriage cases, for now " :

"The court returned earlier this week to consider nearly 2,000 petitions that had accumulated during the justicesâ summer break. It will not be known until next week which of the cases they rejected and which they will reconsider at a later date, but they did accept new cases that raise important questions involving election law and discrimination."

So it appears that we may still have to wait a bit.

chemdude · 2 October 2014

Richard B. Hoppe said: Where is it? It's not on the SCOTUS publication site. That's the official publication site. I'll note that the scotus blog petitions list includes only those cases the blog is watching.
chemdude said: The orders list is out, Freshwater isn't on it. Can it finally be over?
The order list I saw was on the SCOTUS website http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/ordersofthecourt.aspx as for more orders coming out re cmb I guess we still have to wait.

harold · 3 October 2014

chemdude said: The orders list is out, Freshwater isn't on it. Can it finally be over?

It will be great if the court part is over, and thus, the direct threat to public education over. Is "it" over? Unlikely. There will be the speaking tours of churches. The periodic introduction of "Freshwater bills" by right wing legislators in Ohio and elsewhere. I think political evolution denial in public schools is slowly dying as an issue. But it's a noisy exponential decay. The half life may be in the centuries, and there will be periods of seeming relapse.

Richard B. Hoppe · 3 October 2014

I'm at that same site, chemdude, unsuccessfully looking for an "Order List" for September like that of June 30, 2014, as opposed to the single-case "Miscellaneous Orders". I'm now assuming it will be out next week. A newspaper reporter told me that's when she expects it to be available.

tomh · 3 October 2014

Richard B. Hoppe said: I'm at that same site, chemdude, unsuccessfully looking for an "Order List" for September like that of June 30, 2014, as opposed to the single-case "Miscellaneous Orders". I'm now assuming it will be out next week. A newspaper reporter told me that's when she expects it to be available.

If you click on the 10/02/14 Miscellaneous Order you see a list of about 20 orders.

W. H. Heydt · 5 October 2014

This is a semi-off topic question...

If a case is stayed for appeal and SCOTUS denies cert, is the stay dissolved automatically or does it take action by whatever court issued the stay (or a higher one) to remove the stay? Inquiring non-legally-trained minds want to know...

Flint · 6 October 2014

W. H. Heydt said: This is a semi-off topic question... If a case is stayed for appeal and SCOTUS denies cert, is the stay dissolved automatically or does it take action by whatever court issued the stay (or a higher one) to remove the stay? Inquiring non-legally-trained minds want to know...

I'm not either, but I note that the appellate court decisions to overturn the same-sex marriage bans were stayed pending SCOTUS action, and the denial of cert meant those states in the districts covered by the appellate courts were obliged to begin issuing marriage licenses within hours. So I'm inferring that the cert ends the stay.

W. H. Heydt · 6 October 2014

Flint said:
W. H. Heydt said: This is a semi-off topic question... If a case is stayed for appeal and SCOTUS denies cert, is the stay dissolved automatically or does it take action by whatever court issued the stay (or a higher one) to remove the stay? Inquiring non-legally-trained minds want to know...
I'm not either, but I note that the appellate court decisions to overturn the same-sex marriage bans were stayed pending SCOTUS action, and the denial of cert meant those states in the districts covered by the appellate courts were obliged to begin issuing marriage licenses within hours. So I'm inferring that the cert ends the stay.

Those were the cases I had in mind... I have seem comments from people who--apparenyly do have law credentials--that, formally, the appellate court has to issue and order to the states that their decision is in effect. Two circuits did that. I don't know about the third one, but the governor in one state covered by that third circuit told county clerks to issue licenses, and in another state, county clerks started issue licenses without be told. In addition, NC has decided not to continue to fight (something of a surprise), by WY and SC say they'll continue fighting the issue (no surprise on either of those).