Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Looks like the appeal process has begun. From wikipedia - CERTIORARI: United States law

[edit] Federal courts In the United States, certiorari is the writ that an appellate court issues to a lower court in order to review its judgment for legal error and review, where no appeal is available as a matter of right. Since the Judiciary Act of 1925, most cases cannot be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court as a matter of right; therefore, a party who wants that court to review a decision of a federal or state court files a "petition for writ of certiorari" in the Supreme Court. If the Court grants the petition (see Procedures of the Supreme Court of the United States), the case is scheduled for the filing of briefs and for oral argument.

Four of the nine Justices are required to grant a writ of certiorari, referred to as the "rule of four." The great majority of cases brought to the Supreme Court are denied certiorari (approximately 7,500 petitions are presented each year, but just 80 to 150 are typically granted), because the Supreme Court is generally careful to choose only cases in which it has jurisdiction and which it considers sufficiently important (especially cases involving deep constitutional questions) to merit the use of its limited resources. See also Cert pool.

The granting of a writ does not necessarily mean that the Supreme Court has found anything wrong with the decision of the lower court. Granting a writ of certiorari means merely that four of the Justices think that the circumstances described in the petition are sufficient to warrant the full Court reviewing the case and the lower court's action. Conversely, the legal effect of the Supreme Court's denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari is commonly misunderstood as meaning that the Supreme Court approves the decision of a lower court. However, such a denial "imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case, as the bar has been told many times." Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70 (1995). In particular, a denial of a writ of certiorari means that no binding precedent is created, and that the lower court's decision is authoritative only within its region of jurisdiction.

Certiorari is sometimes informally referred to as cert, and cases warranting the Supreme Court's attention as certworthy. One situation where the Supreme Court sometimes grants a writ of certiorari is when the federal appeals courts in two (or more) federal judicial circuits have ruled different ways in similar situations, and the Supreme Court wants to resolve that "circuit split" about how the law is supposed to apply to that similar kind of situation. Issues of this type are often called "percolating issues."

Cert. granted sub nom is an abbreviation of the legal phrase "certiorari granted sub nomen", meaning "judicial review granted, under name", indicating that a petition for certiorari of a case has been granted, but that the court granting certiorari is hearing the case under a different name than the one that subordinate courts heard it. For example, the case of District of Columbia v. Heller was known as Parker v. District of Columbia in the court below.

1 posted on 10/31/2008 9:43:51 AM PDT by nametrader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: nametrader
one good thing its before he gets inagurated
2 posted on 10/31/2008 9:48:57 AM PDT by LittleMoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nametrader

My gut says this is radioactive. After the lies of FL2000, they won’t touch this.


3 posted on 10/31/2008 9:50:53 AM PDT by Sgt_Schultze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nametrader

If the SCOTUS tosses this and Obama wins, We need to send ONE MILLION PEOPLE TO WASHINGTON, blocking Obama’s inauguration, Demanding that he show the vault copy of his birth certificate before he can proceed!!


6 posted on 10/31/2008 9:59:51 AM PDT by Onerom99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nametrader
Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed. (Response due December 1, 2008)

Will you CUT THIS CRAP OUT?? Since when does SCOTUS respond one day after filing and on a weekend??

8 posted on 10/31/2008 10:02:15 AM PDT by pabianice (Inexplicable and infuriating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nametrader
THIRD CIRCUIT DENIES EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY ELECTION:
See ObamaCrimes.com Comment

O R D E R
Plaintiff-Appellant's Emergency Motion for an Immediate Injunction To Stay the Presidential Election of November 4, 2008 Pending Resolution of the Petitioner's Appeal is hereby DENIED. For the reasons ably expressed by the District Court—and not addressed in Plaintiff-Appellant’s Emergency Motion—it appears that Plaintiff-Appellant lacks standing to challenge Senator Barack Obama's candidacy for the Presidency of the United States. Accordingly, Plaintiff-Appellant has not shown a likelihood of success with respect to his appeal.

/s/ Thomas L. Ambro, Circuit Judge
Dated: October 31, 2008
------- I can't find Berg's emergency motion in the Supreme Court docket. I wonder if he filed this first, and now will file in the Supreme Court, or if he filed both places. The Supreme Court docket doesn't show any emergency motion.
17 posted on 10/31/2008 6:48:00 PM PDT by Sibre Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson