Supreme Court cases question

[Fez Hammersticks]

If the U.S. Solicitor General submits a brief to the Supreme Court that she recommends a case to be denied, how does this case fair? Does the panel take what the SG suggests or is her opinion a small blip?

 

[Denny Crane]

The solicitor general is the attorney for the US govt.'s interest in cases before the Court.

The Court itself decides if it will hear a case, regardless of what the Executive Branch (solicitor general) wants.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

I know someone who's apart of a large group who has a case against the Government.

A panel of three judges overturned this case unanimously. And now the SG requested it to be denied. The SC will decide to review or deny the case on the 16th.

I also read that the SC takes a very small fraction of cases brought to them. Am I off base here?

 

[Denny Crane]

The Court chooses to hear maybe 100 cases out of many thousands, each year.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

I'm just trying to get a grasp on their case. It's been overturned and requested to be denied, I just don't like the chances of it being heard by the SC.

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't know about the case, so I can't really comment. SCOTUS is an appellate court; they not supposed to decide if the cases before them were decided wrongly. Typically, the appeal would have something to do with the constitutionality of some part of the process in the decisions of the lower courts. Otherwise it has to be a federal matter, like one state suing another or a suit against the federal govt.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I'm just trying to get a grasp on their case. It's been overturned and requested to be denied, I just don't like the chances of it being heard by the SC.

No case has a good chance to be heard by the SC.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Their case was rejected today.

Now it goes back to a lower court. Though, a three (Federal) judge panel unanimously overturned/remanded the lower courts decision (who said they had the right to "seek" damages), this is when they took it to the SCOTUS.

Elena Kagan, in her brief, basically said this case had no merit from the get-go. The Supreme Court agreed on all of her points.

What the f*** can a lower court judge even do for this group?

 

[Denny Crane]

Their case was rejected today.

Now it goes back to a lower court. Though, a three (Federal) judge panel unanimously overturned/remanded the lower courts decision (who said they had the right to "seek" damages), this is when they took it to the SCOTUS.

Elena Kagan, in her brief, basically said this case had no merit from the get-go. The Supreme Court agreed on all of her points.

What the f*** can a lower court judge even do for this group?

It can be remanded to a lower court again. If remanded to a court that isn't an appeals court, the case would be heard again.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

It can be remanded to a lower court again. If remanded to a court that isn't an appeals court, the case would be heard again.

This case is basically set around a trust between this organization and the Government.

Two higher courts, including the SCOTUS, said that the act of 1980 terminated a trust. Without this they have nothing. It makes all of their points moot.

 

[Denny Crane]

It seems like them remanding it to a lower court/judge means it's not dead yet and there are issues to resolve. Usually, there are instructions issued with the order to remand.

A good example would be Bush v. Gore, when SCOTUS remanded the case back to the supreme court of florida with instructions to implement a fair recount.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

There are two issues withstanding. But I think anything else is a moot point as the trust is absolutely crucial to their case. Without it they literally have nothing.

What they are looking for is land and the assets on the land.

The Court Of Federal Claims has no jurisdiction over these Federally recognized Communities, who own and operate the businesses on these land.

 

[Denny Crane]

There are two issues withstanding. But I think anything else is a moot point as the trust is absolutely crucial to their case. Without it they literally have nothing.

What they are looking for is land and the assets on the land.

The Court Of Federal Claims has no jurisdiction over these Federally recognized Communities, who own and operate the businesses on these land.

Sounds like indian land / casinos ... or something like it.

I don't know enough about the law of treaties and all that, so I can't offer my best layman's opinion.

I do know that in cases of eminent domain, the reagan/bush appointed court did rule that the govt. has to pay fair market value for what they take. Maybe there's some hope in that.

 

[MARIS61]

It all depends on how many, if any, of the judges are honest servants to our country, and how many ignore the Constitution and rule according to their (or their master's) personal views and desires.

Like most employees in every other branch of our government and the private sector, these guys and gals have human flaws, and are just as vulnerable to threats, bribery, and corruption.

 

[MARIS61]

It seems like them remanding it to a lower court/judge means it's not dead yet and there are issues to resolve. Usually, there are instructions issued with the order to remand.

A good example would be Bush v. Gore, when SCOTUS remanded the case back to the supreme court of florida with instructions to implement a fair recount.

Yeah, that worked well.

 

[MARIS61]

Hey Fez, why not just tell us the case and plaintiff group?

Someone you're ashamed to be associated with or you just like stringing us along?

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Hey Fez, why not just tell us the case and plaintiff group?

Someone you're ashamed to be associated with or you just like stringing us along?

I am. I studied this case for one of my projects and even back then (2005) this case had no merit. Their lead plaintiff is as phony as they come. An overnight civil rights leader who uses culture and tradition as a mask for the real motive: money and monetary gains. He had a different tune before being rejected by one of these communities. In 2005 he used scare tactics and threats against his own group to join the case "or else." They aren't tribes, fwiw.

 

[MARIS61]

Be that way.

Keep your dirty little secret.