Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Signed into law by President Ronald Reagan on June 27, 1988 The Supreme Court Case Selections Act of 1988 ( Pub. L. 100–352 , 102 Stat. 662 , enacted June 27, 1988 , codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1257 ) is an act of Congress that eliminated appeals as of right from state court decisions to the Supreme Court of the United States .
A petition for certiorari before judgment, in the Supreme Court of the United States, is a petition for a writ of certiorari in which the Supreme Court is asked to immediately review the decision of a United States District Court, without an appeal having been decided by a United States Court of Appeals, for the purpose of expediting the proceedings and obtaining a final decision.
[after the 1891 act, ] Congress gave the Court discretionary review authority over appellate decisions in diversity, patent, revenue, criminal and admiralty cases. Parties wishing to appeal such cases would file a petition for certiorari, which the Court could grant or deny without passing on the merits. [3]
In law, certiorari is a court process to seek judicial review of a decision of a lower court or government agency. Certiorari comes from the name of a prerogative writ in England, issued by a superior court to direct that the record of the lower court be sent to the superior court for review.
The rule of four is a US Supreme Court practice that permits four of the nine justices to grant a writ of certiorari. It has the specific purpose to prevent a majority of the Court's members from controlling their docket. The rule of four is not required by the US Constitution, any law, or even the Court
The rejected certiorari petition was Dickson's first in this Court, and one can only speculate as to whether denial of that petition would have been a foregone conclusion." [ 9 ] Once a request for a writ of certiorari has been filed, the respondents may choose to file a brief in opposition to the request within 30 days (this too can be granted ...
(rights of speech and petition are "not identical"). Interpretation of the Petition Clause must be guided by the objectives and aspirations that underlie the right. A petition conveys the special concerns of its author to the government and, in its usual form, requests action by the government to address those concerns.
The writing law clerk may ask his or her justice to call for a response to the petition, or any justice may call for a response after the petition is circulated. [10] It tends to fall to the Chief Justice to "maintain" the pool when its workings go awry. Rehnquist chastised clerks for a number of practices, including memos that were tardy, too ...