Your Support Matters: SCOTUS Schedules Semi-Auto Bans for Conference May 16
Yesterday afternoon, we got word that FFL-IL v Pritzker and the other related PICA cases were scheduled for a Supreme Court conference on May 16th, 2024. It's only two short weeks away.
A conference is a meeting of the justices where they review petitions for certiorari, decide which cases they will accept for oral argument, and discuss cases they have heard oral arguments on to vote on the disposition of the case. They typically hold conferences on Wednesday and Friday of each week when they are in session. When the court is not in session, they only hold Friday conferences. After discussing a case in conference, the justices typically take one of a few different actions:
What Can Scotus Do with FFL-IL at the Conference?
They can issue an order and send the case back to the lower court from which it originated with some instructions. This is often a reminder of what precedent-setting cases were missed or misapplied in the lower court’s original decision, with a mandate to “Do Over” under the recommended parameters. This is called a Remand.
They can deny the petition for certiorari, not taking the case for oral argument.
They can grant the petition for certiorari and put the case on the calendar for oral arguments. This is known as being “granted cert.”
They can issue an order one way or another on the case without oral arguments based only on the written documentation that they were provided. This is also rare.
So, what are the chances of the related cases being granted cert? Like most cases seeking court attention, the odds are low. Most documentation indicates that in modern times, between 1% and 5% of cases annually are granted cert. The other thing that makes getting cert challenging is that in recent years, the total number of cases that SCOTUS has granted cert to has decreased dramatically from a high of 377 in 1963 down to 47 in 2022. Currently, only 8 cases have been granted cert for the October 24 term.
Additionally, as we have shared, the related IL PICA cases do not have a final disposition for SCOTUS to review. That is, no district or appellate court has said, based on the merits, which side is correct about PICA being constitutional. This is called an Interlocutory appeal. In other words, a request for cert without an actual decision for the court to uphold or overturn. In the briefs that attorneys for FFL-IL and Raul filed, the arguments for the court granting cert on an interlocutory basis are that the 7th circuit is misinterpreting landmark SCOTUS decisions on the definition of what an arm is, what common use means and where the burden of proof lies based on the NYSRPA v Bruen ruling in 2022. See yesterday’s post for more details.
A case out of Maryland called Bianchi v. Brown, an FPC case, DOES have a decision from a district court and was granted cert pre-NYSYRPA v. Bruen and was GVR’d post Bruen. It has been working its way back up the chain but was a decision from an En-Banc hearing in the 4th circuit when FPC also motioned for cert, believing that the 4th circuit was playing games to delay the answer they knew they had to give based on precedents. This case has been scheduled for SCOTUS conference the same day as the related IL cases on May 16. Could the court hear them all on the same day? Grant some cert and not others? Remand them all back with instructions on how to proceed properly. It is anyone’s guess, but if SCOTUS takes just one case, the odds seem to favor Bianchi.
YOUR SUPPORT HAS GOTTEN US THIS FAR
Please reflect on where we are and what your role is in getting FFL-IL v Pritzker this far. You are part of a group that is MAKING HISTORY and honoring the founding fathers by not letting the rights that they wanted to be protected above all others slip into the crevasse of evil and tyranny. I know I just asked yesterday, and many of you have stepped up with more support. THANK YOU!!! For those of you who didn’t, please consider it now. If you were having dinner with Washington, Jefferson, Madison, or the Adams’ would you be able to look them in the eye and tell them you did all you could to protect the republic from domestic enemies and preserve a way of life that has created more freedom and prosperity in the world than any other?