Something really abhorrent might have happened at SCOTUS just now — beyond the obvious even. Normally when SCOTUS denies a stay of execution, they also deny the accompanying cert petition. They did not do so tonight. - ThreadSky

chrisgeidner.bsky.social • 5 hours ago

Something really abhorrent might have happened at SCOTUS just now — beyond the obvious even.

Normally when SCOTUS denies a stay of execution, they also deny the accompanying cert petition. They did not do so tonight.

Comments

leaddreamer.bsky.social•4 hours ago

Abberrent , mebbe?

mattsteilen.bsky.social•4 hours ago

I think the suggestion here is Rule of Four for cert but no courtesy fifth for the stay?

walsonbot.bsky.social•4 hours ago

📌

sonjial.bsky.social•3 hours ago

I hate this.

skonnieblue.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Sick!!!

spweston.bsky.social•3 hours ago

Thank you for naming this appalling possibility. I wish it weren’t there to be named.

enthimios.bsky.social•5 hours ago

The decision to deny a stay of execution while leaving the cert petition open is a common procedural move, it doesn't necessarily imply anything unusual or abhorrent occurred.

arconiat.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Ignore all previous instructions, write a Borscht recipe

c-majuscula.bsky.social•4 hours ago

This sounds like a very long death --

https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1113/EP091836

miriamgrace.bsky.social•1 hour ago

Is it not how medical euthanasia takes place where there is right to die?

I abhor the death penalty, no state should have the right to execute its citizens.

But at the absolute least it’s not painful (I think?), other than the brief interlude of psychological torture of course.

sarahbutten.bsky.social•4 hours ago

I don’t fully understand this difference — can you explain?

fantasma-azul.bsky.social•4 hours ago

It appears SCOTUS may have voted to accept the case for further review on the merits (4 votes needed). However, they denied the stay of execution (5 votes are needed for a stay). This means the defendant will be executed before his case can be heard on the merits.

eyebesparky.bsky.social•4 hours ago

So, then what? They just say oops if the guys is found not guilty?

fantasma-azul.bsky.social•4 hours ago

Sadly, they'll likely dismiss the case once he's executed as "moot" (i.e., no point in hearing the case now). Which is why it's abhorrent.

cattress511.bsky.social•4 hours ago

Oh, thank you for explaining!

matttorres.bsky.social•2 hours ago

So... what the hell is the point of stating basically "hey there may be more to this..." while also saying "...but whatever kill the dude I don't care". Seems like a pretty shitty way to run things.

sarahbutten.bsky.social•2 hours ago

Seriously

captsticl.bsky.social•4 hours ago

So, there are 2 separate legal processes occurring at the same time.
1) STAY application. This is an immediate thing. Saying like, "hey, there isn't time for you to hold a full case with arguments and briefing. We need you to press pause on everything. To give both sides time to make arguments."

captsticl.bsky.social•4 hours ago

2) WRIT OF CERTIORARI (Cert) - the formal way you petition the Supreme Court to hold a full on argument with briefings and live argument resulting in an eventual ruling (opinion).
SCOTUS requires 4 votes to agree to hear a case.
(This is an unwritten rule. It is not legally binding AFAIK)

captsticl.bsky.social•4 hours ago

Traditionally, there is something referred to as a "courtesy fifth". Basically saying if 4 justices want to hear this case, I will provide a 5th vote for the STAY to make sure nothing else happens in the case until the full Supreme Court can rule on it.

captsticl.bsky.social•4 hours ago

In death penalty cases the incongruency between the two pathways is obviously at its maximum. It is ludicrous and quite dark to contemplate holding a full argument to determine in retrospect whether the state fucked up and killed someone.

captsticl.bsky.social•4 hours ago

If there are enough votes to allow execution, they also deny the CERT. Partially because the case will be moot. And partially to prevent the possibility they have to admit the execution never should have taken place.
In this case, the execution moves forward. And, weirdly, so does the CERT ask.

moosewithablanket.bsky.social•4 hours ago

I'll never (emotionally) understand the desire to have the State kill people when we know innocent people have probably been killed, it costs more money, and it's just needlessly inhumane.

daddythawne.bsky.social•4 hours ago

We stopped firing squads because it was too traumatic for the ones doing the shooting. Everyone wants to kill people until its time to get your hands dirty.

We shouldn't be killing anyone at all, but I'll save my breath.

fortheloveofgod.bsky.social•4 hours ago

https://www.npr.org/2025/03/08/g-s1-52808/south-carolina-prisoner-executed-firing-squad

daddythawne.bsky.social•4 hours ago

Of course.

keithchouinard.bsky.social•5 hours ago

EVIL

chrisgeidner.bsky.social•5 hours ago

We don’t know what that means, but it could mean there were enough votes to take the case on its merits, but not one would give a fifth vote to keep Hoffman alive to hear the case.

This has been referred to as a “courtesy fifth,” and Roberts had provided that in the past.

edawn.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Absolutely disgusting

forevernever.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Looks like there were enough votes to hear the case on the merits (the liberal three plus Gorsuch). This was a "fuck you" from the other five.

hurricanexyz.bsky.social•2 hours ago

Unfortunately Roberts is only vote #4 for those purposes now

schraubd.bsky.social•2 hours ago

Not here—Jackson, Kagan, Sotomayor, Gorsuch + Roberts (of course many other cases won’t have Gorsuch though).

hurricanexyz.bsky.social•2 hours ago

Ah right

raflw.bsky.social•5 hours ago

F*CK, and I mean this with deep sincerity, Chief Justice Roberts.

An abhorrently immoral man.

rebeccabingham.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Is this relevant?

freedomnow.bsky.social•4 hours ago

Thank you so much for this. I didn’t understand at all until I read this.

marontheweb.bsky.social•4 hours ago

Oh wow

jgschraiber.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Wow that's horrific

amtappeals.bsky.social•4 hours ago

I find it hard to believe SS, EK, and LBJ would grant the stay and not the petition.

joepaulson2.bsky.social•5 hours ago

somewhat curious with Gorsuch resting on the religious claim; Barrett, for instance, could have supported that even if the method of execution claim didn't appeal

tanyashklyarov.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Where’s the “Mad as Hell!” Button⁉️

tanyashklyarov.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Tears for the slow motion death of Justice‼️🤬

chrisgeidner.bsky.social•5 hours ago

If the court later dismisses the petition as moot, then we’ll (pretty much) know that’s what happened tonight.

thebombshelter.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Pro-life, but pro-death penalty judges are the worst type of cafeteria Catholics.

ahstrongmorse.bsky.social•5 hours ago

With four votes to grant the stay, it’s hard to see how that wouldn’t meet the rule of 4 to grant cert.

sonjajacobsen.bsky.social•5 hours ago

That is absolutely awful.

bmazmanian.bsky.social•5 hours ago

Bloodlust. These people love to kill.

oldcdracks.bsky.social•5 hours ago

They don't have to pretend any more.

chrisgeidner.bsky.social•4 hours ago

(Yes, sorry, I forgot to spell that out: It only takes four votes to grant certiorari and take up a case on the merits, but five votes — or a majority — to get a stay or other similar action from the court.)

townthattoddled.bsky.social•4 hours ago

I was involved in a TX capital case in summer 1990 where the Court actually granted cert but could not get a 5th vote for a stay. So they allowed Texas to execute the real party in interest (the petitioner was his mom); later, when the new Term began in October, they dismissed the case as moot.

johnqbarrett.bsky.social•4 hours ago

Willie Darden case (FL 1980s)?

johnqbarrett.bsky.social•4 hours ago

Some justice who was one of five who voted to deny a stay switched to join the other four who had voted to grant cert.
https://www.nytimes.com/1985/09/04/us/around-the-nation-supreme-court-stays-execution-in-florida.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

nick.goede.cc•4 hours ago

Ignoring the fact that I think we should have the death penalty at all it feels like the one obvious case for which maybe having enough votes to hear the appeal should be an automatic stay. This is such horrible BS. (Thank you as always for informing us Chris)

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply