Bingo Ellie! I have already lodged my official complaint at the Colorado Attorney General's Website v suggested Rule 44, Motion for Re-Hearing within the mandatory 25 days.
I als recommended that Colorado hire NEAL KATYAL to handle the Motion ... that would be Neals' 51st appearance at SCOTUS if they do hire the top appellate attorney in the Land
Bingo Ellie! I have already lodged my official complaint at the Colorado Attorney General's Website v suggested Rule 44, Motion for Re-Hearing within the mandatory 25 days.
I als recommended that Colorado hire NEAL KATYAL to handle the Motion ... that would be Neals' 51st appearance at SCOTUS if they do hire the top appellate attorney in the Land
Thank you Ellie! T Greg's first sentence is extremely important in terms of the EXACT admissible evidence about the numerous "stipulations" agreed to by the State of Colorado, cited in the Majority Opinion. The Opinion relies on those "stipulations" to reach their desired 6-3 result.
Put aside the buden of proof (B/P) standard for Rule 60 for the moment because I do not believe that B/P will be "outcome determinative" in the next 20 or so calendar days.
As I stated a day ago & formally filed a complaint with AG Weiss, the state of Colorado MUST hire top counsel to take over the this Federal asap.
Mr Weiss has an Oath of office & a fiduciary duty to his Client, the state of Colorado and its citizens to let NEAL KATYAL or LAWRENCE TRIBE (given the 1st Amendment sophistry) take over now. Such attorneys can have the frank attorney client protected and "work product" discussions needed to bust this fraud on the Court..
тАЬThe facts in the 303 case were stipulated, meaning both sides agreed to them and the Court is required to take them as true for purposes of making its decisionтАЭ
тАЬ You can have a judgment set aside under Rule 60(b)(2) for "newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered"
But тАУ as the media coverage shows тАУ that evidence *could* have been discovered with reasonable diligenceтАЭ
тАЬThere's no fraud when the State of Colorado agreed to it
Even if were, the deadline for a Rule 60(b)(3) motion to set aside for fraud would have been 1 year after the trial court's ruling -- so that deadline already passed back in 2018тАЭ
Regarding bad due diligence:
тАЬThis assumes the State cared. They may have assumed a case of this sort was inevitable eventually anyway, and may as well get an appellate ruling on it sooner than laterтАЭ
тАЬI don't know enough about Colorado politics or law to know if that had any influence on why things went how they did, but her 4-year tenure did overlap with the major case points: initially filed in 2016, trial court decisions in 2017 and 2018, 10th Circ appeal in 2019тАЭ
Regarding Neal Katyal said CO AG should get rehearing:
тАЬLet's assume that procedurally all of this is 100% possible (it's not, btw): which 2 of the 6 SCOTUS justices would change their minds based on this?тАЭ
Doucette advised reading the lower courtsтАЩ opinions available on SCOTUS blog:
"Colorado Mewsline" via LINDSAY TOMMER & QUENTIN YOUNG have a direct quote from ATTORNEY GENERAL PHIL WEISER stated on 6/30/23 9:08 am Mountain, " ... on the legal front, we're going to ... ultimately to overturn this decision."
Here is the full quote for context: "On the legal front, we're going to do all we can to limit thevidmpact of this decision and, ultimately, to overturn this decision."
EARLIER 7/4 Comment: Thx you Ellie, I follow AMY HOWE's analyses & others on scotusblog.com.ЁЯСМ
Today, I did nail down that a prior Colarado AG, CYNTHIA COFFMAN (R) was responsible for the Stips (plural) that were agreed to years earlier in the case. COFFMAN's file on the Stips must be produced & examined by appellate Cousel regarding the representations that were the foundation for any stipulations that Gorsuch cashed in.
I will update the Community if I get a reply from Colorado AG Weiss on my complaint.
I do know Robert's work. Neal Katyal posted his 3rd ' Courtside, post inwhich Neal reported the appellate tactics he used to ultimately prevail in Moore v. Harper at the SCOTUS hearing.
I do subscribe to Neal Substack' Courtside. Thus, I was able to advise Neal (deadpanning it) that I recommend an appellate attorney to the State of Colorado AG to handle 303 Creative LLC post Opinion. And, that my recommended counsel had already appeared at SCOTUS 50 times. :)
LOL if that came to pass--Neal arguing 303 Creative before SCOTUS--I would be so tickled to remember how he got "recommended!"
Robert Hubbell is vacationing but still writing his newsletter and said he might address 303 Creative defects tonight, citing Jay Kuo (who wrote he's on a riverboat in Central Europe!).
Out of HCR's Substack, we have a grassroots action group and a Giving Circle through The States Project. If interested, you can email: heathersherd@gmail.com
Also in the meantime is this article by Dale Carpenter arguing that the ruling is very narrow regarding free speech (so donтАЩt worry about protected classes getting unprotected in subsequent cases?).
Thx Ellie, yes, the avalanche of Twitter replies made things cloudy.
. I did note two Attorney replies: 1) one was merely a procedural matter; the other, 2) smacked of distraction. Neither were helpful on the urgent questions.
Bingo Ellie! I have already lodged my official complaint at the Colorado Attorney General's Website v suggested Rule 44, Motion for Re-Hearing within the mandatory 25 days.
I als recommended that Colorado hire NEAL KATYAL to handle the Motion ... that would be Neals' 51st appearance at SCOTUS if they do hire the top appellate attorney in the Land
Neal Katyal is the absolute best at presenting to the Supreme Court.
Rule 44, Neal KatyalтАФbrilliant! Thank you!
Neal is brlliant. The top appellate attorney I have heard argue before SCOTUS.
Legal mindsтАЩ review, please, of this thread by Greg Doucette:
https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1675646942498390017?s=46&t=G1vnalQqxYifVbjonWfCIA
Noon Pacific, Oh, T. Greg Doucette, the lawyer. The "T" in T. GREG DOUCETTE is Important ....
Thank you Ellie! T Greg's first sentence is extremely important in terms of the EXACT admissible evidence about the numerous "stipulations" agreed to by the State of Colorado, cited in the Majority Opinion. The Opinion relies on those "stipulations" to reach their desired 6-3 result.
Put aside the buden of proof (B/P) standard for Rule 60 for the moment because I do not believe that B/P will be "outcome determinative" in the next 20 or so calendar days.
As I stated a day ago & formally filed a complaint with AG Weiss, the state of Colorado MUST hire top counsel to take over the this Federal asap.
Mr Weiss has an Oath of office & a fiduciary duty to his Client, the state of Colorado and its citizens to let NEAL KATYAL or LAWRENCE TRIBE (given the 1st Amendment sophistry) take over now. Such attorneys can have the frank attorney client protected and "work product" discussions needed to bust this fraud on the Court..
Sorry. T. Greg Doucette excerpts:
тАЬThe facts in the 303 case were stipulated, meaning both sides agreed to them and the Court is required to take them as true for purposes of making its decisionтАЭ
тАЬ You can have a judgment set aside under Rule 60(b)(2) for "newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered"
But тАУ as the media coverage shows тАУ that evidence *could* have been discovered with reasonable diligenceтАЭ
тАЬThere's no fraud when the State of Colorado agreed to it
Even if were, the deadline for a Rule 60(b)(3) motion to set aside for fraud would have been 1 year after the trial court's ruling -- so that deadline already passed back in 2018тАЭ
Regarding bad due diligence:
тАЬThis assumes the State cared. They may have assumed a case of this sort was inevitable eventually anyway, and may as well get an appellate ruling on it sooner than laterтАЭ
Regarding Republican CO AG when case was filed:
https://coloradosun.com/2019/01/08/cynthia-coffman-colorado-ag-exit-interview/
тАЬI don't know enough about Colorado politics or law to know if that had any influence on why things went how they did, but her 4-year tenure did overlap with the major case points: initially filed in 2016, trial court decisions in 2017 and 2018, 10th Circ appeal in 2019тАЭ
Regarding Neal Katyal said CO AG should get rehearing:
тАЬLet's assume that procedurally all of this is 100% possible (it's not, btw): which 2 of the 6 SCOTUS justices would change their minds based on this?тАЭ
Doucette advised reading the lower courtsтАЩ opinions available on SCOTUS blog:
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/303-creative-llc-v-elenis/
7/423 11 PM Pacfic UPDATE:
"Colorado Mewsline" via LINDSAY TOMMER & QUENTIN YOUNG have a direct quote from ATTORNEY GENERAL PHIL WEISER stated on 6/30/23 9:08 am Mountain, " ... on the legal front, we're going to ... ultimately to overturn this decision."
Here is the full quote for context: "On the legal front, we're going to do all we can to limit thevidmpact of this decision and, ultimately, to overturn this decision."
EARLIER 7/4 Comment: Thx you Ellie, I follow AMY HOWE's analyses & others on scotusblog.com.ЁЯСМ
Today, I did nail down that a prior Colarado AG, CYNTHIA COFFMAN (R) was responsible for the Stips (plural) that were agreed to years earlier in the case. COFFMAN's file on the Stips must be produced & examined by appellate Cousel regarding the representations that were the foundation for any stipulations that Gorsuch cashed in.
I will update the Community if I get a reply from Colorado AG Weiss on my complaint.
Time: July 4 at 3 pm Pacific.
Thank you for the dive and follow up, and restoring a bit of hope to cap off this Fourth of July!
Enjoy this musical celebration:
https://youtu.be/IiydluD0PyM
ЁЯО╢With Truth Thy Only GuideЁЯО╢
Do you also read Robert HubbellтАЩs Substack? He pairs very well with HCR and Joyce, if you donтАЩt know him. I credited you unnamed for this dive.
https://open.substack.com/pub/roberthubbell/p/the-walls-of-liberty?r=6pp8t&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
I do know Robert's work. Neal Katyal posted his 3rd ' Courtside, post inwhich Neal reported the appellate tactics he used to ultimately prevail in Moore v. Harper at the SCOTUS hearing.
I do subscribe to Neal Substack' Courtside. Thus, I was able to advise Neal (deadpanning it) that I recommend an appellate attorney to the State of Colorado AG to handle 303 Creative LLC post Opinion. And, that my recommended counsel had already appeared at SCOTUS 50 times. :)
LOL if that came to pass--Neal arguing 303 Creative before SCOTUS--I would be so tickled to remember how he got "recommended!"
Robert Hubbell is vacationing but still writing his newsletter and said he might address 303 Creative defects tonight, citing Jay Kuo (who wrote he's on a riverboat in Central Europe!).
Out of HCR's Substack, we have a grassroots action group and a Giving Circle through The States Project. If interested, you can email: heathersherd@gmail.com
Also in the meantime is this article by Dale Carpenter arguing that the ruling is very narrow regarding free speech (so donтАЩt worry about protected classes getting unprotected in subsequent cases?).
https://reason.com/volokh/2023/07/03/how-to-read-303-creative-v-elenis/
I cocncur on the "narrow" analysis but, I would say "thin & vulnerable to attack".
Well, Greg DoucetteтАЩs Twitter thread is long with lots of replies from others, so IтАЩm working on a workaround. In the meantime is the article:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/sham-customer-likely-didnt-affect-supreme-court-ruling-sex-weddings-ex-rcna92366
Thx Ellie, yes, the avalanche of Twitter replies made things cloudy.
. I did note two Attorney replies: 1) one was merely a procedural matter; the other, 2) smacked of distraction. Neither were helpful on the urgent questions.