MrSwankyPants

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2022/03/14/raskin-fed-manchin/ Wasn't she nominated with ST? Will this further delay a vote of confirmation?

Was just posted. Remanded to lower courts.

Do we have any updates on what will happen on the 30th? Will the date just be pushed?

sounds good. I like derivative so it doesn't concern when i bought my shares.

Got it. So it's this opinion that's being appealed and argued: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/federal-claims/cofce/1:2013cv00465/28224/449/ Didn't Fairholme buy their shares post conservatorship? Are they not pushing for direct claims?

I'm so confused after listening to this. Can someone refresh me what case this is and where it's on appeal from? Too many cases, too many judges...I'm loosing track!

A good analysis is given on the latest episode of the Advisory Opinions Podcast with David French and helped me to understand what was going on here. The issue at hand is Thomas being the lone wolf, creating a plurality agreement on the outcome, but for different reasons. I'd encourage you to listen to it. The TLDR of what's said is basically this- Thomas decided to be take the practical route in this case based on his previous dissent in another case (Johnson) and his view that a 4/4/1 decision would create significant confusion for lower courts going forward. What's important for Collins is that the two textualist Gorsuch and Thomas stuck together.... I firmly believe Gorsuch joined Kagan most likely because of the TEXT of the statute. Add in the language of Kanavaugh's dissent (pulled straight from judge brown) and I feel good about our chances simply because Roberts, Alito, and Barrett have seemingly put their stamp of approval on that reasoning at some point during the drafting of the dissent.

Any ideas why this opinion is taking so long?

Some thoughts from today's SCTOUS opinions. Looks like December opinions were issued by Kavanaugh and Kagan this morning (Edwards and CIC). That leaves Barrett, Gorsuch, Thomas, Breyer, and Alito without any opinions from December's conferences. I very much believe Alito is very busy working on Fulton from November, and therefore I don't see him working on a major case like Collins as well (two huge cases back to back). The reason i believe this is that Fulton is a major religious liberties case, which Roberts tends to assign Alito to. So I'm guessing either Barrett, Gorsuch, Thomas, or Breyer will be the author of our case. Breyer hasn't written since October, so his schedule is open... Of course, there's no rule that a justice can't write two opinions each month, but looking at the trend for the term, it looks like Roberts has been handing things out fairly evenly (outside of October where Barrett didn't get any assignments). Would love to see Gorsuch or Thomas write Collins....

Opinions will now be released on Mondays now that orals are over. So watch for announcements on Monday and Thursdays as opinions are written and released.

ROLG has around April 1 pegged as the date. I believe this is based on Selia Law's timing last year.

Can you please define 'Fulcrum Security' - I rarely hear that phrase and am curious to understand what it means in specific terms.

I just read the link, not the opinion, and this is an interesting case...not the least because most of those favoring judicial review in this majority are justices that I would expect to side with govt in collins re anti-injunction clause. these cases for statutory interpretation often are decided based upon the precise language of the statute, which is usually different from case to case and statute to statute. but yes you can take this case as indicating a judicial slant in favor of judicial review...and indeed the justices who were in dissent argued that there was another statute that limited review, not that the statute in question didnt support it. so directly readable to collins? no. but better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick collins is interesting since while the justices might recoil at the notion that govt can siphon off >$100B and not have its action subject to judicial review, while at the same time considering granting a remedy in that amount constitutes a tough swallow. I also found it interesting that the judges who were in favor of JR were on the 'left' side of the bench. Agree that it's quite different than our case, but happy to see more JR in general.

The SC issued an opinion today regarding judicial review (https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/02/divided-court-favors-judicial-review-of-agency-decision-on-railroad-worker-benefits/). Curious to hear ROLG's thoughts on any tea leaves that could be read through this to Collins. If i'm correct, JR was a tactic used by the government in it's defense.