Subject: en banc vote to be taken in ACLU case
From: Rick Hasen
Date: 9/16/2003, 11:45 AM
To: "election-law@majordomo.lls.edu" <election-law@majordomo.lls.edu>
Reply-to:
rick.hasen@mail.lls.edu

BREAKING RECALL LITIGATION NEWS The Ninth Circuit has asked the parties to brief whether or not the ACLU punch card case could be taken en banc. The briefs are due by 2 pm tomorrow. How did this happen, if the parties have not yet filed a request for an en banc hearing? Any active, non-recused judge can call for a vote to take the case en banc. If it is taken en banc, it will be heard by a panel of 11 judges. (See here and scroll down to FRAP 35 and the relevant circuit rules on en banc procedures.)

I do not believe that the en banc activity will prevent either the state, or Costa, or both, from petitioning for a writ of certiorari and a stay. It is possible that the en banc action will cause the Supreme Court justices to wait a bit before ruling. In the BCRA case, for example, a party sought a stay of part of the BCRA from Chief Justice Rehnquist before the lower court had ruled on a stay request. The Chief Justice denied the motion without prejudice, and said it could be refiled within a week if the lower court denied the stay.
UPDATE: Here is the text of the order: "Before: Thomas, En Banc Coordinator:
The parties, including the intervenor, shall file simultaneous briefs, not to exceed 15 pages, or 7,000 words, setting forth their views on whether or not this case should be reheard en banc. The briefs shall be filed with the Clerk no later than Wednesday, September 17, at 2:00pm P.D.T. The briefs may be filed in letter format and shall be sent to the Court electronically. Issuance of the mandate will be stayed pending further order of this Court."
-- 
Professor Rick Hasen
Loyola Law School
919 South Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA  90015-0019
(213)736-1466 - voice
(213)380-3769 - fax
rick.hasen@lls.edu
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html
http://electionlaw.blogspot.com