Before I get excited, I'd like to know what the rules are for the Supreme
Court to accept a post-oral argument amicus brief.

------------
Dr. Michael P. McDonald 
Assistant Professor, George Mason University 
Visiting Fellow, Brookings Institution

                          Mailing address: 
(o) 703-993-4191          George Mason University 
(f) 703-993-1399          Dept. of Public and International Affairs
mmcdon@gmu.edu            4400 University Drive - 3F4 
http://elections.gmu.edu  Fairfax, VA 22030-4444

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu [mailto:owner-election-
law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu] On Behalf Of ban@richardwinger.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:54 AM
To: election-law@majordomo.lls.edu
Subject: so is the Texas redistricting case news exciting or what?

I'm hoping people interested in the Texas
congressional redistricting case will comment on
whether the Court's acceptance of the post-oral
argument amicus is exciting news or not.  The sentence
"the change (to the boundaries of 3 State Senate
districts) was made to boost the prospects of the
Republican candidate Bill Cowsert, who is the
brother-in-law of the retiring incumbent state
senator, by excluding from the district the resident
of Cowsert's leading Democratic opponent, State Rep.
Jane Kidd of Athens" certainly is pithy.  Also the
note that the Governor waited two months to sign the
bill until a few hours after the March 1 US Supreme
Court oral argument.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com