4 ms·
Yeah, I’ve heard lawyers use decisions in other jurisdictions to give weight to their line of reasoning. The SC saying they aren’t reviewing an appeal might not
by DrewADesign 6mo ago
Yeah, I’ve heard lawyers use decisions in other jurisdictions to give weight to their line of reasoning. The SC saying they aren’t reviewing an appeal might not make that universally binding, but it signals that they don’t categorically reject the lower court’s decision.
- bluGill 6mo agoI doubt any lawyer would mention the SC didn't review this - that is meaningless and judges know it. They will however mention this case. Even if they case goes against them they will mention it so they can say why it is wrong (the opposition will be sure to mention it so they have to be prepared to take it down)
- DrewADesign 6mo agoAnd you’re saying the SC not taking up the issue has no effect on the weight of that non-binding citation in their argument, even if it was effectively the same situation in a different jurisdiction? The argument was that because the decision only had precedent in that circuit, the fact that the SC did not take the issue up has zero effect on decisions outside of that jurisdiction, even for essentially the same situation. If that’s what you’re arguing, I don’t buy it.