Dan Epps

And I think he had a persona that I think some people found a little kind of too much. I remember I can't remember what case it was, but there was the case that he argued that was the same day as another huge case. And he says in his opening to the court is, today's undercard presents the issue of, and everyone was kind of rolling their eyes. But maybe this is a selfish thing to worry about.

I do actually a little bit worry about the future of Skoda's blog because I believe he owns it. I don't know if it's about to get shut down. I don't know if it's about to get I mean, literally, I'm not joking, I think, could he get seized by the IRS if he owes all this money?

I do actually a little bit worry about the future of Skoda's blog because I believe he owns it. I don't know if it's about to get shut down. I don't know if it's about to get I mean, literally, I'm not joking, I think, could he get seized by the IRS if he owes all this money?

That would be in addition to all the bad things for Tom Goldstein, for his family, but that would obviously be very bad for the public if Skoda's blog were to disappear. So again, that's a selfish thing to worry about right now, but it does seem newsy and I felt like needed to be remarked upon.

That would be in addition to all the bad things for Tom Goldstein, for his family, but that would obviously be very bad for the public if Skoda's blog were to disappear. So again, that's a selfish thing to worry about right now, but it does seem newsy and I felt like needed to be remarked upon.

website with easy access to the briefs, which are easier to get now for the reasons you mentioned. And what's pending and just the basics. And let us not forget Relist Watch by the great John Elwood. Really one of the most tremendously useful things, the court coming out of the commentariat of savvy Serbian court observers, far more useful than what we do here.

website with easy access to the briefs, which are easier to get now for the reasons you mentioned. And what's pending and just the basics. And let us not forget Relist Watch by the great John Elwood. Really one of the most tremendously useful things, the court coming out of the commentariat of savvy Serbian court observers, far more useful than what we do here.

I think I've mentioned Relist Watch before, but basically some number of years ago, John Elwood realized that which is when the court on its docket notes that a case is going to multiple conferences. This is one of the best ways to get information out of the court in terms of what's going on. And he started noticing, hey, this case is being relisted. It's been relisted 12 times.

I think I've mentioned Relist Watch before, but basically some number of years ago, John Elwood realized that which is when the court on its docket notes that a case is going to multiple conferences. This is one of the best ways to get information out of the court in terms of what's going on. And he started noticing, hey, this case is being relisted. It's been relisted 12 times.

What does that mean? Oh, turns out next week there's a summary reversal. It turns out next week there's a long dissent from a denial. And he started noticing, gosh, they seem to be relisting a lot of cases once before they grant. There seems to be some new internal checking process happening. So hopefully that Relist Watch, among other valuable SCOTUSblog contributions, can continue.

What does that mean? Oh, turns out next week there's a summary reversal. It turns out next week there's a long dissent from a denial. And he started noticing, gosh, they seem to be relisting a lot of cases once before they grant. There seems to be some new internal checking process happening. So hopefully that Relist Watch, among other valuable SCOTUSblog contributions, can continue.

Okay, any other newsy things? I don't think so. Okay, so Shadow Docket?

Okay, any other newsy things? I don't think so. Okay, so Shadow Docket?

Is that a doctrine or is that just kind of an assumption, right? That hasn't ever been tested. It's a policy of the DOJ, right?

Is that a doctrine or is that just kind of an assumption, right? That hasn't ever been tested. It's a policy of the DOJ, right?

It says a president cannot be indicted during office. I think it describes the sitting president's immunity. I think I've forgotten that part of the opinion. Jumping off point. No, no, no. You have a far better memory than I. You've caught me before.

It says a president cannot be indicted during office. I think it describes the sitting president's immunity. I think I've forgotten that part of the opinion. Jumping off point. No, no, no. You have a far better memory than I. You've caught me before.

Which are currently being, which at least for a while, at least were being ignored by the same person.

Which are currently being, which at least for a while, at least were being ignored by the same person.

Okay, so this is 5-4. Yeah. Do you think it's weird that nobody even bothered to write kind of a three-sentence, let alone a two-page dissent?