Within the last year, Justice Goodwin Liu has revived a long-dormant practice of issuing a separate statement explaining the reasons for a dissent from the denial of a petition for review. (See here and here.) It’s happened twice since October 2015. We might be due for another.
In the high-profile Vergara v. State of California case concerning the constitutionality of teacher tenure laws, the Supreme Court’s time to rule on the pending petition for review expires this coming Monday. [Disclosure: Horvitz & Levy filed an amicus brief in the Court of Appeal, and also submitted a letter in the Supreme Court supporting review.] No decision on the petition was announced after yesterday’s conference, and there are no more regular court conferences before Monday. It’s unusual for a petition for review ruling to be announced other than on a conference day. The lack of a ruling yesterday on the Vergara petition suggests that something’s up.
The something could be a separate statement concerning the denial of the petition for review. Justice Liu’s previous dissenting statements were both filed on non-conference days, either on or one court day before the last day for a ruling on the petitions.
