The SG has waived his right to respond to the cert petition in Taylor, No. 07-13, which we previously discussed here.

3 Responses to “SG passes on Taylor”

  1. Anonymous says:

    Anyone know what this means? Options: The SG has no answer; does not care; and/or, relies on the SCT’s deference to CAAFactivism? Or all of the above.

  2. John O'Connor says:

    My best guess is that it means that the SG thinks there is little chance of cert being granted and therefore doesn’t want to waste resources drafting a response, knowing that if there is any interest by the Court, the Court will ask for a response. Because privileges in military law are by rule, as opposed to the common-law process of the federal rules, I’m guessing the SG sees little likelihood that Taylor has application any broader than court-martial practice and therefore is a poor vehicle for review by the Court.

  3. Jesse Elliot says:

    A quick review of Stern’s Supreme Court Practice suggests that Mr. O’Connor is correct. The case is unlikely to be reviewed by the Court and the SG, who now works in Mr. Stern’s old office, knows it.