Supreme Court shadow docket: Congress scrutinizes it and considers reform.

We've gotten used to it: the late hours order granting or denying a stay of the Trump rush to execute before the libs take back the White House, the stay of an order issued by a District Judge protecting the rights of border crossing applicants for asylum, the passionate dissent by a Justice.  In his study The Solicitor General and the Shadow Docket University of Texas professor Steven Vladeck documented the great increase of such Supreme Court orders in the Trump Years.  today four experts testified about it before the House Judiciary Committee. - GWC

Supreme Court shadow docket: Congress scrutinizes it and considers reform.

By Mark Joseph Stern//Slate

Over the past few years, the Supreme Court has dramatically altered the way it decides most cases—without acknowledging or justifying this radical shift. More and more often, the justices forgo the usual appeals procedure in favor of rushed decision-making behind closed doors in what’s known as “the shadow docket.” They issue late-night opinions on the merits of a case without hearing arguments or receiving full briefing, and often refuse to reveal who authored the opinion, or even how each justice voted. The public is then left to guess why or how the law has changed and what reasoning the court has embraced. These emergency orders are supposed to be a rare exception; today, however, the court regularly uses them to make law in hugely controversial cases, including disputes over the border wall, COVID-19 restrictions, and executions. On Thursday, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing to decide what, if anything, Congress can do to address a problem that’s spiraling out of control.