(ORDER LIST: 549 U.S.)
FRIDAY, JANUARY 19, 2007
APPEALS - JURISDICTION POSTPONED06-618 OFFICE OF SENATOR MARK DAYTON V. HANSON, BRAD
06-969 ) FEC V. WISCONSIN RIGHT TO LIFE, INC.
Further consideration of the question of jurisdiction is postponed to the hearing of the case on the merits. In addition to the Question presented by the statement as to jurisdiction, counsel are directed to brief and argue the following Questions: 1) Was the Office of Senator Mark Dayton entitled to appeal the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit directly to this Court? 2) Was this case rendered moot by the expiration of the term of office of Senator Dayton? The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Further consideration of the question of jurisdiction is postponed to the hearing of the cases on the merits. The cases are consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. The briefs of appellants are to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Friday, February 23, 2007. The brief of appellee is to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Friday, March 23, 2007. Reply briefs, if any, are to be filed with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Wednesday, April 18, 2007.
CERTIORARI GRANTED05-1448 BECK, JEFFREY H. V. PACE INTERNATIONAL UNION, ET AL.
06-8120 BRENDLIN, BRUCE E. V. CALIFORNIA
The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted.
05-85 POWEREX CORP. V. RELIANT ENERGY SERVICES, ET AL.
The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted.
The motion of Province of British Columbia for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The motion of Government of Canada for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to Question 1 presented by the petition. In addition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following Question: Whether the court of appeals had jurisdiction to review the district court's remand order, notwithstanding 28 U.S.C. §1447(d).
ORDER IN PENDING CASE06A678 COALITION TO DEFEND, ET AL. V. GRANHOLM, GOV. OF MI, ET AL.
The application to vacate the stay entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on December 29, 2006, presented to Justice Stevens and by him referred to the Court, is denied.