TFA explains why the Supreme Court's decision is yet another new phenomenon. Related context from Chris Geidner [1] (wherein he also examines the April 27th oral arguments in the Chatrie v. United States, the geofencing case):
> This hopefully will put an end to Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s ridiculous Fox News defense of the shadow docket in October 2025, where she insisted that “in none of these cases have we finally resolved the issue.”
> In that interview, Barrett proclaimed that “[d]eciding a merits case is a painstaking process,“ very different from the “preliminary” review on the shadow docket. In those cases, she said that there are often not “long opinion[s]“ because “it might give the impression that we have finally resolved the issue.”
TFA explains why the Supreme Court's decision is yet another new phenomenon. Related context from Chris Geidner [1] (wherein he also examines the April 27th oral arguments in the Chatrie v. United States, the geofencing case):
> This hopefully will put an end to Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s ridiculous Fox News defense of the shadow docket in October 2025, where she insisted that “in none of these cases have we finally resolved the issue.”
> In that interview, Barrett proclaimed that “[d]eciding a merits case is a painstaking process,“ very different from the “preliminary” review on the shadow docket. In those cases, she said that there are often not “long opinion[s]“ because “it might give the impression that we have finally resolved the issue.”
[1] https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-summary-reversal-texas-redi...