Friday, September 16, 2022

Roberts and Kavanaugh Issue a Surprise Warning Shot to Conservative Lawyers

The Supreme Court divided 5–4 in a clash over religious liberty and LGBTQ equality on Wednesday, forcing Yeshiva University to stop discriminating against a gay rights group on campus. But the majority’s order had little to do with this culture war skirmish. It was, rather, a rebuke of Yeshiva—and specifically, its overeager lawyers—for racing to SCOTUS after losing in the lower courts because of their own errors. Chief Justice John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh did not side with the three liberals against the university because they think gay students deserve equal treatment. They did so because Yeshiva brazenly abused the court’s shadow docket on the assumption that it would get special treatment. It was an understandable gamble. But it failed.


  1. “Roberts and Kavanaugh” Thanks for this post. I looked at SCOTUS 22A184:
    “Sep 14 2022 The application (22A184) for stay pending appeal of a permanent injunction entered by the New York trial court, presented to Justice Sotomayor and by her referred to the Court, is denied without prejudice to applicants again seeking relief from this Court if, upon properly seeking expedited review and interim relief from the New York courts...”

    I looked up Appellate Division rules: \S 1250.4 (b) states: "Motions or Applications Which Include Requests for Interim Relief. (1) An application or order to show cause presented for signature that includes a request for a temporary stay or other interim relief pending determination of a motion, or an application pursuant to CPLR 5704, shall be presented in person unless the court excuses such appearance, and shall state, among other things: (i) the nature of the motion or proceeding; (ii) the specific relief sought; and (iii) the names, addresses, telephone numbers and (where known) email addresses of the attorneys and counsel for all parties in support of and in opposition to the motion or proceeding."

    My theory. Roberts and Kavanaugh love YU but want YU to do a \S 1250.4(b)---an application for interim relief. Beautiful. Thank you, God. This is a hint to me.

    I did yesterday (using UPS as I always do) to the Appellate Division Brooklyn a \S 1250.4(b)---an application for interim relief. After I came home from the UPS at the airport, I see that the New York State Court of Appeals dismissed my motion 460 June 27, 2022. I’m allowed to do a motion for reargument.

    I did today at the UPS a Motion for Reargument Motion Number 460 June 27, 2022. I explained to the girl at the UPS that I know all the rules, Torah and Sages laws, for tumah where the punishment is karet etc. I included my $45 check, attached document, notice of Motion for Reargument, affidavit of service, two copies to court and to Susan I’ve done this many time. The NYS Court of Appeals allows only one motion for reargument on a dismissal of a motion. I’m expecting to get a new motion number October 3, 2022. Thanks DT for letting me talk of my personal 30 year case Aranoff v Aranoff. You chop off my Daas Torah thoughts.

  2. Maybe they were desperate. Desperate people do desperate things.

    The desperation may stem from the possibility of losing out on future donastions if the club is allowed. There may be donors who are reluctant to have even one penny of their donation in a sense be used to fund an LQBTetc university sanctioned club.

    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that donations generally go into a Yeshiva University account and each and every dollar in that account is not traced from the moment it is given till it is disbursed.

    But the university money is fungible.

    And thus when university resources are used by the LGBTetc club that means some other club or some other aspect of the university loses out a little bit on that funding.

    So, conceptually at least, every general donation to the university does support, in a sense, the LGBTetc club.

  3. Allow me today's letter to NYS Court of Appeals:

    5.I request the NYS Court of Appeals to allow my appeal of the Appellate Division 2nd Dept April 1996 ruling. This is in the interest of substantial justice. I ask the Appellate Division 2nd Dept to certify that one or more questions of law have arisen which in their opinion require the NYS Court of Appeals. My many papers in SCOTUS and in NYS courts show that I assert that Judge Eric I. Prus violated criminal laws. This is judge who at the start of Inquest, before a person typing his every word, says while wearing his black robe and sitting high in the judge's bench, ``The get was a religious divorce'' before Myla Serlin and Susan spoke!! What! The judge is Susan's lawyer!!! This is the judge who told me July 10, 2013 "Your wife is here with her lawyer." After I corrected him that my wife, Yemima, is here by me in Israel, Judge Prus repeated to me "Your wife is here with her lawyer." The NYS Constitution states: From an order of the appellate division of the supreme court in any department, in a proceeding instituted by or against one or more public officers.

    Amazing they got Bill Clinton for his lie that he had no sex with Monica Lewinsky.


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.