Federal Judiciary Study

This is the third in a series of posts to help you prepare for the consensus meeting on the Federal Judiciary Study.

This week's topic is the shadow docket. The shadow docket was once referred to as an "emergency docket" because it considered death row appeals and occasional requests to halt a lower court's orders. In recent years, the Court has begun issuing more rulings on significant issues through the shadow docket. This LWVUS policy brief discusses the evolution of this process.

• Most Americans are familiar with the high-profile cases on the Court's merits docket, where the justices consider briefs and listen to oral arguments. The Court then issues an opinion explaining its reasoning, often accompanied by written concurrences and dissents. Between 60 and 70 of these types of cases are considered by the Court every year.
• Thousands of orders and opinions are issued each year through the emergency or shadow docket, a term that originally referred to the low-profile nature of the cases being decided. These cases don't receive a briefing or a hearing and orders are issued without a written decision.
• The Court has increasingly used the shadow docket to rule on such consequential issues as gerrymandering, pandemic rules, environmental regulations, and abortion.
• In shadow docket cases, the absence of a full briefing, oral arguments, and a written decision means that there is no guidance for lower courts.

Join other LWVAA members on Saturday, March 15, 2025, as we discuss these issues as part of our Federal Judiciary Study consensus meeting. It's your chance to learn more about the federal judiciary and to provide input into an important, timely LWVUS position.

Click this link to learn more about the study, to find additional resources, and to register for the meeting. If you need assistance registering, contact LWVAA by phone at (512) 451-6710 or by email at lwvaustin@lwvaustin.org.