| No. 22A136 |
|
| Title: |
Richard Rose, et al., Applicants v. Brad Raffensperger, Georgia Secretary of State |
| Docketed: | August 15, 2022 |
| Lower Ct: | United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit |
| Case Numbers: | (22-12593) |
| Aug 14 2022 | Application (22A136) to vacate stay entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, submitted to Justice Thomas. Main Document Other Proof of Service |
| Aug 15 2022 | Response to application (22A136) requested by Justice Thomas, due Wednesday, August 17, 2022, by 5 pm. |
| Aug 17 2022 | Response to application from respondent Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger filed. Main Document Proof of Service |
| Aug 18 2022 | Reply of applicant Richard Rose, et al. filed. Reply Proof of Service |
| Aug 19 2022 | Application (22A136) referred to the Court. |
| Aug 19 2022 | Application (22A136) to vacate stay presented to Justice Thomas and by him referred to the Court is granted. The August 12, 2022 order of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit staying the district court’s injunction is vacated. Respondent’s emergency motion for a stay pending appeal relied on the traditional stay factors and a likelihood of success on the merits, see Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009), yet the Eleventh Circuit failed to analyze the motion under that framework. Instead, it applied a version of the Purcell principle, see Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 1 (2006) (per curiam), that respondent could not fairly have advanced himself in light of his previous representations to the district court that the schedule on which the district court proceeded was sufficient to enable effectual relief as to the November elections should applicants win at trial. The Eleventh Circuit may reconsider whether a stay pending appeal is appropriate, subject to sound equitable discretion. |