My interest in the Supreme Court has really been piqued thanks to a very intensive law course that I took last year. My professor has his law degrees from Stanford, and he worked us hard enough such that I was putting in about 20 hours a week minimum just on that course. I am still thinking about going to law school for another degree, thanks to the interest stirred in me by the professor and that course.

I love reading decisions by the Justices. And especially researching the cases by which they base much of their decisions.

Where I am going with this is that trying to understand why the USSC refuses to hear a case is as interesting to me as their decisions in the cases that they do hear. We are really left to our conjecture as to why they decide not to hear a case unless they throw it back down to a lower court with specific instructions. This issue with the Vatican lawsuit is fascinating to me. I suspect that there is far more politics and rather unjudicial-like personal prejudice involved in deciding not to hear a case than there ever could be while listening to a case. And perhaps rightfully so, if you give it some thought.

Perstare et praestare. Per aspera ad astra.