Supreme Court Agrees to Reconsider Citizens United

[onenote]

38. I think the article jumps the gun.

Back in February, the Court stayed the effectiveness of the Montana law, with even Ginsburg and Breyer agreeing that was the proper result in deference to the decision in Citizens United. However, Ginsburg and Breyer went on to express the view that a grant of "certiorari" to hear the challenge to the Montana law would provide an opportunity to revisit the Citizens United case.

At that point, therefore, it appeared that the Court had the following options: it could grant the pending request by the opponents of the Montana law that the decision of the Montana court striking down that law be summarily reversed based on Citizens United. Or it could grant certiorari and direct the parties to brief and argue the case. It takes five votes on the court to summarily reverse the state court decision, which presumably is a number that can be reached if the five justices that voted for Citizens United stick to their guns. However, it only takes four votes to grant certiorari, and a grant of cert should trump the summary reversal vote. Therefore if the four dissenters in CU stick together, they can force the Court to hear full argument on the Montana case.

The article makes it sound like the latter decision has now been made. And maybe it has, but it certainly doesn't appear that way from the SCOTUS website, which does not show the Court taking any action in this case since it issued the stay order in February. Indeed, I don't believe the Court took any action yesterday, which is what the article in the OP suggests.

If someone has a link to the Court's cert ruling, that would help clear things up. Until I see it, I believe the matter remains unresolved.