Well denial of certiorari (saying “nah”) usually means that a strong majority of the Supreme Court thinks the lower court was correct. You need four votes to grant cert, and hear the case. A justice isn’t going to listen to arguments in a case they already think was decided correctly. It would be a waste of time for everyone.

I think this scenario is very likely. Supreme Court still has a bad taste in their mouth from getting involved in the 2000 election, and they’re probably not going to dive in unless they see a really big error.

Well denial of certiorari (saying “nah”) usually means that a strong majority of the Supreme Court thinks the lower court was correct. There is no reason to hold arguments again, because no justice thinks their mind can be swayed and change the outcome.

I think this scenario is very likely. Supreme Court still has a bad taste in their mouth from getting involved in the 2000 election, and they’re probably not going to dive in unless they see a really big error.