The Aporia · A Strange Sorting Feature On The Supreme Court's Docket

A Strange Sorting Feature On The Supreme Court's Docket

Read the original at Reason ↗

Cite

APA MLA Chicago

Blackman, J. (2026, September 9). A Strange Sorting Feature On The Supreme Court's Docket. Reason. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/08/a-strange-sorting-feature-of-the-supreme-courts-docket/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Quick Summary

A quirk on the Supreme Court's docket has been noticed, where an order from a Justice appears before reply briefs filed earlier, as seen in Hoskins v. Von Glahn. In one instance, Circuit Justice Kavanaugh's denial of the order was entered after the reply briefs were filed, but his order appears first on the docket. The exact reason for this sorting is unclear, with some speculating that the Justice's order may have precedence at any given time.

Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-09-09, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

AI analysis runs on qwen2.5:14b, locally

Story summary

A peculiar feature of the Supreme Court's online docket has been observed by law professor and commentator Josh Blackman. In the case of Hoskins v. Von Glahn, which dealt with Missouri's congressional maps, the Circuit Justice Brett Kavanaugh issued an order on September 8 in the evening, but it appears on the docket before the reply briefs that were filed earlier that morning. This unusual sorting feature seems to place a Justice's order ahead of related documents, even if those documents were submitted first. The reasons behind this quirk are unclear, and Blackman speculates that it might be because the Justice's action takes precedence on a given day.

Written for “Supreme Court Justice Process Changes” on 2026-10-24, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

Nothing to compare against. No article is close enough to this one for the pipeline to have linked or judged the pair.

How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted

sentences that state something as happening or true

Uncertain

11%

1 of 9 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")

Leaning

not political

takes no side on a contested political question

Publisher signals

67/100

Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.

Outlets on this story

Politics

Same framing elsewhere

articles that frame the event the way this one does

Analyzed 2026-09-09 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability

Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 913 article(s) · 4 correction(s) detected

Running correction rate · 4 correction(s)

2026-10-02

Would a Firing Squad Have Been More 'Humane' for Christa Pike?

2026-09-26

"I Will Not Stand for Being Jerked Around … by Any Lawyer Who Practices Before Me"

2026-09-18

New Article: Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections: Bringing Clarity To The Necessary and Proper Clause

2026-09-05

Lawyers' Responsibility for Hallucinations in Briefs That They Sign

Who wrote this

Josh Blackman

77 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction

🔮 ] There have been many news reports suggesting that the United States Department of Justice may pursue denaturalization proceedings against Representative Ilhan Omar.

2026-10-22 · mixed framing · What Happens to Representative Ilhan Omar's Congressional Seat if the United States Files Suit to Denaturalize Her?

🔮 Nevertheless, the next two decades would vastly enlarge the president's powers as Congress' authority over the executive branch would be greatly diminished.

2026-10-20 · assertive framing · New in SCOTUSBlog: "The separation and expansion of powers between Congress and the president"

🔮 Justice Sotomayor, Justice Gorsuch, Justice Barrett, and Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

2026-10-19 · mixed framing · Four Justices Recuse From Petition By Publishing Companies And New Grant on Disparate Impact

🔮 The regulations for Freedmen schools in Texas provided that classes would begin at 9 A.M. and "[t]he morning Exercises will commence with either the singing of an appropriate hymn, or prayer, or the reading of the Scriptures."

2026-10-13 · assertive framing · New Essay: "The Establishment Clause At The Second Founding"

🔮 Kyle asks: Well, I don't know how much coverage of the court you read, but you may not be surprised to learn that one light motif is that you are brooding figure.

2026-10-08 · assertive framing · Justice Alito Calls Out Empty Reporting From "Court Watcher" Joan Biskupic

🔮 Just as there are no doubt those on the bench who have strong ambitions for future office, there are others who are happy to be public servants, but who would be just as happy earning their living by some other means.

2026-10-06 · assertive framing · Lurching Through The Audition Trap

🔮 "But within a relatively short period of time, the thought occurred to me, and I think to the others in the majority, that this would endanger us.

2026-10-05 · assertive framing · Alito Hints That The Dobbs Knew A Member of the Majority Would Be Subject To Assassination

🔮 He could have served in government, but he didn't.

2026-10-04 · assertive framing · Comparing the Credentials Of Three Decades of Fifth Circuit Nominees

🔮 (Southwick's already fragile reputation would be irreparably tarnished by such a move.)

2026-10-02 · assertive framing · How Would A Judge Butler Actually Affect The Fifth Circuit?

🔮 The conduct caused disturbances that would have resulted in violence had law enforcement not intervened.

2026-10-02 · assertive framing · Todd Butler Compared Street Preacher In Supreme Court Case To "Domestic Terrorism"

Also by Josh Blackman

What Happens to Representative Ilhan Omar's Congressional Seat if the United States Files Suit to Denaturalize Her?

2026-10-22 · Reason

Today in Supreme Court History: October 22, 1915

2026-10-22 · Reason

Today in Supreme Court History: October 21, 1919

2026-10-21 · Reason

New in SCOTUSBlog: "The separation and expansion of powers between Congress and the president"

2026-10-20 · Reason

Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.

All 77 articles by Josh Blackman →

Topics

Missouri the Supreme Court's

Subjects

Kavanaugh PERSON · 2× Hoskins PERSON · 1× Missouri GPE · 1× the Supreme Court's ORG · 1×

Narrative

Often, an order from a Justice will be entered before the notation for reply briefs, even though the reply briefs were filed before the order.

framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-09

🔮 Often, an order from a Justice will be entered before the notation for reply briefs, even though the reply briefs were filed before the order.

2026-09-09 · Reason

A Strange Sorting Feature On The Supreme Court's Docket · assertive framing

Claims (9 extracted, 1 hedged)

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent I've noticed a quirk on the Supreme Court's docket. asserted

I → notice → docket

Often, an order from a Justice will be entered before the notation for reply briefs, even though the reply briefs were filed before the order. asserted

briefs → enter → order

Such is the case with Hoskins v. Von Glahn, which concerned Missouri's congressional maps. asserted

which → concern → maps

The reply briefs were filed in the early hours of Tuesday, September 8. asserted

briefs → file → Tuesday

Then, around 6:00 in the evening, Circuit Justice Kavanaugh denied the order in chambers. asserted

Kavanaugh → deny → chambers

Yet, on the docket, Kavanaugh's order appears before the reply briefs. asserted

order → appear → briefs

If you were to just look at this docket, you might think that the reply briefs were filed after the Circuit Justice order, which would make no sense. uncertain

which → look → sense

I'm not sure why they are sorted like this. asserted

they → sort → this

Perhaps the Justice's order always takes precedence in a given day? asserted

order → take → day