You can read the cert. petition and appendix filed by the RNC and the opposition filed by the DNC. Here is the Supreme Court docket. Even putting aside the political nature of the case which will get it some attention at the Court, I rate this as having a pretty good chance of being taken up by the Court, given the interesting Remedies issues involved. Here are the questions presented:
1. Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit misinterpret United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36 (1950), and thus improperly rely on the district court’s factual findings and legal rulings in an earlier case that was vacated as moot while on appeal, even though other courts of appeals have interpreted Munsingwear as rendering a vacated decision a nullity, as if it the case had never been filed, and draining its factual findings of all vitality?
2. Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit misconstrue Rule 60(b)(5), Fed. R. Civ. P., as this Court has interpreted that rule in Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools v. Dowell, 498 U.S. 237 (1991), and Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, 502 U.S. 367 (1992), by deeming substantial compliance with a consent decree over more than two decades insufficient to justify termination, even though other courts of appeals have held that the defendant’s good faith and substantial compliance with a decree over a long period of time is a ground, standing alone, for terminating the decree?
3. Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit misconstrue Rule 60(b)(5), Fed. R. Civ. P., by affirming the district court’s unilateral expansion of the decree, even though other courts of appeals have held that the rule does not authorize a court to increase the obligations imposed by a decree?