Calling Howard Bashman or Tom Goldstein...

Additional dissenting opinions issued today in the Vermont expenditure limits case, Landell. The opinions are interesting in their own right. See for example, this tidbit from Judge Jacobs' dissenting opinion:

One arresting irony of this case is that the present Act can be used to limit the speech of the newspapers and the broadcast media. If a newspaper wishes to publish a story on a candidate and requests a photo, interview, or statement, and if the candidate provides such materials, the value of the ensuing publication counts against the candidate’s contribution and expenditure limits. See Landell Dissent, 382 F.3d at 168-69. And in time, Vermont’s legislators may conclude that the newspapers and broadcast media so control the public agenda, so forcefully channel legislative energies to serve publishers’ views and interests, and so thoroughly monopolize the time of legislators vying for journalistic coverage and approval, that some reasonable limits should be placed on them. The Fourth Estate may be able to defend itself, but under the majority’s decision, the Fourth Estate may not be able to get much help in the federal courts of this Circuit.

As I've noted, this case seems likely headed to the Supreme Court. But when? It might be remanded first. But today's order, as Howard Bashman notes, indicates that more dissenting opinions may be forthcoming. What does all of this do for the timing of plaintiffs, who may want to bring a challenge now to the Supreme Court? Does the wait for additional opinions affect the timing of a cert petition? As Judge Jacob notes, Landell is the ruling of this circuit for some time to come unless the Supreme Court says otherwise. Does this delay the clock for filing a cert petition in the Supreme Court?
UPDATE: Tom Goldstein e-mails (and Howard Bashman concurs): "Since rehearing was denied, the time to seek cert was running despite the absence of opinions. That said, the petitioners almost certainly could get an extension of up to 60 days because of the changing landscape of the opinions." Thanks!

Posted by Rick Hasen at April 11, 2005 12:14 PM