This is the DC Circuit BTW. I find it odd Henderson (an anti through and through) seems to ALWAYS be on any panel examining a 2A challenge, including this one which is strictly based on the District Court's delay and not on the merits. SHE was the lone vote against Heller before the Supreme Court ruled for Heller-claiming "security of a free state" meant one of the 50 states-not DC.BEFORE: Henderson, Brown, and Srinivasan, Circuit Judges ORDER
Upon consideration of the petition for a writ of mandamus, it is ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus be denied without prejudice to renewal. Petitioners have not shown that the district court’s delay in ruling on the pending cross-motions for summary judgment is so egregious or unreasonable as to warrant the extraordinary remedy of mandamus at this time. See Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271, 289 (1988); cf. Telecommunications Research and Action Center v. FCC, 750 F.2d 70, 79-81 (D.C. Cir. 1984). We are confident that the district court will act on the motions as promptly as its docket permits.
Yes, it is very comforting to know that three black robed statists are confident that the district court will rule on a civil rights case of that has entered its sixth calendar year as promptly as its docket permits.
It is also very comforting to note that the judicial pocket veto is alive and well in the second circuit. Funny thing though, I cannot find any mention of the judicial pocket veto in my copy of the US Constitution.