Supreme Court's first relists of new term include appealability and takings cases

This Relist Watch column reviews petitions that the Supreme Court has rescheduled for its next conference. Of the 100 matters on the Friday conference docket, 14 are relists, including Berry v. United States and Clark v. United States, which raise a related question about certificates of appealability. The column also discusses takings clause cases involving property destroyed by police.

The Court’s Friday conference list contains 100 matters. Fourteen are relists: thirteen newly rescheduled and one carried over from the prior term. Berry v. United States, a summer holdover, asks whether a certificate of appealability should issue when circuit precedent bars a prisoner’s claim but another circuit has accepted it. Clark v. United States presents the same question, so the justices may choose between them or take both.

A separate group concerns police destruction of property. In Hadley v. City of South Bend, officers used tear gas and caused about $16,000 in damage while seeking a fugitive who was not there; the Seventh Circuit denied relief under its police-power exception. Pena v. City of Los Angeles involves a print shop damaged during a standoff. Earlier, Baker v. City of McKinney was denied review, though Sotomayor and Gorsuch noted the issue’s complexity and lower-court disagreement.

Count words. First para: The(1) Court’s2 Friday3 conference4 list5 contains6 1007 matters8. Fourteen9 are10 relists11: thirteen12 newly13 rescheduled14 and15 one16 carried17 over18 from19 the20 prior21 term22. Berry23 v.24 United25 States26, a27 summer28 holdover29, asks30 whether31 a32 certificate33 of34 appealability35 should36 issue37 when38 circuit39 precedent40 bars41 a42 prisoner’s43 claim44 but45 another46 circuit47 has48 accepted49 it50. Clark51 v.52 United53 States54 presents55 the56 same57 question58, so59 the60 justices61 may62 choose63 between64 them65 or66 take6