# The hold on Supreme Court decisions **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 1, 2015, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003 "2015-07-01T23:36:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2015, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/1 "2015-07-01T23:36:20Z")
As those who follow US political news know, gay marriage is still not implemented nationwide because we are currently in a 25-day period in which the losers are permitted to ask the Supreme Court to reconsider their ruling. Obviously that isn’t going to happen, but the question is, has it \*ever \*happened? Has the Court ever reversed itself just because the losing side’s attorneys told them they got it wrong, and they agreed? ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2015, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/2 "2015-07-02T04:46:27Z")
Uh, what chaos would ensue if they reversed themselves on this one? With the mad rush of SSM couples getting married, _starting right on the day of the decision_ – remember all those wroth battles over the marriage applications and certificates and whether they were legal if the clerk made hand-written corrections, because people were so eager to get married _that very day_ – – is it even _thinkable_ that they could reverse the SSM decision now? It would be chaos just like if they had struck down the Obamacare subsidies, and I’ll bet nobody imagines _that_ is going to be reversed either. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2015, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/3 "2015-07-02T07:16:32Z")
> [@Senegoid](#): > > Uh, what chaos would ensue if they reversed themselves on this one? > > With the mad rush of SSM couples getting married, _starting right on the day of the decision_ – remember all those wroth battles over the marriage applications and certificates and whether they were legal if the clerk made hand-written corrections, because people were so eager to get married _that very day_ – > > – is it even _thinkable_ that they could reverse the SSM decision now? > > It would be chaos just like if they had struck down the Obamacare subsidies, and I’ll bet nobody imagines _that_ is going to be reversed either. You didn’t even try to disguise that as an actual answer…nice !!😃 ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2015, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/4 "2015-07-02T16:32:23Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > You didn’t even try to disguise that as an actual answer…nice !!😃 I just did some googling, and there sure doesn’t seem to be anything out there about it. I’m finding several articles and references, discussing the SSM case, mentioning that the loser in a SCOTUS case has 25 days to request a rehearing. So OP is right about that. But I haven’t found a single mention of any past history of this rule coming into play. If it has, it must be obscure. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2015, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/5 "2015-07-02T16:34:00Z")
I’ve never heard of the US Supreme Court granting reconsideration. State supreme courts have done it now and then (including one of my cases–we won and then we lost…) ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2015, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/6 "2015-07-02T17:07:26Z")
> [@Senegoid](#): > > Uh, what chaos would ensue if they reversed themselves on this one? > > With the mad rush of SSM couples getting married, _starting right on the day of the decision_ – remember all those wroth battles over the marriage applications and certificates and whether they were legal if the clerk made hand-written corrections, because people were so eager to get married _that very day_ – > > – is it even _thinkable_ that they could reverse the SSM decision now? > > It would be chaos just like if they had struck down the Obamacare subsidies, and I’ll bet nobody imagines _that_ is going to be reversed either. **Moderating** This being GQ, it’s best to stick to factual answers at least initially, and refrain from speculation or personal opinion. Colibri General Questions Moderator ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2015, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/7 "2015-07-02T19:46:51Z")
My understanding is that some states claimed they were waiting on a decision from the 5th Circuit Court on a similar case. They hoped for a decision that would somehow give them wiggle room to continue to deny licenses until the Supremem Court ruled on THAT case. That issue in now moot, as the 5th Circuit handed down its ruling yesterday, apparently weeks earlier than expected, and possibly to shut down this particular justification to continue defiance of the SC ruling. The 5th Circuit ruled that gay marriage is now indeed legal EVERYWHERE, so LA, TX, and their ilk are just going to have to bend over and take it. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Habeed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a587f6/32.png) [@Habeed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Habeed)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2015, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/8 "2015-07-02T20:33:29Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > That issue in now moot, as the 5th Circuit handed down its ruling yesterday, apparently weeks earlier than expected, Sounds like the 5th circuit is making sure nobody gets to defy their bros in the Supreme Court. ---
**Author:** ![barbitu8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@barbitu8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/barbitu8)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2015, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/9 "2015-07-02T21:06:20Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > I’ve never heard of the US Supreme Court granting reconsideration. State supreme courts have done it now and then (including one of my cases–we won and then we lost…) What about the Affordable Care Act? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2015, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/10 "2015-07-02T21:24:43Z")
> [@barbitu8](#): > > What about the Affordable Care Act? No, those were two decisions about two different legal challenges to the same law. The 2nd case did not in any way reconsider the first one. ---
**Author:** ![SCSimmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e495f1/32.png) [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2015, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/11 "2015-07-05T04:33:01Z")
According to [its Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_v._Covert), Reid v. Covert is the only instance ever in which the Court granted a rehearing and ended up reversing its initial decision. I can’t find any cites for how many rehearings have been granted, but this 1957 case appears to be the most recent instance. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2015, 6:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/12 "2015-07-05T06:50:24Z")
List of some cases where the US SC has changed its mind after an application for rehearing. i) City of New York, 147 US 72 (1893) ii) Whitney v. California, 274 US 357 (1927) (originally dismissed because Court record was incomplete). iii) Bakery Drivers Local v. Wohl, 315 US 769 (1942) iv) Arizona v. California, 530 US 392 (2000) ---
**Author:** ![TheSeaOtter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ed655f/32.png) [@TheSeaOtter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheSeaOtter)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hold-on-supreme-court-decisions/724003/13 "2015-07-06T16:48:06Z")
Is there any indication of what distinguished those cases? What sort of thing has happen for the Court to decide “You know, we should really rethink this one.”?