The Supreme Court of the United States granted review in two cases this morning:
Ryan v. Gonzales, No. 10-930: Did the Ninth Circuit err when it held that 18 U.S.C. § 3599(a)(2)--which provides that an indigent capital state inmate pursuing federal habeas relief "shall be entitled to the appointment of one or more attorneys"—impliedly entitles a death row inmate to stay the federal habeas proceedings he initiated if he is not competent to assist counsel?
Tibbals v. Carter, No. 11-218: Do capital prisoners have a right to competency in habeas proceedings, and can a court order an indefinite stay of habeas proceedings.
Previously, by an order issued on March 5, 2012, the Court ordered reargument (to be held next Term) in No. 10-1491, Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, and directed the parties to file supplemental briefs addressing the following question: “Whether and under what circumstances the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. §1350, allows courts to recognize a cause of action for violations of the law of nations occurring within the territory of a sovereign other than the United States.”