You took the time to write a long rant, without taking the time familiarize yourself with the basic facts.
When a Federal Circuit Court denies an en banc hearing (and when the Supreme Court denies cert) - unlike in an opinion when a Circuit Court panel or the Supreme Court actually hears a case - there is no publically released tally of votes. All we know is that the majority - here, at least 7 of the 12 judges sitting on the 11th circuit - voted against denial.
It is not required or even typical that those judges or justices who favored hearing the case to write or join a written dissent from the denial of an en banc hearing or denial of cert; it is entirely discretionary. Here, 2 11th circuit judges wrote or joined a written dissent. Thus, all we can assme is that vote denying an en banc hearing was somewhere between 10-2 and 7-5. But we do not know which way Pryor voted, from the fact that he didn't write or join a written dissent.
Now you might want to slam Pryor for not auuthoring or joining a written dissent, but that's another matter.
Whoops.
"Voted against denial" at the end of the 2nd paragraph should be "voted for denial."
Don't know what some of us would do on here without you, Dog Gone, Torie, and others that know the law. Thank you for posting the facts.
It is like some of these vanities are being slanted with the purpose of getting people riled up and it is wrong.
I do not want activists judges.