curiosity wrote:
> What evidence do you have that any of the justices are pro-review?
Indeed. Recalling that Justice Scalia once remarked that sexual orgies eliminate social tensions and should be encouraged, he may just be exercising his unique sense of humor in referring these matters to the full court.
Possibly. A more likely explanation is that this is the second time the case has been filed with a justice, and he figures a rejection by the full court, rather than by just one justice, will do more to discourage the plaintiffs from pursuing it further.
At any rate, it's impossible to infer his motives from the mere act of referring it to the full court. The only thing we know for sure is that the decision to refer the case to the full court tells us nothing about whether a justice supports reviewing it.