Okay, you say, let's pretend that's not the de novo review Congress wanted - they wanted a whole new hearing of all the issues. One wonders why they limited it to examining whether federal rights violations occurred, but there you go - we wave our wand and probate is now magically a federal matter. Little problem now - we need an injunction, or she'll be dead long before our full-blown hearing ever gets off the ground. Trouble is, they can't meet the standard required to get that injunction. Congress could have mandated an injunction, but they didn't, so the courts had no choice but to treat it like any other request for relief, and there it fell apart.
Write your congressman - ask him why they didn't mandate statutory relief, when then knew or should have know that the failure to do so was a death sentence. Be sure to share any response you get from him with the class.
No he did not. He "predicted" the success of their claims using old data. The law "mandated"(by his own reading) a de novo review. That was the whole purpose for the TRO request. IOW "Give us time to get that review". It is ludicrous to claim that it was met, since there would be no need for a TRO if the review was accomplished. IT WAS NOT DONE.