The extension happens to come the day after Easter, so the last workweek day before the deadline is Good Friday. I wonder if that will mean a quicker filing so that some attorneys can take that personal time.

Wallach explains:

“The respondents (i.e., the leagues) asked for more time, as they are the ones that are now “on the clock.” Without the extension, the responses were due in two weeks. It is customary for parties (i.e., the lawyers) to ask an appellate court for additional time to respond to a court filing. These are complex constitutional issues, after all.

However, the extension now makes it less likely that the Court will rule on the petition prior to the end of the current term (late June). Remember, the petitioners are also allowed to file a Reply Brief 10 days after the Respondents file their response. Thus, the earliest that the petition will be fully briefed is in early May. At that point, there would be less than two months remaining of the Court’s current term.

I am skeptical that the Court would address it in that remaining time-frame, especially given the expected large number of court filings from so many different represented parties and amicus filers. If not acted on by the end of the June, the earliest that the petition could potentially be acted on is the last Monday on September (the 29th), which is when the Justices hold their first private conference following the summer recess.

This may actually be a good thing for the New Jersey petitioners, as it will give the Clerks (who work during the summertime even though the Court is in recess) more time to analyze the court filings. Given the historically low percentage of cert being granted in any case, the more time, the better. With additional time to analyze the issues and with the issue receiving more media attention, the Clerks (who wield enormous influence) may be able to drum up support for the case being heard.”