I don’t give a shit about whether it is predictive of the full court’s direction. That’s not the point - making it the point is deflecton from the real issue, which is whether it is due the full court’s attention at all, and whether it justified a stay, regardless of whether stays are routine.
The answer is, no, it’s not worth the full court’s consideration, and no, it doesn’t justify a stay.
Even if the court wants to explore the limits of protection offered to congress, and to use this case as a vehicle for that even though it’s meritless then no stay is necessary. They can take up the case as a mechanism for such exploration while still allowing Georgia to compel Graham to testify. And timeliness in this case is important, before the midterm elections potentially disrupt the political will to find out the truth of Graham’s involvement.
