Not doing so violates the doctrine of due process. This is about the Supreme Court though, not any other appellate level. Failure to conduct hearings does not mean agreement that "the lower court ruling was so obviously correct" as you put it. It only means exactly that, the Supreme Court did not want to grant the petition for a Writ of Certiorari. So you are incorrect sir.You don't expect each appellate level to conduct hearings on each appeal, do you?
"the Supreme Court's denial of a petition for a writ of certiorari is sometimes misunderstood to mean that the Supreme Court approves the decision of the lower court."
Certiorari - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Thanks I'm fully aware of the statistics.I don't know what the percentages are down the line, but the US Supreme Court gets about 10,000 appeals a year, but hears only 75-80 of them.
If the USSC had to hear each case then it would not be able to devote an average of even one hour to each one even if it worked 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.
Why do people want to give rights to those that would slaughter all of us typing here if they had the chance? These people aren't Americans, aren't good people period, who cares if they rot in Gitmo??
⚧ C.T.L.W. You figure it out
My Endo doc went over my blood work. "I see your estrogen level is now at 315, do you feel like you have too much Estrogen now?"
I told her "... N... N.. No..." and started crying.