Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

In Re Bahig Bishay

Paid petition


Certiorari denied · October 6, 2025
Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

in the D.C. Circuit on December 27, 2024 *** [un] answered after the circuit acknowledged its disqualification in the entirety to sit en banc under Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure *** A. Whether government employees classified as judicial officers are absolutely immune from prosecution for declaratory relief only, if they are sued solely in individual capacity for violating the U.S. Constitution; and for foreclosing Civil / Constitutional Rights while acting under color of law, thus deemed to have acted ultra vires their assigned judicial authority and immediately became private actors stripped of their status as representatives of the sovereign, as the U.S. Supreme Court so held in Ex parte Young to wit: When an official acts pursuant to an unconstitutional statute, the absence of valid authority leaves the official ultra vires his authority, and thus a private actor stripped of his status as a representative of the sovereign. It is simply an illegal act on the part of the official... ‘If the act which the state Attorney General seeks to enforce is a violation of the Federal Constitution, the officer in proceeding under such enactment comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution,

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Bahig F. Bishay

For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

  1. Oct 06 2025
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Jul 02 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
  3. Jun 10 2025
    Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
  4. Apr 28 2025
    Petition for a writ of mandamus filed. (Response due June 30, 2025)