Petitions for leave to file a complaint, in SCOTUS&#39;s original jurisdiction in suits by a state against a state
<p><a href="https://scontent.ffcm1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/131342408_10102054556464976_5750941547625050282_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&amp;ccb=2&amp;_nc_sid=8bfeb9&amp;_nc_ohc=WF1D90WM_CoAX8QKWdQ&amp;_nc_ht=scontent.ffcm1-1.fna&amp;oh=e9d4d0fb5ff641ab38264a9f3cdc3fa8&amp;oe=5FFCB9C7" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Denial of leave to file a complaint</a></p>
<p>The U.S. Supreme Court has just denied the petition from the state of Texas for leave to file a complaint against the state of Wisconsin.</p>
<p>Ten months ago they denied a petition from the state of Arizona for leave to file a complaint against the state of California.</p>
<p>In both cases, Justices Thomas and Alito said they do not have discretionary power to deny such leave because the Constitution says that when one of the states sues another, the U.S. Supreme Court &quot;shall&quot;, not &quot;may&quot;, have jurisdiction.</p>
<p>Why does this question arise? Why can't a state just file a complaint that the justices can decide to toss out, or not, as they judge fit, instead of first requesting leave to file a complaint. Suppose a state did just that. What would the Court do?</p>

<p>The U.S. Supreme Court, given the discretionary nature of its customary appellate jurisdiction, has adopted the practice of not considering complaints filed with it in its original jurisdiction until leave to do so is granted.</p>
<p>As the highest legal authority in the land, there is no other court in which this procedure can be litigated.</p>
<p>A complaint filed without leave would either be rejected, or would be deemed a request for leave to file it, and evaluated on that basis. Without the grant of leave to file the complaint, it will not be considered by the U.S. Supreme Court on the merits.</p>

us-supreme-court