of the nine justices could plausibly come up with any reason to reverse it, and the supreme court has often said we sit to review judgments, not to write elaborate opinions and essays. there is nothing in this judgment for the supreme court to disagree with. >> it seems to me if this case did not involve the president of the united states that the supreme court would be very unlikely to even take it. >> i don't think they'll take it anyway. the fact that it involves the president gives them an additional reason not to, because for the court to jump into a politically deep thicket and a swamp of sorts, when the legal ruling is clear, convincing and unmistakably correct would be to invite a political mud fight that the court doesn't need and doesn't want. >> so you think it's possible they won't even grant certiari?