Petition to Watch: Ryan v James and Whether the Court Will Extend Harrington & Cullen - Updated

The Court has Ryan v James, Supreme Court No. 12-11 on today’s case call. The issue is whether Ninth Circuit’sl opinion conflicts with the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) as interpreted by the Court’s decisions in Harrington v Richter and Cullen v Pinholster insofar as it:
(a) treated AEDPA’s deferential standard as a waivable defense, rather than an inherent restriction on a federal court’s authority

(b) refused to find that the state post-conviction (PCR) court issued a merits ruling on respondent’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim, when the state court expressly ruled that none of respondent’s PCR claims were colorable, and

(c) considered evidence presented for the first time in federal court to grant habeas relief.
This case will be an interesting case to see whether the Court is going to extend
Cullen and Harrington. The Ninth Circuit’s opinion is available here.
Update: There was nothing on today’s
order list. Conservative blogger Kent Scheidegger thinks this means that the case been relished.