ORDER OF COURT

Plaintiffs have filed a “petition for rehearing on an emergency basis,” relying on events which have occurred since the court’s Opinion of March 13, 2003. As we said in that opinion, “Ripeness doctrine involves more than simply the timing of the case. It mixes various mutually reinforcing constitutional and prudential considerations.” Although some of the contingencies described in our opinion appear to have been resolved, others have not. Most importantly, Congress has taken no action which presents a “fully developed dispute between the two elected branches.” Thus the case continues not to be fit for judicial review. See Massachusetts v. Laird, 451 F.2d 26, 34 (1st Cir. 1971).

The petition is denied.