The state court of appeal held that the trial court judge correctly ruled by excusing a single juror who explicitly said he would not follow the law.  A perfectly correct decision but not in the 9th Circuit who reversed the state court on habeas corpus.  Naturally, the Supreme Court reversed the 9th Circuit for not following Supreme Court precedent and ignoring AEDPA. The Supreme Court remanded the case to the 9th Circuit (again) who upheld the California court this time. Yet even one of the judges (as a usual dissent by Judge .Reinhardt) still dissented..

What is the trial court supposed to do when a juror refuses to follow the law? Eleven jurors had found the defendant guilty, and the dissent wants to retry the case because one juror held out for refusing to follow the law.  When will the Supreme Court strip the 9th Circuit of habeas jurisdiction?