> I don’t think that this is a fair characterization of what it means for a circuit to have one of its decisions be heard by the Supreme Court. It makes it seem like being “reviewed” by the Supreme Court is a proxy for “out of the norm,” and that’s not the test for Supreme Court review

My intent was for the statement of their decisions being considered extreme and their decisions being reviewed often to be two separate statements, the former an opinion I've seen often and the latter a statistical phenomenon. The latter doesn't imply the former, but I don't think it would be surprising that the former correlates with the latter.