proceeding. See 4 V.I. Code § 243(4) (“Every court shall have power . . . [t]o compel obedience to its judgments, orders, and process, and to the orders of a judge out of court, in all actions, or proceedings pending thereinf.]”); 4 V.I. Code § 281(2) (“Every judicial officer shall have power... [t]o compel obedience to his lawful ordersf.]”); Young v. United States, 481 U.S. 787, 793, 107 S. Ct. 2124, 95 L. Ed. 2d 740 (1987) (“[I]t is long settled that courts possess inherent authority to initiate contempt proceedings for disobedience to their orders----”). We have certiorari jurisdiction under 48 U.S.C. § 1613, which grants the Third Circuit certiorari jurisdiction to review final decisions of the Virgin Islands Supreme Court. See Kendall v. Daily News, 716 F.3d 82 (3d Cir. 2013) (<HOLDING>). 4 The ACLU, as amicus, argues that Kendall is
recognizing that where a state prisoner declines to pursue certiorari in the united states supreme court that petitioners conviction is not final  until  after the time for filing a petition for certiorari with the supreme court has passed holding that pursuant to the language of hr 6116 the third circuit court of appeals retains certiorari jurisdiction over proceedings that were filed in virgin islands courts before the enactment date of hr 6116 holding that congresss recent elimination of the third circuits certiorari jurisdiction over decisions of the virgin islands supreme court does not affect at a minimum certiorari petitions filed before the effective date of the jurisdictionstripping act holding that supreme court need not consider issue not raised in petition for certiorari holding that this court lacks jurisdiction over appeals from decisions of the supreme court of the commonwealth of the northern mariana islands which were not completed before may 1 2004