And NLJ's Supreme Court Brief has Oral Arguments: A "Work in Progress":
- The justices on Monday issued guidelines for lawyers arguing in the courtroom during the first three months of the new term, and, not surprisingly, the guidelines reflect the ongoing pandemic.
- Arguing counsel and co-counsel who plan to attend the arguments must take a PCR test on the morning the day before argument, including Sunday before a Monday argument. The court said it will arrange for the testing, at its own expense, at a downtown medical facility and it expects to get results by 6 p.m. the same day.
- An advocate who tests positive will be expected to participate remotely via telephonic connection as was done during last term. "While we hope that the chances of this occurring are small, counsel should give some advance consideration to the telephone setup that they would use in the event that it is necessary," the court's guidance said.
- the telephonic questioning will follow the same pattern as happens in the courtroom .... Inside the courtroom, the justices have adopted a hybrid questioning scheme in which they return to the traditional free flow of questions among justices and lawyers but at the end of the usual 30 minutes of argument time, each justice will have the opportunity, in order of seniority, to ask questions, as was the practice during telephonic arguments.
- Oral arguments will continue to be livestreamed for the time being.
Under a bill the California legislature approved unanimously last week, courts across the country’s most populous state would be permitted to continue hosting remote hearings in civil proceedings through July 1, 2023.
Law360 has Lifting The Veil On The Supreme Court's Shadow Docket by Vetan Kapoor.
The Wall St. Journal has 131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest
Posts
