BloombergLaw has Off-the-Clock Questioning Made Supreme Court Arguments Longer
- The court heard arguments in 61 cases this term and sessions went well over scheduled time in hot-button disputes on abortion and gun rights. Extra questioning also prolonged arguments in lesser-known cases that populate the docket.
- US Supreme Court oral arguments lasted 28% longer on average this term under a new round-robin format that advocates say reduced pressure and made the justices less inclined to talk over each other.
- The new format added an extra 18 minutes and 17 seconds to each case on average, said William Jay, who leads Goodwin Procter’s Supreme Court and appellate litigation practice. He’s been keeping careful stats on both the length of each argument and the number of questions asked off-the-clock.
- Arguments ran longest in the two consolidated cases challenging whether to let President Joe Biden’s Covid-19 vaccine rule for large employers take effect. The court had allotted 60 minutes for arguments, but the discussion lasted for 2 hours, 8 minutes and 50 seconds.
- Fewer interruptions may be what’s kept Justice Clarence Thomas participating in oral arguments. The court’s most senior associate justice had been known for his silence during court proceedings, having gone a decade—from 2006 to 2016—without asking a single question.
Also of note, Law360 has Judge Hughes Says Firms Are Letting Diverse Ex-Clerks Down -- U.S. Circuit Judge Todd M. Hughes on Tuesday expressed his frustration that the Federal Circuit tends to hire a good number of law clerks from underrepresented groups, but that he rarely sees former clerks being chosen by a firm to argue appeals.
As for CA appellate practice, if you're into writs (and, of course, you are!), then don't miss pp. 20-21 of this 1/1 opinion from two weeks ago. (Hat tip to Don Willenburg!)
Posts
