Bloomberg Law has Long High Court Sessions Makes Advocates Happy, Stomachs Grumble
- Eighty percent of Supreme Court arguments went over their allotted time this term, for an average of nearly 30 additional minutes.
- The culprit is the pandemic-era shift away from the traditional free-for-all format that was largely time limited to a hybrid one that also includes a round robin.
- Of the 59 arguments heard this term, only nine finished within five minutes of the allotted time. Just three went significantly under.
- The remaining 47 cases went into overtime, though it varied from six minutes extra in the property rights case Wilkins v. US, to 93 additional minutes in Haaland v. Brackeen. That was on top of an already extended argument challenging a 1970s-era tribal adoption law, which was slated to last 100 minutes.
- The spillover added 28 1/2 hours over the 63-plus hours of argument time anticipated.
- Xiao Wang, a professor known for his innovations as an appellate clinic leader, is joining the University of Virginia School of Law faculty to direct its Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.
- He plans to bring the network, and another new program ― the En Banc Institute ― to UVA. The institute offers lawyers who are scheduled to argue before full panels of appellate circuit court judges a place to practice their arguments in a full dress rehearsal before faculty, alumni and practitioners. In the last year at Northwestern, Wang has hosted 10 online and in-person moots.
Posts
