When former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was on the court, [lawyer Carter G. Phillips] recalled, she asked the first question so quickly and so predictably that there was little point in preparing an elegant opening argument. "Now you might get three or four minutes" without interruption, he said....A fascinating change in style. Who knows what it has to do with the content of the decisions we will receive from the Roberts Court?
Has Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., himself the veteran of 39 Supreme Court arguments as a lawyer, shared with his colleagues the perspective from the other side of the bench, or maybe even laid down some new rules?
The latter theory is unlikely; the court's ethos calls for signaling rather than rule-making. To the extent that the new chief justice is leading by example — and there is no doubt that he is in charge of the courtroom — he is offering a model of how to ask questions that are tightly phrased, penetrating and often the last thing a lawyer wants to hear.
२ मे, २००६
"You have to be ready now to make some kind of affirmative presentation."
Advice for advocates arguing to the Supreme Court. The Justices don't jump in with questions as they used to:
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५ टिप्पण्या:
I'm almost worried this means a closed-mindedness when it comes to oral arguments. After all, isn't what's said in the opinions that matter the most for the record? I've always thought the Court's mind is usually made up before oral arguments anyway. Maybe I'm wrong?
I don't know what it has to do with the content of the decisions we will receive from the Roberts Court. But I do know it makes me an even bigger admirer of our new Chief Justice.
enochs: I don't see it as indicating "a closed-mindedness." I see it as a true leader's kindly admonition that the other Justices should check their egos at the door and be on their best behaviour.
wickedpinto: The purpose of the adversarial system is to obtain Justice. I mean that in all sincerity.
I know the answer.
Dan Henninger had a column in the WSJ last week, in which he documents his visit to the Court for oral arguments, noting that towards the end "Justice Scalia has now sunk so low in his chair that only the top half of his face is visible to the gallery. He looks like he's floating in a Jacuzzi." Well, it's obvious, isn't it? The more relaxed tone? The more collegial style? Isn't it obvious: they've installed a jacuzzi behind the bench! :p
The Vibro-Chairs (tm) just weren't doing it!
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा