Rising Hegemon
As someone who has argued an appeal or two (never the Supreme Court, but a rung lower) anybody who is saying how the Justices will vote based on their questions at oral argument is doing just that.
Look at their prior decisions and you'll get a better handle on it.
Those folks saying Monday good, Tuesday bad/good, are just talking to be talking.
4 comments:
I agree. As someone who has done nothing but appellate work for ten years, I will add that oral argument as a whole is an archaic holdover from the era before it became easy to publish written arguments (that is, typing, then word processing, etc.). Maybe in Daniel Webster's day what was said, out loud, mattered; but why in the world would anyone think that oral argument is of any value when you have weeks or even months to carefully craft your best arguments on paper, and you also have a chance to reply to the other side's arguments?
Don't tell Scott Lemieux. It's all he's got.
Gotta MAKE some news somehow, someway...and this is a three-day EXTRAVAGANZA of over-evaluation of Breyer's facial tics or if Roberts parted his hair on the left or the right this morning...
They're gonna do what they ALWAYS do--fuck us as well as they can. It's now in their very job descriptions, doncha know...
--Daddy-O
JAZZ HANDS.
Post a Comment