« Hit Lists: Cyber Incitement, Cyber Threats | Main | Sunday Closing Laws and Saturday Observers »
Friday, April 08, 2011
More on judicial dominance of oral argument
The discussion of the changing nature of SCOTUS arguments, specifically the way the justices interrupt one another (and the attorneys' answers to one another's questions) in a way that makes this less and less of a conversation, is back in the news today, this time in Adam Liptak's column. He likens the arguments to a "catastrophically overbooked cable television show," and quotes one observer that there has been a shift from arguments involving justice signalling to one another to justices sparring with one another.
You do have to wonder--could it be any worse if there were cameras capturing all this?
Posted by Howard Wasserman on April 8, 2011 at 01:39 PM in Howard Wasserman, Law and Politics | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c6a7953ef0147e3d5f87b970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More on judicial dominance of oral argument:
Comments
The audio is telling enough. Anyway, it is striking how personal many court opinions are, not only those written by Scalia. The Kagan dissent was quite snarky ("now really") at times, so she's joining in.
Posted by: Joe | Apr 8, 2011 1:47:01 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.