There is a fascinating fight going on behind the scenes of a case about to reach the Supreme Court. The argument more or less boils down to whether a local attorney who has been with a case for a decade or an experience Supreme Court advocate fresh to the case should argue in front of the Court. They motioned for divided time but the Court said no so they have to duke it out sometime before arguments on November 3rd. The BLT has more on the case here.

Tom Goldstein (of SCOTUSblog) will most likely be arguing against whoever is chosen to represent the state.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Random Posts

  • January Hearing List Released: The Supreme Court has released the Hearing List for the January sitting and you can find it here. Several high-profile advocates are back...
  • Advocate Scorecard for OT 09: I finished this a while ago but neglected to post it until now. Whoops? Anyways, here is the OT 09 advocate scorecard with win/loss record. ...
  • Measuring Justice Sotomayor's Liberal Bona Fides: Justice Sotomayor has completed two years on the Supreme Court and, as she begins her third, it seems like an appropriate time to take an in...
  • Early OT09 Stats: I've finally finished the first edition of my OT09 statistics. First, the links: Term Index and Term Opinion Breakdown. Honestly, the nam...
  • A Classic Oral Argument Passage: Today's New York Times article about Paul Clement, "Lawyer Opposing Health Law is Familiar Face to the Justices", reminds me of an interesti...