Attorneys from the Office of the Solicitor General are scheduled to participate in nine out of the twelve cases scheduled for oral argument during the October sitting. In five cases – Reynolds v. United States, Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC, Golan v. Holder, Pacific Operators v. Valladolid, Judulang v. Holder – the OSG will represent either the petitioner or respondent.

In four cases, the Office of the Solicitor General will argue as an amicus curiae: Douglas v. Independent Living Center, Martinez v. Ryan, Howes v. Fields, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders. The federal government will not participate in oral arguments in three cases: Maples v. Thomas, CompuCredit v. Greenwood, Greene v. Fisher.

Last year, representatives from the OSG participated in 49 of 77 oral arguments (64%), so the fact that the OSG is arguing in 9 of 12 cases during the October sitting (75%), is not terribly unusual. That said, I think a lot of readers would be surprised to see that such frequent participation from that office is the norm.


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

Categories

Random Posts

  • Change is Fun But...: I'm sad to see Justice Stevens leave the Court for a variety of reasons that have been well documented by people smarter than me. I'm also e...
  • Updated Term Statistics: I've updated the Term Statistics to reflect this week's opinions. Complete --- Term Index Opinion Breakdown Vote Breakdown
  • New OT08 Term Stats : With 43 opinions released, the Court has now released just over half of the opinions it will release for the term. Lets take a look at some ...
  • Opinions Released as a Percentage of Total Term Opinions: I've created a little chart that shows opinions released as a percentage of total opinions for a given term. For the current term, I've used...
  • 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...