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.


Random Posts

  • Updated Term Statistics: I've updated the Term Statistics to reflect this week's opinions. Complete --- Term Index Opinion Breakdown Vote Breakdown
  • Final Term Index: Here is the final Term Index for October Term 2009. OT09_term_index_final
  • Profile: H. Bartow Farr, III: In the past, we've profiled notable advocates and judges that were in the news. This is the first in a series of posts about the advocates w...
  • New Opinions and Updated Statistics: The Supreme Court released three new opinions today and dismissed one hotly-anticipated case as improvidently granted. Graham v. Florida-...
  • Term Index Updated: I've updated the Term Case Index to reflect the four opinions handed down this week. Earlier today I released opinion authorship statistics ...