Skip to Main Content
Search
Close
Search
Advanced Search
Search Menu
AI Discovery Assistant
Book cover for Oral Arguments Before the Supreme Court: An Empirical Approach Oral Arguments Before the Supreme Court: An Empirical Approach
Lawrence Wrightsman
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195368628.001.0001
Published online:
01 May 2008
Published in print:
01 June 2008
Online ISBN:
9780199867554
Print ISBN:
9780195368628

Contents

Book cover for Oral Arguments Before the Supreme Court: An Empirical Approach Oral Arguments Before the Supreme Court: An Empirical Approach
Lawrence Wrightsman
Front Matter

Preface

Get access
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195368628.002.0007
Pages
ix–xii
  • Published:
    May 2008

Extract

Of the three branches of our federal government, the judicial branch is arguably the most secret. For example, the justices of the Supreme Court decide in secret which cases to resolve, they meet in secret to take a preliminary vote, the opinions are drafted in secret, and not until their decision is announced is the public privy to their actions. But one step in the decision-making process is open to the public: the oral arguments. Despite its transparency, the process of holding oral arguments has been challenged. Some critics—and even a current justice—believe that the exercise is useless in the overall process of decision making, as justices’ minds have been made up before this step.

In this book, I challenge that conclusion. The viewpoint of this book is that oral arguments are a significant part of the Supreme Court’s decision-making process. Justices have an opportunity to test the limits of claims made by advocates in their briefs; furthermore, the argument procedure provides an opportunity for justices to sense the strength of feelings held by other justices and even to try to persuade their colleagues as they question the advocates. The requisite nature of oral arguments was illustrated in a case that came before the Court on October 19, 2007, Medellin v. Texas. It was a case of major significance as it was a death-penalty case. But even more, it asked whether the President of the United States, on his own, could order a state court to follow a decision by the International Court of Justice that foreign nationals on death row in the United States—in this case, one Jose Medellin—can obtain counsel from their native countries. The comments and questions from the justices were so frequent and heated that Justice John Paul Stevens, ever gracious on the bench, told the Solicitor General of Texas that he would like to hear the six points in the advocate’s argument “without interruption by my colleagues.” Chief Justice Roberts did something that was unprecedented: he gave each side 15 minutes extra time to argue their case; scheduled for an hour, the oral argument lasted an hour and a half. By the end, the justices had directed 122 questions or comments to the petitioner’s attorney and 93 to the respondent’s.

Subject
Criminal and Forensic Psychology Forensic and Law Psychology
Collection: Oxford Scholarship Online
You do not currently have access to this chapter.
Metrics
View Metrics
Metrics
Total Views 4
3 Pageviews
1 PDF Downloads
Since 5/1/2023
Month: Total Views:
May 2023 1
March 2024 2
June 2024 1
Citations
Powered by Dimensions
Altmetrics
×

Email alerts

Sign up for marketing
More from Oxford Academic
Clinical Psychology
Criminal and Forensic Psychology
Forensic and Law Psychology
Psychology
Science and Mathematics
Books
Journals

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close