When justices are not listening to arguments, they are (1) reading written arguments about cases and (2) holding private meetings to decide the meaning of the law.
When justices are not listening to arguments, they are (1) reading written arguments about cases and (2) holding private meetings to decide the meaning of the law.
When justices are not listening to arguments, they are (1) reading written arguments about cases and (2) holding private meetings to decide the meaning of the law.
During a sitting session, the justices hold case conferences on Thursday and Friday following the oral arguments heard earlier in the week.
Public arguments
The US Supreme Court justices question the attorneys representing the parties to a case during oral arguments. Each attorney has 30 minutes to present his or her reason the justices should find in favor of his client, as well as clarify points and answer any questions the justices raise. The justices are usually better prepared and know more about the case, precedents and applicable law than the attorneys, and often grill them.Oral arguments occur after all parties have submitted their briefs and the justices read the briefs and relevant case law, but before they vote on the case.For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Someone petitions the Supreme Court to review a case on appealThe lawyers submit briefsThe justices vote to decide which cases to hearThe Clerk schedules oral argumentsThe justices read all briefs and lower court documentsThe justices have their clerks research precedents and other informationThe justices listen to oral argumentsThe justices hold a case conference to discuss issues and take a voteOne justice is assigned to write the official opinion of the CourtThe opinion is circulated for commentsOther justices write concurring or dissenting opinions (optional)The decision is released to the parties and the general public
In the US Supreme Court, each side is allotted 30 minutes to present its case to the justices. The justices may extend oral arguments at their discretion to accommodate the Solicitor General or amici (friends of the court), if they choose. For more information, see Related Questions, below.
The Court's interpretation of the Articles and Amendments of the US Constitution is the most important factor in their decision-making. Other factors include case precedents, established federal (or state) laws, ideology, intellectual reasoning, and a commitment to impartiality, among other things.
Yes, it is possible for Justices to provide a fair review of a case despite the brief presentations from lawyers. They have access to extensive written briefs, legal precedents, and prior case law, which allow them to delve deeply into the issues at hand. Additionally, the oral arguments, while concise, highlight the key points and concerns that the Justices consider when making their decisions. Ultimately, their experience and expertise enable them to analyze complex legal matters efficiently.
US Supreme Court Justices should only compare the case in the light of the US Constitution.
A majority of the nine Supreme Court justices, which means at least five justices, are typically required to reach a decision in a case.
To understand why most justices ruled in a particular way in a Supreme Court case, one should consult the majority opinion. This opinion outlines the legal reasoning and principles that guided the justices' decision, presenting the core arguments and interpretations of the law that led to their conclusion. Additionally, looking at concurring opinions can provide insight into different perspectives that align with the majority's ruling.