Supreme Court holds 1st arguments by phone

WASHINGTON — It’s a morning of firsts for the Supreme Court, the first time audio of the court’s arguments was heard live by the world and the first arguments by telephone.

The changes are a result of the coronavirus pandemic, which has made holding courtroom sessions unsafe, especially with six justices aged 65 or older and at risk of getting seriously sick from the virus.

The historic session began at the usual time of 10 a.m. EDT, when Marshal Pamela Talkin called the court to order and Chief Justice John Roberts announced the day’s case.

“Oyez! Oyez! Oyez!” Talkin began, dropping the words commanding people “to draw near” to reflect the unusual circumstances.

Arguments, scheduled to last an hour as they would generally in the courtroom, ran 17 minutes long, but without serious problems. The justices asked roughly two questions apiece at a time, and Roberts occasionally interjected to keep things moving.

And there was one mild surprise: Justice Clarence Thomas asked questions for the first time in more than a year.

Several justices said “good morning” to the lawyers, a telephone nicety not often heard in the courtroom. The justices also did not interrupt each other, as they frequently do in court, and instead took turns asking questions.

The court’s plaza, normally bustling on the mornings of arguments, was deserted Monday, as it has been since the building was closed to the public in mid-March because of the virus outbreak. Two months of arguments were postponed before the court decided to hear 10 cases over six days in May.

The experiment could propel the court to routinely livestream its arguments. Or it could just be an extraordinary exception to the court’s sustained opposition to broadening the audience that can hear, if not see, its work live.

Cases that will be heard over the next two weeks include President Donald Trump’s effort to shield tax and other financial records and whether presidential electors have to cast their Electoral College ballots for the candidate who wins the popular vote in their state.

The court chose a somewhat obscure case about whether the travel website Booking.com can trademark its name for its first foray into remote arguments.