Virus upends long-held Supreme Court traditions
Arguments held by phone, live audio broadcasts are firsts
WASHINGTON — The coronavirus pandemic is forcing big changes at the tradition-bound Supreme Court. The justices will hear arguments this month by telephone for the first time since Alexander Graham Bell patented his invention in 1876.
Audio of the arguments will be broadcast live by the news media, another first. This will be just the second time that the justices will meet outside the court since the Supreme Court building opened in 1935. (Discovery of anthrax in a court mailroom in 2001 forced a temporary relocation to another federal courthouse less than a mile away.)
The first argument is Monday, and the court will hear 10 cases over six days. Among the cases to be argued: President Donald Trump’s bid to keep certain financial records private and whether presidential electors are required to cast their Electoral College ballots for the candidate who won their state.
Here are a few things to know ahead of the arguments:
Supreme Court arguments are generally freewheeling affairs, with rapid-fire questions coming at advocates. That often means the justices trip over each other trying to get in a question.
This time, the justices will ask questions in order of seniority, with Chief Justice John Roberts going first and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the last to speak. Doing things in seniority order is routine at the court.
One justice you probably won’t hear much from is Clarence Thomas, who is the longest-serving member of the court. He almost never asks questions, and he’s said he thinks his colleagues interrupt the lawyers before them too much. a s e a s i l y we a r bathrobes.
The same goes for lawyers who argue before the Supreme Court. Appropriate court attire for lawyers, the court says, is “conservative business dress in traditional dark colors.” Think navy blue, or charcoal gray. Sweatpants come in those colors, don’t they?
Meanwhile, the Justice Department says the government’s lawyers will wear their traditional longtailed formal morning coats and present their arguments from the conference room of the solicitor general, the government’s top Supreme Court lawyer.
their
Five minutes before the justices take the bench, a buzzer sounds in the courtroom. It sounds again right before they emerge from behind the courtroom’s red velvet curtains. No warnings are likely over the phone, the court said, and it’s not as though the lawyers need any.
They’ll get a call at 9:15 a.m. EDT, 45 minutes before arguments begin. At 10, the court’s marshal, Pamela Talkin, will call the court to order. It’s possible there will be some variation on her usual cry that begins with the phrase: “Oyez! Oyez! Oyez!”
Another courtroom cue will be missing. Typically lawyers arguing before the court get a warning that their time is about to expire: a white light that goes on at the podium where they are arguing. A red light goes on when it’s time to stop talking. “Arguing counsel have been encouraged to keep their own time for argument, so that they can independently determine how much time is remaining,” court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said.
If you’re a member of the public, getting a ticket to watch a Supreme Court argument is like winning the lottery. The tickets are free, but there are fewer than 100 seats typically available to the public and to get one you have to line up before dawn.
And that’s just for cases that are snoozers. Watching a blockbuster can mean spending days in line, or paying someone to do it on your behalf. People waited through a rainy night and falling temperatures for arguments in November over legal protections for young immigrants.
This time, with arguments beginning at the traditional 10 a.m. in Washington, D.C., even West Coasters can stay in bed past dawn and still have time to tune in to C-SPAN to hear the proceedings.
Many state Supreme Courts and one federal appeals court, in San Francisco, regularly have live video of their courtroom sessions, and have continued to do so even as they have moved to remote hearings because of the virus.
But that’s a bridge too far for the Supreme Court. The justices won’t even have any internal video link that would allow them to see each other during the arguments, Arberg said.