When lawyers argue before the Supreme Court, a small white light goes on to tell them when their time is almost expired and then a red light signals when they should stop. But, arguments this term are extending well beyond the red light's cue.
In December, an argument about whether a Colorado graphic artist can refuse to create wedding websites for same-sex couples lasted two hours and 25 minutes. And an important elections case that was scheduled for an hour and a half clocked in at two hours and 53 minutes. Already, a handful of arguments have been longer than any argument the high court heard in the term that ended in June — and that term included major cases on abortion and guns.
When the justices moved back to in-person arguments in their courtroom more than a year and a half later, they returned to the largely free-for-all questioning. Now, however, at the end of each lawyer's time, the justices each get a chance to ask any remaining questions, again in seniority order. That switch led to an average of 18 extra minutes per case last term, said lawyer William Jay, who's been tracking the extra time.
The justices' new format has tripped up some lawyers who are used to the old way of doing business and have moved to sit down when the red light on their podium went on.Longer arguments are, in fact, a return for the court. Early in the court's history, cases could take days to argue. The length of arguments shrank over the years until in 1970, under Chief Justice Warren Burger, it became 30 minutes per side. The court's website claims that's still the case."Typically, the Court holds two arguments each day beginning at 10:00 a.m., each lasting one hour," it says.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who was chief from 1986 to 2005, was known for cutting off lawyers and even fellow justices when the lawyer's red light went on.
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Illinois Supreme Court halts plans to eliminate cash bail and other pretrial court changesControversial provision of SAFE-T Act paused by high court to 'maintain consistent pretrial procedures throughout Illinois' You crashed how many cars and hurt how many people? Apologize, promise you won't do it again and go home? Ah this sucks They passed this unlawful bill and expected us to let it slide. It’s a fkn shame lawmakers fight more for the criminals than law abiding citizens. They make us take them to court and waste our time and money.
Source: ChicagoBreaking - 🏆 521. / 51 Read more »
Illinois Supreme Court halts implementation of cashless bailControversial provision of SAFE-T Act halted by state high court. Could have done that a month ago Illinois is a one-party state. Democrats control everything, thanks to the sheep-like Chicago & Cook County voters. States Attys like Kim Foxx want only to empty jails of minority felons. That’s what this is all about, and it won’t end well. Criminals saying, 'damn'
Source: ChicagoBreaking - 🏆 521. / 51 Read more »
Illinois Supreme Court Blocks End of Cash Bail on Jan. 1 as State Appeals Judge's RulingJust hours before cash bail was set to be eliminated across parts of Illinois, the state’s Supreme Court stopped it from taking effect as the high court prepares to debate whether or not the pretrial release provisions are constitutional. This gives people more time to arm up.
Source: nbcchicago - 🏆 545. / 51 Read more »
IL Supreme Court halts Pre Trial Fairness Act, preventing no cash bail provision from taking effectThe ruling means no cash bail provisions will be going into effect Jan 1, pending an appeal. Lost of revenue if they change the bail system. Millions will be lost It is a racket. It always has been. The ability to hold someone hostage until they pay. It is illegal unless you are the government. It doesn’t matter if you are guilty or not.
Source: ABC7Chicago - 🏆 284. / 63 Read more »
Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts Says Justices Shouldn’t ‘Live in Fear’Chief Justice John Roberts closed a tumultuous year for the Supreme Court with an annual report that recalled the violent resistance the judiciary faced when it aggressively dismantled state-enforced racial segregation in the 1950s and ‘60s. TERM LIMITS FOR US SUPREME COURT!!!!! Eh, lifetime terms with no repurcussions for your actions Get real Roberts. Welcome to the real world... Make sure you and the other justices move into a gated community with valid security...
Source: WSJ - 🏆 98. / 63 Read more »
Illinois Supreme Court puts SAFE-T Act on hold, leaving cash bail in effectIt was supposed to go into effect at 12:01 a.m. on Jan. 1 and eliminate cash bail for criminal cases. Down with crime-friendly things like this Act.
Source: cbschicago - 🏆 546. / 51 Read more »