0

Yesterday, the US Supreme Court announced a schedule change for Gloucester School Board v. G.G., which would push the due date for respondent's merits brief as far back as Febuary 23, 2017. The website SCOTUSBlog notes that:

under the revised schedule it would not be slated for oral argument until the court’s March sitting (which begins on March 20) or possibly even the April sitting (which begins on April 17) – increasing the chances that a ninth justice may have taken the bench by the time the case is argued.

Is there any rule regarding how late in a case a new justice can join tp participate in the decision?

|improve this question
  • 2
    No, there isn't. For example, Kagan recused herself from several cases because she or her office had worked on them when she was solicitor general, not because of the timing of her appointment to the court. – phoog Dec 8 '16 at 14:26
  • Are you asking about federal judges in general, or Supreme Court justices in particular? They don't necessarily have the same practices. – Nate Eldredge Dec 8 '16 at 15:36
  • 2
    For SCOTUS, my understanding is that what matters is not the filing of the briefs, but the timing of oral argument. Typically justices won't participate in a case if they weren't on the court during oral argument (since they wouldn't have had an opportunity to ask questions, etc). I don't know if this is a written rule or just standard practice. – Nate Eldredge Dec 8 '16 at 15:37
  • 1
    @NateEldredge that seems to fit with the quote at least, since it says "may have taken the bench by the time the case is argued", implying that that has some significance. – aidanh010 Dec 8 '16 at 16:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.