Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Charles Rothfeld of Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw arrived at his D.C. office early on Tuesday, eager to learn whether the Supreme Court would grant review in a key commerce clause case he had brought before the Court. He expected to find out at 10 a.m., the hour when the Court had announced it would make public the list of cases granted review at the justices’ private “long conference” on Monday, at which they sift through petitions that have piled up over the summer. But when Rothfeld turned on his computer, he found an early morning e-mail alerting him that his case DaimerChrysler Corporation v. Cuno had in fact been granted. Rothfeld wasn’t the beneficiary of a forbidden leak from inside the Supreme Court. Instead, in an rare case of human error, the Court had inadvertently posted the orders list on its Web site hours earlier than the announced time of 10 a.m. “Someone in my office found it early,” said Rothfeld, who was glad to learn about the grant earlier than expected. It was a minor Supreme Court lapse that did not appear to move markets, and it was not as serious as if the Court had actually released an opinion before its time, a highly forbidden act. But at an institution where traditions reign supreme, it was a notable deviation. Under past chief justices — Warren Burger, in particular — Tuesday’s transgression might have been enough to cause heads to roll. But the Court seemed to shrug it off, and it was hard to imagine the more easygoing Justice John Paul Stevens, who is running the Court in the absence of a chief justice, getting very upset about it. The glitch had a ripple effect in the Supreme Court community and among the media. Stories began emerging early about the cases granted — ranging from Rothfeld’s case on the constitutionality of state investment tax credits, to the case of onetime Playboy bunny Anna Nicole Smith — and Goldstein & Howe’s Scotusblog posted the list by 8:37 a.m. The mishap was another reminder that the legendary “First Monday in October” isn’t what it used to be. The first Monday in October is when, by statute, the Court begins its term, and it was memorialized in a 1981 movie by the same name in which Jill Clayburgh played the role of the Court’s first female justice. This year the first Monday in October was also the deadline the Senate set for confirming John Roberts to be the next chief justice. But this Tuesday’s orders list — early or otherwise — underlines the fact that the Court’s work really begins earlier, at the long conference. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who has had to delay her retirement plans, was at the conference Monday and fully participating — even though she may not be on the Court when the cases granted are argued. But before a few years ago, even the dispositions decided at the long conference were not announced until the First Monday, adding to its luster. Lately, however, the Court has slowed to a trickle its pace of granting review to new cases. As a result, the cases that it grants in the spring for argument in the fall term barely fill the Court’s argument calendar for the fall. That, in turn, leaves the new term’s argument calendar hungry for new cases coming out of the long conference in September. This year, for example, before Tuesday’s list was released, the Court only had enough cases to fill slots through early January. And that means that if the Court waits until the traditional first Monday in October to announce newly granted cases, advocates would have a fairly tight briefing schedule to meet in advance of January oral arguments. For the last several years, the Court’s solution to this problem has been to announce the new cases a day after the September conference, thereby giving lawyers an extra week to prepare. Advocates appreciate the gesture, even if it has taken the attention away from the First Monday. Assuming Roberts is confirmed as chief justice, he will have a chance to tinker with the policy, directly or indirectly. He has already announced that he thinks the Court could stand to handle a few more cases than the 75 or 80 that it dockets today. If he does that, then by a year from now, the calendar for the 2006 term won’t be starving for cases to fill argument slots, and there will be less need to give lawyers an extra week to prepare. The First Monday in October could be restored to its previous stature. But chances are good that Roberts will want to follow the new tradition rather than the old; as a onetime Supreme Court practitioner, he knows that even an extra few days of preparation can help. The Tuesday-before-the-First-Monday-in-October does not have quite the same ring, but its significance for the Supreme Court may be hard to change.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.