▪ The Value of Appellate Oral Argument
The Ithaca, NY newspaper reports on a Cornell speech by retired US Supreme Court Justice Sandra O'Connor about how oral advocacy helps the justices shape their thinking about an appeal.
O'Connor said Chief Justice Roberts stated, “Oral argument is a time, at least for me, when ideas that have been percolating for some time begin to crystallize.”
O'Connor said oral argument was often helpful in shaping her views. She said often she'd enter oral arguments with the intention to vote one way, though with some concern, and her trepidation would be resolved by the end of oral arguments.
Full report here. Hawaii Supreme Court Associate Justice Simeon Acoba has opined about the value of appellate oral argument, and provided some insight to how the Court decides which cases are set for argument. In Rivera v. Dep't of Labor & Indus. Relations, 100 Haw. 348, 60 P.3d 298 (2006) (Acoba, J., dissenting), he wrote:
Oral argument then has illuminated issues not evident from the briefs that would not have been otherwise discovered.
. . .
Justice must be seen to be done. That proposition applies to all appellate courts...However, oral argument is only possible in any case if a majority of the justices vote for it. Again, unless oral argument is supported by the good faith and commitment of the justices, whether on the [expedited oral argument] calendar or on a regular schedule, the function of oral argument and its contributions to the appellate process will be substantially diminished as will the public's perception of justice.
The Hawaii Supreme Court and Intermediate Court of Appeals now regularly calendar oral arguments in pending appeals. These proceedings are usually open to the public. Check out these links:
Comments