A forthcoming article in the Cornell Law Review ("Virtual Briefing at the Supreme Court") argues that it's an "open secret" that the way to influence a SCOTUS case is to hit up social media:
The open secret of Supreme Court advocacy in a digital era is that there is a new way to argue to the Justices. Today’s Supreme Court arguments are developed online: They are dissected and explored in blog posts, fleshed out in popular podcasts, and analyzed and re-analyzed by experts who do not represent parties or have even filed a brief in the case at all. This “virtual briefing” (as we call it) is intended to influence the Justices and their law clerks but exists completely outside of traditional briefing rules.
On the heels of that comes this: a web page and Twitter account devoted (for now) solely to a case we've been following that is in the petition stage, the Love Terminal takings case. Check out "Protect Our Property Rights" (Twitter) and "SCOTUS Fifth Amendment" (web page) for a very slick campaign.
Of course, when the petitioner is represented by a SCOTUS uberlawyer and federal takings mavens, and there are beaucoup amici briefs filed in support (ours included), they probably don't need additional social media briefing to convince the lurking clerks that this is a good case. But it doesn't hurt, we suppose.
Of course, a social media and law blog presence aren't new things, but employing them as overt tools to influence the Court is. Look for this as a new trend.
