Supreme Court arguments can drag on. Chief Justice Roberts is considering some change

0:00Like many things in the U.S., arguments at the Supreme Court have been getting bigger and bigger in recent years. Sessions that once lasted an hour are now stretching far beyond. And that is testing the patience of some of the justices. Chief Justice John Roberts says that he's considering some changes for the new term that begins in October. MPR's Carrie Johnson reports. The Supreme Court used to be a stickler when it comes to oral arguments. Most cases took 60 minutes, start to finish. The late Chief Justice William Renquist operated as the enforcer. Here he is, slamming the brakes on Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Tribe in 1990. I had meant to say some time for a battle, but I could you have it. I guess I have to. Lawyer still tells stories about Renquist cutting off arguments once time expired and the light in front of an advocate turned red. How times have changed? Adam Feldman analyzes the Supreme Court in a sub-stack devoted to the justices and data.

1:00The arguments are definitely longer than they used to be. I mean, they're called for 60 minutes, but they have been going 90 minutes or longer for many of them. The COVID pandemic forced the justices to alter their routine and it transformed the format for these oral arguments. Each advocate got a bit of time to introduce their case without interruption. And each justice got a few minutes to ask questions individually before a free-for-all erupted. Again, Adam Feldman. The purpose during COVID was you couldn't see each other telephonically. And so there had to be some ordering or it would have been really messy. Oral arguments are important, especially for the court, which has been syncing in public opinion polls. Tanya Jacobi, a law professor at Emory University, explains. Our argument is the one open part, one transparent part of the Supreme Court's decision-making process. So it's very important to have it available to the public, even if the public mostly doesn't listen. Some of the changes to arguments are almost universally welcomed.

2:00Many lawyers are happy to hear from Justice Clarence Thomas, who rarely spoke before the pandemic. Now he gets the first question because he's the leader in seniority. Jacobi says some of the format changes that give each justice dedicated time to speak seem to respond to her research that chose male justices and male advocates had been routinely interrupting the women justices. But Jacobi says the rates of interruption are no better now, and the justices mostly use their extra time to speak to each other and stand their ground. Because she says the courts quite polarized, and there's not as much room for persuasion. I think it makes our arguments harder to listen to because they just take longer without, I think, particularly adding all that much. Justice Gatangi Brown-Jackson, the newest member of the court, and one of its three liberals, speaks the most by far, followed by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and appointee of Democratic President Obama. Jacobi says there's a good reason for that.

3:03Essentially, I think when you're expecting to be on the losing side of an argument, you do more talking to try and persuade people to your side, whereas if you're quite confident as probably most of the conservative justices are now, with six in their coalition, you're feeling confident of winning, and you don't need to persuade people as much. But some of the other justices seem to have chafed at the super-sized oral arguments and the questioning style of some of their colleagues. Chief Justice Roberts told an audience this summer, the arguments are now a little too long, and he's thinking about how to rein them in. Former acting solicitor General Jeff Wall says it's a hard problem. Here he is in an event sponsored by the conservative Federalist Society in July. I don't know what you do. It's like every time I'm on a conference call, I want somebody to stop talking. There's no easy way to get people to just talk less when you would like them to. Adam Feldman, who uses data to explain the work of the court, says, time management for the justices is a work in progress,

4:05and he thinks Justice Roberts is working on it behind the scenes. I think the chief has to be very thoughtful about where he asserts himself, because he wants to manage the court, but he also doesn't want to alienate any of the justices. Jacobi is taking a global view. Now I should note that in other jurisdictions, such as Australia, my home country, we measure our arguments in days, not minutes, so it could be with us. Any changes to the format will be on display October 5th when the court starts a new term. Carrie Johnson, NPR News.