The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Oral Arguments at the Supreme Court with no spectators
Will SCOTUS adopt "social distancing"?
The Supreme Court chamber holds (by my count) about 200 people. Currently, the Court has twelve oral argument days remaining on the schedule. The Supreme Court very well may consider some form of "social distancing." That is, holding oral arguments without spectators. (The NBA is already moving in that direction.)
The Court could select minimum essential personnel. The Court would admit the arguing attorneys, and their co-counsel. Maybe a few journalists who could file pool reports. But no public seating. All bar admissions will be postponed. And the Court's exhibits and cafeteria (with a buffet) would be shut down. There is no reason to maintain the staff needed to handle an influx of guests if those guests are not admitted in.
Eugene has blogged that several courts have adopted closure rules. The Supreme Court very well may be next.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Considering the average age of the justices and the risks rising with age and other medical issues, probably a good idea.
See, proof of a Trump conspiracy! He just wants to nominate a few more justices.
Cancel them, decide on the briefs.
And Justice Thomas wins again...
Tightie whities, boxers, boxer briefs, or thongs?
Maybe they could clear the court except for participants and I don't know set up video cameras.? I though I heard they already have monitors in an overflow room.
Given the court's known hostility to cameras, this seems unlikely.
But if it happens, hopefully it becomes permanent. It's ridiculous, in this day and age, that we don't have cameras for SCOTUS oral arguments.
If Thomas asks a question in an empty auditorium, did he really speak?
They will probably try to make this permanent.
Yeah, what a great idea. The Court can show that it can be hysterically over reactionary like other institutions and at the same time restrict the view of its dealings to select members of our objective and responsible media. What the @#$# is going on? Is mental illness an affect of the Wuhan coronavirus? (yes Wuhan, that's where it originated)
Is this by any chance the same MKE who used to hang out on a certain NFC North-themed blog?
Just to forestall the nazi grammarians, yes I know it should be "effect"
If the court does do something like this, I wonder if they might also do something to make up for the reduction in public access. Iām not expecting cameras in the court or anything like that, but same day oral audio, perhaps?
Your intel is out of date, the NBA just cancelled the whole season.
The National Bar Association has a season?
Not now. š
Right on time. š
I was going to go to oral argument in Google v. Oracle on March 24 -- booked tickets out, splitting an Airbnb with another junkie (SCOTUS junkie! get your head out of the gutter), all ready to camp out overnight (with a third junkie to join) if needed.
This was to be a side trip for me out of Las Vegas, where I would visit as part of a long-distance cycling trip to visit family for Easter. And in Vegas I'd also catch a hockey game with my home team (such as the Red Wings are, these days).
But with DC in state of emergency, Congress ending public tours this week, SCOTUS seeming more likely than not to follow, the NBA suspending its season (and it seems unlikely the NHL wouldn't follow suit, in this safety-conscious era -- or at least play the game with no spectators), and all the family I'd be visiting over 60 (and one in assisted living aged 96 -- doing great for the age, but still fragile)...basically every rationale for the entire trip is crumbling in realtime. š
Hopefully if SCOTUS and the NHL both cancel, they'll do it today or tomorrow so I can adapt most easily. š
You've probably seen by now, but the NHL season is suspended.
Yeah, I'm really not surprised. (And SCOTUS too, for anyone who hasn't seen Josh's followup from today.)
I could still bike down to Texas and skip Vegas -- and I could leave a few days later if I chose to, so I don't have to decide immediately. But...yeah, if I'm being honest this entire trip is probably not happening now and I'll just be sheltering in place (to state it somewhat overdramatically).
(Well, SCOTUS isn't suspended -- yet -- but for my attendance purposes closed to the public is the same thing.)