Thursday Is The New Monday At SCOTUS

Historically, the Court issued opinions on Mondays after oral arguments concluded. But this Term, Thursday is the big day.

In the past, the Supreme Court followed a careful rhythm. You could predict, with a degree of certainty, when orders would drop and when opinions would be released. When oral arguments were scheduled, the Court would release orders on Monday, and opinions on Tuesday. As March turned to April, the Court would begin releasing opinions on Tuesday as well as Wednesday. However, in May, when oral arguments concluded, the Court would issue both opinions and orders on Mondays. That practice would continue until mid-June, when the Court would start issuing opinions on Mondays, Wednesdays, Thursdays, and on rare occasions, Fridays. You could set your watch to that timeline. Indeed, I would try to avoid air travel in June on Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday mornings.

The pandemic changed many things around, but the Monday handdown tradition continued, at least through May 2022. But this term, the Court seems to be experimenting. Oral argument concluded on April 26, 2023. And over the past two weeks, the Court has not reverted to the Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday hand-down. Rather, the Court is cramming all of the opinions on Thursdays. Indeed, the Court handed down four opinions on Thursday, May 11, and six opinions on Thursday, May 18. This seems to be the new practice.

Jacob Berlove, who was the champion of the inaugural season of FantasySCOTUS, flagged this issue on the SCOTUSBlog live-blog:

Why is the Court announcing decisions on Thursdays instead of Mondays? Pre-Covid, Monday was the day once arguments ended until they moved to multiple decision days.

I much prefer trickling out a few opinions on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. That timeline gives me more time to read and digest the decisions. But now I have to read six opinions totaling about 170 pages, in a single day. If nothing else, the press will have a harder time covering this much content at once. We are used to this torrent the last week in June, but not throughout May. On balance, the Court should go back to its old tradition. Unless making it harder for the press to cover cases is a feature, rather than a bug.

Comments

[ReaderY]

The Republic won’t end if the Supreme Court hands out opinions on Thursdays instead of Mondays. Life will go on.

[QuantumBoxCat]

Eh, on Monday, May 13, 1889 (the last day of the Oct. 1888 term) the Court issued 49 opinions, which I doubt were available for immediate release through its website.

That was back when the Court used to actually do work and every justice didn't feel the need to write a separate opinion in every case.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

But now I have to read six opinions totaling about 170 pages, in a single day.

No, you do not.

I had a law professor who performed an extended, pathetic, loud meltdown at the library circulation desk a few days before Christmas, when informed that an edition of Law Week had not arrived and therefore would not be available until after New Year’s Day (the law library closed for 10 days or so at the end of the year).

Law Week (or something similar; I haven’t paid attention to it in 40 years) published Supreme Court decisions on paper as released and at that time the mailed editions constituted the quickest way to get those decisions (pre-Internet). But this edition was late, a circumstance the professor was unequipped to handle. He demanded everything from having someone check the mail again — right now! — and having someone check at the university’s main mailroom — right now! — to demanding that the librarian instruct Law Week to deliver a copy directly to his home — tomorrow! — and contact the Court clerk to check on immediate delivery — to his house — options.

This went on for at least 20 minutes. At various points several librarians were involved, the counter was pounded, library materials were swept from the counter to the floor, the professor was hyperventilating, the professor was near tears, at least one librarian was near tears, one librarian was cowering behind another, the exchanges were so loud everyone on three floors was following the display, and several other faculty members tried, unsuccessfully, to calm the unhinged colleague, who could not handle the prospect of waiting a week or so to read the latest Supreme Court opinions.

I liked that professor. Took his classes more than once. But I learned on that day that he had no life beyond his Supreme Court obsession, that he possessed lousy judgment, and that he was severely inept at handling people and life. He genuinely believed he must read every Supreme Court decision RIGHT NOW!

That’s just sad, and an indication of a substandard life.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

One of our betters, I presume.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Federalist Society member.

[Commenter_XY]

So definitely, one of the betters. 🙂

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

A guy who nearly cried and pissed his pants because he couldn’t wait a few days to read Law Week. A guy who screamed at librarians and couldn’t understand why they wouldn’t agree to come to work over the holiday to provide special Law Week access to him. A guy with no life beyond reading court decisions.

Not a better. Not even an as-good.

[David Nieporent]

Making up stories is an even better indication of a substandard life.

[SRG]

Roberts, today, in Polselli v IRS

As an old joke goes: “I believe we should all pay taxes with a smile. I tried but they wanted cash.”

Brrrrmmmmtsh!

[The Margrave of Azilia]

So, today was just another manic Monday?

[bernard11]

Maybe Tuesday will be your good news day.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

"It's Thursday."

"I am, in fact. I think I'll have a Coke."

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Unless making it harder for the press to cover cases is a feature, rather than a bug.

Someone should try to get this guy a girlfriend.

Or a date.

Or a chance to sit near someone and call it a date.