Does the Supreme Court Strategically Time The Handdown Of Decisions?

Are the biggest cases staggered in June to take advantage of newscycles?

As a general matter, the Supreme Court hands down opinions when they are ready. That opinions came at such a slow pace this term perhaps reflects the fact that the Justices were taking more time to write fewer opinions. Moreover, it is unsurprising that the biggest cases of the year will often take the longest. The affirmative action cases, for example, were argued on Halloween but came down on the penultimate day of the term. It took some time to muster together 240 pages of opinions!

Still, there is some conventional wisdom that the Court staggers the release of the biggest cases on the final week of the term. The Chief Justice, the thinking goes, follows some sort of strategy that considers how the decisions will play in the public sphere. If this conventional wisdom is correct, I can think of a few possible strategies. First, the Chief Justice may try to mix up the conservative and liberal results on a given day so the Court seems balanced. Second, the Court may try to cram in all conservative decisions on one day, and all liberal decisions on another. Third, the Court can save the most conservative rulings for the final day of the term, which this year came before a long Fourth of July weekend. That way, they will be buried in the press. All of these strategies rely on contestable marketing strategies, which I don't think any on person (let alone the Chief Justice) can understand.

But is there actually a strategy? Let's look at the big cases for June 2023:

• Friday, June 30 - 303 Creative, Biden v. Nebraska
• Thursday, June 29 - Groff, SFFA v. Harvard
• Tuesday, June 27 - Moore v. Harper
• Thursday, June 15 - Haaland v. Brackeen
• Thursday, June 8 - Allen v. Milligan

Arguably, the biggest "liberal" decisions--Brackeen and Milligan--came down on June 8 and 15. And Moore v. Harper, another quasi-liberal victory, was not saved for the final two days of the term. Until the morning of June 29, the Court was looking quite moderate this term. And then, bam! Affirmative action, compelled speech, and student loans in rapid succession. The Court took a final turn to the right on the way out the door before a long weekend. Why does this approach make strategic sense? If the Chief was trying to moderate things, he could have easily held Moore v. Harper for later in the week. Really, if the Chief was trying to manage the newscycle, he would have held onto Milligan till the final week to juxtapose Voting Rights with affirmative action. Everyone already forgot about the Alabama case by the end of June.

What about the timing of June 2022?

• Thursday, June 30 - WV v. EPA, Biden v. Texas
• Wednesday, June 29 - Castro-Huerta
• Monday, June 27 - Kennedy v. Bremerton School District
• Friday, June 24 - Dobbs
• Thursday, June 23 - Bruen, Berger v. NAACP
• Tuesday, June 21 - Carson

What was the strategy here? Well, the Friday Dobbs drop took everyone by surprise, as that blockbuster would usually be saved for the end of the term. But there does not seem to be any deliberate left-right staggering here. Then again, Red June went solid to the right.

What about the timing of June/July 2021?

• Friday, July 2 - Brnovich
• Thursday, July 1 - AFP v. Bonta
• Friday, June 25 - TransUnion v. Ramirez
• Wednesday, June 23 - Collins v. Yellen, Cedar Point Nursery, Mahanoy
• Monday, June 21 - Arthrex
• Thursday, June 17 - Fulton, California v. Texas

I don't see any obvious strategy for the staggering of opinions. Maybe the conventional wisdom is wrong, and the Court simply releases opinions when they are ready.

In any event, the final day of the term allowed the Chief Justice to send a clear message to the public in Biden v. Nebraska.

It has become a disturbing feature of some recent opinions to criticize the decisions with which they disagree as going beyond the proper role of the judiciary. Reasonable minds may disagree with our analysis—in fact, at least three do. See post, p. ___ (KAGAN, J., dissenting). We do not mistake this plainly heartfelt disagreement for disparagement. It is important that the public not be misled either. Any such misperception would be harmful to this institution and our country.

With his final words before summer break, the Chief Justice did what he did best--defend the Supreme Court.

Comments

[AmosArch]

Being against slave cake baking and racism makes you a raging conservative these days I guess.

[Sarcastr0]

THE ONLY THING I LOVE MORE THAN RACISM IS SLAVE CAKE BAKING, AS MARX WOULD HAVE WANTED!

[Krychek_2]

If you're a pregnant woman who can't get an abortion, your involuntary servitude lasts nine months, permanently changes your life, and has the capacity to kill you. If you're a baker who disapproves of gay weddings, your involuntary servitude lasts the hour it takes to bake and decorate the cake and you never have to think about it again. So, which form of involuntary servitude most upsets conservatives?

[BravoCharlieDelta]

If it only took an hour of thoughtless work, why would anyone seek out and pay specialists $500-$1000 to create one?

The fact that you somehow elevate your hurt feelings over the free will of others and the life of a child shows how wrong the APA was to remove your condition from the DSM.

That and all the data. I mean the data is probably way more powerful than your anecdote.

[Krychek_2]

What harm does the baker have besides hurt feelings? Why are his hurt feelings valid but mine aren’t?

I also don’t understand why people pay the ridiculous wedding prices that they do, but I also don’t see the relevance of it to this discussion. The point remains that the bakers harm is virtually non existent compared to the lifetime harm of a woman forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

If a guy is horny, why can't he rape a woman? Why are her feelings more important than his?

I also don’t understand why people pay the ridiculous wedding prices that they do, but I also don’t see the relevance of it to this discussion

It's relevant because it undermines your characterization that a specialty craftsman's work is no different than serving a soda at a lunch counter.

The point remains that the bakers harm is virtually non existent compared to the lifetime harm of a woman forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.

Just like that rape victim's emotions. She'll get over it. Perpetual blue balls can cause lasting physical damage.

[Krychek_2]

Well, for starters, rape includes a physical battery and a bodily penetration, which having to make a cake does not, and I can’t believe I’m actually having to explain that. The Queen is right; you’re just an idiot.

[bernard11]

If you’re a baker who disapproves of gay weddings, your involuntary servitude lasts the hour it takes to bake and decorate the cake and you never have to think about it again.

Plus, you get paid.

[EscherEnigma]

I see you're still confused on the kinds of services Lorie Smith provides.

[Bob from Ohio]

As pointed out last week, all the big Kennedy gay cases have the same anniversary date. Can't believe that wasn't planned for #2 and #3.

[EscherEnigma]

Unless you believe that the SCOTUS is rushing opinions at the end of the term, it's ridiculous to think that it's putting opinions out "when they're ready", rather then some other criteria.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

the final day of the term allowed the Chief Justice to send a clear message to the public

He tried, but the lead story of yesterday's Washington Post addressed reforming the Court (introducing some ethics rules, enlargement).

For conservatives, the path toward avoiding improvement of the Court's ethics practices and enlargement of its bench seems clear: Make intolerance, backwardness, and superstition more popular in America, and win most of the elections.

[Sarcastr0]

Lets care almost as much about this as whether white or Black is capitalized in an opinion!

[BravoCharlieDelta]

It’s White, you genociding racist.

You will not replace us.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

I wonder why he never got the bottom of the Dobbs leaker.

The answer to that is probably found in the same place the answers to the J6 pipe bomber, the J6 Fedsurrection videos, JFKs assasins, Epsteins client list, who dropped Hunters cocaine in the WH library, and Seth Richs murder answers lie.

[gVOR08]

Seems likely Robert's was hot to find the liberal clerk he assumed leaked it, but pulled the plug when investigation started to go somewhere entirely different.

There's someone else who has some known history of leaking, demonstrated in response to the pro publica fishing trip story that he had friends at WSJ, and came up with a schoolyard statement to the effect, "I didn't leak it. I know who did. It wasn't me. But I'm not saying who. But it wasn't me." And who, if proven to be the leaker, would create a scandal demanding the leaker's impeachment. Not probative. But geez.

[Jonathan Affleck]

Isn't it simpler to suggest that a really big important decision comes last because one or more justices might want to think longer about the case?

[The Turtle Dove]

Logically, it makes sense that the court would try to put the most controversial cases at the end of the term so that the half of the country riled up by them won't take the subsequent decisions of the term less seriously. And, from what I understand, the precision printing required by the operation is nothing to sneeze your nose at. Wild guess, but perhaps there's some extra proofing going on.

On a more pragmatic level, the day after indicting Burr for treason, Marshall CJ (though not as CJ) famously set out for a quick vacation in the Shenandoah mountains of Virginia. In his diary, something along the lines of "Yesterday, I indicted Burr for treason, and today I rode for the mountains."

Interestingly, with the advent of the printed reporter in early modern England, publication dates of cases began to get a bit more...fluid. Some decisions were attached to terms that had seen no trace of them. With the beginning of certain records comes the possibility of new ways of falsifying things.

Mr. D.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Which of those items do you have answers to?

[BravoCharlieDelta]

I wonder if there ever come a day where your mind masters tell you to be curious about unsolved political events.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

I don't understand the connection between White Erasure/White Genocide and the homosexual disease.

[grb]

Just when you think BCD can't be more a ranting freak, he one-ups himself....

[BravoCharlieDelta]

But I didn't. Care to make the connection between genocide and feelings?

[BravoCharlieDelta]

haha yeah only ranting freaks care about Epstein's client list and the J6 Pipe Bomber!

SO WACKY AND KWAZY!

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Flabbergasting zoppledoodles twirl in wibbly-wobbly merriment, whisking through luminescent marshmallow clouds. Jibber-jabbering crumpet monsters bounce gleefully on pogo sticks made of rainbow licorice, leaving trails of giggle sparks in their wake.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Whiffleflumps prance sideways while sprinkling confetti made of stardust, creating a symphony of color and joy. Tickled moonbeams pirouette around the treetops, whispering secrets to the twinkling fireflies.