Get Ready for an 8-Justice Supreme Court, as Kavanaugh Controversy Persists
“We all do the math. Four out of eight is harder than four out of nine. It will slow down the pace of grants. Maybe some people think that's a good thing, but Supreme Court practitioners don't,” says Kirkland & Ellis partner Paul Clement.
September 19, 2018 at 01:30 PM
5 minute read
No matter how the fast-breaking developments surrounding Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation unfold, it is sinking in among Supreme Court advocates and scholars that a new term will almost certainly begin on Oct. 1 with eight justices, not nine, on the bench.
“There is probably no way that anyone will be occupying Justice Kennedy's seat on the first Monday in October,” said John Yoo, professor at UC Berkeley School of Law, a former general counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee and former clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas.
At a Washington Legal Foundation preview of the upcoming term on Tuesday, Yoo said that even if the reopened Senate Judiciary Committee hearing set for Sept. 24 takes place, the earliest the committee could vote is Sept. 27, followed by 30 hours or more of Senate floor debate. Lawyers for Kavanaugh's accusers are demanding an FBI investigation before any public testimony, potentially delaying Monday's hearing. Kavanaugh has denied any wrongdoing.
After several days of such debate, Yoo surmised, the earliest a full Senate confirmation vote could take place would be Oct. 4—after the court's first argument session of the term is over. The last time the court began a term with only eight justices was in 2016, after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia and before Justice Neil Gorsuch was seated in April 2017. The refusal of Republican senators to act on Merrick Garland's nomination kept the court at eight justices.
The timeline sketched out by Yoo means that six oral arguments in October on issues ranging from the Endangered Species Act to the death penalty, arbitration and property rights would likely be decided by eight justices, raising the specter of 4-4 ties. In that case, the lower court ruling is affirmed.
No ironclad rule prohibits a new justice from voting on a case that was argued before he or she joined the court, but the long-standing tradition is that the tie would stand or the case would be reargued when a ninth justice arrives.
Covington & Burling partner Beth Brinkmann, speaking at the same event, also noted that with an eight-member court, the justices may “try to avoid affirming by 4-4” by crafting narrow rulings that would attract more than four votes, or else by dismissing the cases altogether.
The justices have said they followed the practice during the long eight-justice period after Scalia's death. In 2016, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. said, “I try to achieve as much consensus as I can. … I think we spend a fair amount of time—maybe a little more than others in the past—talking about things, talking them out.” Justice Elena Kagan also stated at the time, “I think we always work hard to reach agreement, but I think we're especially concerned about that now.”
The delay in full membership on the court also has consequences for advocates asking the court to grant certiorari, especially at the beginning of the term when they consider hundreds of petitions filed during the summer recess. Four votes are needed to grant certiorari.
“We all do the math. Four out of eight is harder than four out of nine. It will slow down the pace of grants. Maybe some people think that's a good thing, but Supreme Court practitioners don't,” Kirkland & Ellis partner Paul Clement said Monday at a Georgetown University Law Center event previewing the upcoming term.
That kind of delay could also impact the court's docket later in the term. “There is real pressure this time of year at the court to fill [the court's] calendar” for January and beyond, said Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partner Nicole Saharsky.
Williams & Connolly partner Kannon Shanmugam said a prolonged vacancy “may affect which cases the court grants, not how many.” The justices, as they did after Scalia's death, may seek out cases that can be decided “by a clear margin,” he said, rather than knotty cases that could end in unproductive ties.
And what happens if Kavanaugh's nomination is withdrawn? Berkeley's Yoo said that in such a scenario, the vetting of a new nominee would start from scratch, while Senate Democrats might “throw any wrench” into the process, possibly trying to delay confirmation until after a new Senate is convened.
But even if President Donald Trump picks a nominee who moves quickly through the process, Yoo said it would be difficult to have a nominee confirmed and sworn in before the end of the year, which would mean that three of the court's seven argument cycles this term will take place before eight justices.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All6th Circuit Judges Spar Over Constitutionality of Ohio’s Ballot Initiative Procedures
Amazon, SpaceX Press Constitutional Challenges to NLRB at 5th Circuit
Will the 9th Circuit Still be Center Stage in Trump Policy Challenges?
11th Circuit Revives Project Veritas' Defamation Lawsuit Against CNN
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250