Alito and Kagan Will Face House Members at Supreme Court Budget Hearing
For years, the court's budget hearing was a major event, not because of budget minutiae but because it fostered a rare unscripted dialogue between the legislative and judicial branches.
March 01, 2019 at 11:54 AM
3 minute read
For the first time since 2015, two Supreme Court justices next week will go before a U.S. House of Representatives committee hearing to answer questions about the court's budget, an occasion that members of Congress have used in the past to raise a range of other issues.
Justices Samuel Alito Jr. and Elena Kagan will represent the court at the hearing March 7 before the House Appropriations subcommittee on financial services and general government. There was no reason given for why Alito and Kagan are attending, but the court itself has a budget committee, and they are likely to be members.
The House subcommittee is headed by Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Illinois, who has long pushed for Supreme Court transparency, including allowing cameras in the court. Quigley did not immediately respond to a call for comment, but the resumption of public hearings for the Supreme Court's budget may be chalked up to the House coming under Democratic control in January. Quigley was ranking member of the committee before this year.
Evan Hollander, spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee, said in a statement:
“While a public hearing has not occurred in recent years, the Appropriations Committee is pleased that Justices Alito and Kagan will appear before the Financial Services and General Government subcommittee next week. Hearing from witnesses about budget requests is a key function of the Appropriations Committee, and we look forward to resuming this important practice with the Supreme Court.”
For years, the court's budget hearing was a major event, not because of budget minutiae but because it fostered a rare unscripted dialogue between the legislative and judicial branches on issues ranging from recusal policies to the dearth of minority law clerks.
But the hearings were called off starting in 2016, the result of purported scheduling conflicts. In 2017, Justices Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer met with the subcommittee in private.
“The Supreme Court budget hearing had been one of the few times all year in which Americans could see the justices with their own eyes and not have to rely on outmoded means, like courtroom sketches, to trust that these public servants were, in fact, serving,” said Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, which advocates for Supreme Court transparency.
Roth added: “It's unfortunate that this practice went underground for three years, but I'm pleased that the justices will return to public view next week. After all, the high court receives about $100 million of our money each year. It would be nice to learn how it plans to spend it.”
|Read more:
'Hard to Predict' Court Dynamics Sans Swing Justice, Kagan Says
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 All3rd Circuit Strikes Down NLRB’s Monetary Remedies for Fired Starbucks Workers
Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
3 minute readA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Be Comfortable Being Uncomfortable': Pearls of Wisdom From 2024 GC Q&As
- 2The New Frontier in Legal Compliance: Privacy, Security, and Information Governance for Law Firms
- 3North Carolina Courts Switch to Digital, Face Extreme Weather in 2024
- 4It’s Happening Faster than Anyone Thought
- 5Mootness and Ethics: Meeting the Client’s Objectives
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