Select Page

November’s Argument Sketches

The justices heard arguments in some notable cases this month, from abortion to gun rights in just the first week. It’s been pretty exciting. The new seating arrangement for the press puts us directly behind arguing counsel; such an improvement after years of being sidelined into a cramped alcove behind two rows of reporters. That’s Nina Totenberg in the foreground, and you can just spy Joan Biskupic on the far right in red.

As usual, I’m late in posting these. I have an aversion to looking at my drawings once they’re done, at least for awhile. It’s always such a struggle, and there’s never enough time, that it’s hard to be satisfied. If that sounds like false modesty it’s just temporary . . . The drawings aren’t bad. I’m just trying to excuse my laziness in publishing them.

Trick or Treat, A New Court Returns to the Bench

On October first, at the investiture ceremony for Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the new Supreme Court, with the exception of Justice Kavanaugh had recently tested positive for COVID-19, assembled on the bench for the first time.

The new term began as usual on the first Monday in October but with Kavanaugh still absent from the bench but participating remotely by telephone.

Here are the sketches from October’s arguments:

By the second week of arguments Kavanaugh was back to participating in person.

Next Monday, November first,  the justices will hear arguments in two expedited cases on Texas’ new law, SB8, enforcing abortion restrictions by bounty, and on Wednesday comes a Second Amendment appeal of New York’s gun carry law. It promises to be an interesting term for the new Court.

The End Is Nigh . . .

. . . for a most unusual SCOTUS term. And, while I hate to admit it, it’s been kinda fun sketching at home from photos of lawyers arguing their case in more casual settings. It will be interesting to return to the courtroom, as expected, in the fall.

Here are the last sketches from this term, April’s arguments plus the one in early May. I’ll probably do a couple more banners between now and when the last opinion is announced. That’s it, I hope, till October in-person.

Amy M. Saharia for petitioners

Jeffrey Fisher, joined by students from Stanford’s Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, arguing on behalf of Michael Gary.

Daniel L. Geyser for petitioners

Robert N. Hochman for petitioner

Matthew M. Wolf for respondents

Aimee A. Feinberg, California Deputy Solicitor General

Derek L. Shafer for petitioners

 

Bradley N. Garcia, appointed by the Court

Peter D. Keisler for petitioners

Matthew W. Morrison for private respondents

Lisa S. Blatt for petitioner

Jeremy M. Feigenbaum, New Jersey State Solicitor

Andrew L. Adler for petitioner

The justices, all now fully vaccinated, recently sat for an official portrait. The SCOTUSblog banner above was based on that photo. Interestingly another photo taken at the same time shows a wider view of the room including a portrait of Chief Justice Roger Taney, author of the infamous Dred Scott opinion. I originally had included the Taney portrait — see below — but was persuaded that it might be confusing.

SCOTUS March Madness

Late as lately usual, here are some sketches from the March arguments which continue to be heard remotely by telephone. Just in time for the April sitting beginning Monday.

Joshua P. Thompson for petitioners

California Solicitor General Michael J. Mongan

Eric R. Henkel, appointed by the Court

Shay Dvoretzky for petitioner

Kannon K. Shanmugam for petitioners

Samuel Issacharoff for respondent

Jeffery L. Kessler for respondents

 

 

 

Very Few February Sketches

Other than the Arizona voting case it was a pretty quiet calendar for the SCOTUS February sitting. This month will be pretty much the same, but April looks to pick up the pace. And I’m getting fat and lazy.

Neal K. Katyal for respondent

David J. Zimmer for respondent

Jeffrey Fisher, with law students, arguing for petitioner

Samuel T. Harbourt, California Deputy Solicitor General

Amanda K. Rice, Court-appointed amicus in support of judgement below

Mark A. Perry arguing for Smith & Nephew, Inc. in Arthrex

Jessica R. Amunson for repondent Secretary Hobbs

Sarah M. Harris for petitioners

 

January SCOTUS Sketches – A Little Late

Fencing surrounds SCOTUS following mob attack on capitol.

January was a little crazy here in DC so maybe I’ll be forgiven for forgetting to post these sketches in a timely manner. Fewer cases than usual were on the calendar, and arguments continued to be heard remotely by telephone.

Paul W. Hughes for respondents

Andrew A. Pinson for respondents

Kristen K. Waggoner for petitioners

Joel R. Marcus arguing for FTC

Kannon K. Shanmugam for petitioners

Victor M. Sher for respondents