Oral argument live blog for Wednesday, November 5

Empirical SCOTUS is a recurring series by Adam Feldman that looks at Supreme Court data, primarily in the form of opinions and oral arguments, to provide insights into the justices’ decision making and what we can expect from the court in the future.

The Supreme Court’s next two weeks of oral arguments are set to begin, and it will be telling to see if they resemble the court’s first round of oral arguments, which took place in October. Perhaps most interestingly, throughout these arguments, the justices were more interested in how cases get decided than in making sweeping new rules. We will see if this is an anomaly or a theme of this term. 

Please note that the views of outside contributors do not reflect the official opinions of SCOTUSblog or its staff.

Lawyers have long played an outsized role in American policymaking. Almost two-thirds of the delegates at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 were trained in the law, more than half of U.S. presidents have been lawyers, and even today half of current U.S. Senators were practicing attorneys. 

Updated on Oct. 31 at 8:42 a.m.

On Nov. 5, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a pair of challenges to President Donald Trump’s power to impose sweeping tariffs on virtually all goods imported into the United States. The economic stakes are massive, but the cases are also an important test of presidential power more broadly. 

Here’s a brief explainer on the issues in the cases, how they got to the court, and when the court is likely to act. 

On Tuesday, Nov. 4, in Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited Inc. v. Burton, the Supreme Court will consider a disagreement among the federal courts of appeals over whether there is a time limit for setting aside a judgment as void for lack of personal jurisdiction – that is, because the trial court did not have the authority to exercise power over the litigant.

The arguments next Tuesday in The Hain Celestial Group v Palmquist probably will sound like a session of a first-year civil procedure course, as the Supreme Court will consider what to do when a trial court improperly dismisses a defendant who would have deprived it of jurisdiction to hear the case.