The Return of “Conference Call”
In certain previous Terms, Tom has identified the group of cert. petitions that had a reasonable chance of being granted cert. for a column called “Conference Call” that ran in the Legal Times and other American Lawyer Media publications. “Conference Call” typically featured a detailed analysis of one petition of particular interest, along with a summary of the questions presented in all of the other noteworthy petitions. This Term will see the return of the regular publication of that column. “Conference Call” will run in the Legal Times (and other ALM publications) on the Monday before each Conference; grants and denials in these cases are typically announced on the next day that the Court is in session following the Conference. This Term’s first “Conference Call” appeared today in the Legal Times, and it can be found online here [registration req'd].
“Conference Call” in print will be similar to what it has been in past years, but this Term will see additional information regarding cert. petitions on SCOTUSblog. For instance, we will begin having the full-text of each noteworthy cert. petition available electronically for download so that you may find out more detail about any cases of particular interest; in fact, last week, we made the list of noteworthy petitions on the opening Conference list available (click here). (One side note regarding this feature: in order to help us post these cert. petitions as quickly as possible, if you are involved in the submission of a paid cert. petition to the Supreme Court, sending it electronically to jharrow [at] akingump.com as it is filed would be much appreciated.)
Along with the complete petitions in all cases that Tom has selected as reasonable candidates for cert., we are also going to make available scans of the cover page and questions presented for every paid petition that is filed with the Court starting with 06-1 and updated on a rolling basis (pro se petitions will not be included). The first set, featuring petitions from 06-1 to 06-219, is now available by clicking here.
We hope that the regular publication of the “Conference Call” column, the availability of complete petitions in every case with a reasonable chance of a cert. grant, and a scan of every paid petition’s “Questions Presented” page will allow you to keep track of the goings-on at the Supreme Court more closely than was previously available anywhere other than 1 First Street.
With respect to the noteworthy petitions, a link to the docket alongside the link to the petition would be convenient.
Comment by Norma Chase — September 25, 2006 @ 7:21 pm
You wrote that pro se petitions won’t be included, but I think you mean that IFP petitions won’t be included. Usually they are one and the same, but not all IFP petitions are pro se, and not all pro se petitions are IFP. The Court only distinguishes between IFP and paid petitions, not pro se and counsel-assisted.
Comment by blackdoggerel — September 25, 2006 @ 9:41 pm
Blackdoggerel understates the point. In criminal cases, it is very common for represented prisoners to appear in forma pauperis.
Comment by Kent Scheidegger — September 26, 2006 @ 11:19 am
Yes, the new features will enable you to keep close track of what is happening at the Court. They may, however, impair your ability to keep track of laundry, bills, client matters, and the like. Be warned.
Comment by Norma Chase — September 26, 2006 @ 12:38 pm
The Stern book advises against writing “Questions Presented” that read like a West headnote.
I read some of those that you kindly made available, and there were a couple — I’m not going to identify them — that read like a West headnote that mixed drugs and alcohol.
Comment by Norma Chase — October 1, 2006 @ 12:41 am