Today’s Transcripts

Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007 3:42 pm | Ben Winograd | Print This Post

The transcript of today’s oral argument in Gall v. United States (06-7949) is now available here.

The transcript of today’s oral argument in Kimbrough v. United States (06-6330) is now available here.



4 Comments »



  1. It appears to me that ChJ Roberts extended Jeff Green’s argument time in Gall by three minutes, one to sum up his principal argument and two extra on rebuttal. He appears to have done this in recognition that the Court’s pattern of questioning had almost entirely prevented Jeff from making his argument on the Question Presented. Are such extensions of argument time a new practice under the new Chief? Has this happened before in the new regime? I’m fairly sure that Rehnquist would never had done the same, am I right? What about prior Chiefs?

    Comment by Peter Goldberger — October 3, 2007 @ 1:01 pm

  2. I can’t answer the question about historical Chiefs, but I remember reading a transcript from OT2006 in which Roberts gave tons of extra time (which wound up being 10 to 15 minutes more) because the Court members had, in Roberts viewed, really gone far astray. I’ll try and find the transcript and link it here.

    Comment by David Huberman — October 3, 2007 @ 1:18 pm

  3. I was very wrong about the 10 to 15 minutes recollection.

    The primary example I was thinking of earlier was in the Guam case, Limtiaco. v. Camacho. Seth Waxman argues on behalf of the AG of Guam as the petitioner. On page 23 of the Alderson transcript with time running out, Waxman asks for a minute to assert an argument. On page 24, Roberts responds, quoting, “CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Now Mr. Waxman, we’ve taken a fair amount of your time before you got to the merits. So we’ll give you a couple of minutes for rebuttal. Why don’t you answer that.” Waxman then continues, but only for a short argument (maybe 1 or 2 minutes). The Chief then gives Waxman 3 minutes of rebuttal time on page 52.

    http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/06-116.pdf

    In Panetti v. Quarterman, the Chief gave the petitioner’s counsel 2 extra minutes of rebuttal time. Quoting, “CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr. Cruz. Mr. Wiercioch, your rebuttal time was used up but not primarily by you. If you want to take two minutes for rebuttal?”

    Comment by David Huberman — October 3, 2007 @ 2:02 pm

  4. I think it’s only fair that extra time be given when the other court members had used up counsel’s time to address side issues that are not directly relevant to the question that the cert was granted.

    I recall Justice Stevens being pretty relax on the time limit when he chaired during Rehnquist’s illness.

    As long as it’s done fairly, i don’t see a problem with this.

    Comment by Chee Foong Chew — October 3, 2007 @ 2:04 pm

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.