This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-teleconference-hearings-bookingcom/2020/05/03/f5902bd6-8d76-11ea-a9c0-73b93422d691_story.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=wp_homepage
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court takes modest but historic step with teleconference hearings | Supreme Court takes modest but historic step with teleconference hearings |
| (about 1 hour later) | |
| The Supreme Court’s historic first teleconference oral argument went off relatively smoothly Monday, and its orderly round of questioning by the justices was enough to entice Justice Clarence Thomas, who usually asks no questions at hearings. | The Supreme Court’s historic first teleconference oral argument went off relatively smoothly Monday, and its orderly round of questioning by the justices was enough to entice Justice Clarence Thomas, who usually asks no questions at hearings. |
| Forced from gathering in their grand courtroom because of the threats presented by the coronavirus, the justices spent a little more than an hour on a trademark dispute case, the outcome of which will not enter the court’s vault of landmark decisions. | Forced from gathering in their grand courtroom because of the threats presented by the coronavirus, the justices spent a little more than an hour on a trademark dispute case, the outcome of which will not enter the court’s vault of landmark decisions. |
| Supreme Court announces remote hearings for first time | Supreme Court announces remote hearings for first time |
| But because the arguments were broadly broadcast by media outlets, it made history as the first time the public could listen in remotely as advocates made their cases. The court doesn’t allow cameras in its courtroom, has never allowed simultaneous audio broadcasts and only rarely even allows tapes of its hearings to be released the same day. | |
| A transcript and tape of the proceedings also will be posted on the court’s website supremecourt.gov. | |
| Instead of the usual free-for-all, the justices asked questions in order of seniority, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. going first. | Instead of the usual free-for-all, the justices asked questions in order of seniority, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. going first. |
| Justice Sonia Sotomayor apparently became the first justice to forget to unmute her audio. There was silence when Roberts called on her. “Justice Sotomayor? Justice Sotomayor?” he called. | Justice Sonia Sotomayor apparently became the first justice to forget to unmute her audio. There was silence when Roberts called on her. “Justice Sotomayor? Justice Sotomayor?” he called. |
| Supreme Court hearings will offer all the grandeur of working from home | Supreme Court hearings will offer all the grandeur of working from home |
| “I’m sorry, chief,” she eventually answered. | “I’m sorry, chief,” she eventually answered. |
| At another point, Justice Stephen G. Breyer’s audio turned into an indecipherable squawk. But it was quickly corrected. | At another point, Justice Stephen G. Breyer’s audio turned into an indecipherable squawk. But it was quickly corrected. |
| The day’s surprise was Thomas, who at times on the court has gone a decade without asking a question. He has given various reasons such as that he believes the time should be spent on lawyers presenting their cases and that his colleagues ask too many questions. | The day’s surprise was Thomas, who at times on the court has gone a decade without asking a question. He has given various reasons such as that he believes the time should be spent on lawyers presenting their cases and that his colleagues ask too many questions. |
| But, coming just after Roberts in the questioning order, he asked somewhat technical legal questions of both advocates. | But, coming just after Roberts in the questioning order, he asked somewhat technical legal questions of both advocates. |
| Washington lawyer Lisa S. Blatt argued on behalf of Booking.com from her dining room in Northwest Washington. Justice Department lawyer Erica Ross was at a speakerphone in the solicitor general’s conference room. | |
| Blatt made the only oblique reference to the coronavirus pandemic that caused the change to the court’s routine. The justices canceled arguments scheduled for March and April and will hold teleconference hearings on some of the cases this week and the next. | Blatt made the only oblique reference to the coronavirus pandemic that caused the change to the court’s routine. The justices canceled arguments scheduled for March and April and will hold teleconference hearings on some of the cases this week and the next. |
| Referencing how consumers use websites, Blatt told the justices that she had been searching grocery and hardware store websites for toilet paper, and using food delivery services as well. | Referencing how consumers use websites, Blatt told the justices that she had been searching grocery and hardware store websites for toilet paper, and using food delivery services as well. |
| Supreme Court oral arguments bear little resemblance to courtroom dramas as seen on television. The rhetoric is legalistic, relying heavily on the court’s precedents. Those who have not studied the case beforehand often have trouble following the conversation. | Supreme Court oral arguments bear little resemblance to courtroom dramas as seen on television. The rhetoric is legalistic, relying heavily on the court’s precedents. Those who have not studied the case beforehand often have trouble following the conversation. |
| Monday’s argument ran about 15 minutes longer than the usual hour, and at one point, Roberts told Ross to “take a minute to wrap up,” something he normally would not do. | Monday’s argument ran about 15 minutes longer than the usual hour, and at one point, Roberts told Ross to “take a minute to wrap up,” something he normally would not do. |
| Like most of their cases, the trademark dispute did not present the court with the kind of issue that displays its ideological split. That may change later this week, when the justices again consider the contraceptive requirement in the Affordable Care Act. Next week, it will consider President Trump’s battle to keep his financial records from being turned over to congressional committees and a New York prosecutor. | Like most of their cases, the trademark dispute did not present the court with the kind of issue that displays its ideological split. That may change later this week, when the justices again consider the contraceptive requirement in the Affordable Care Act. Next week, it will consider President Trump’s battle to keep his financial records from being turned over to congressional committees and a New York prosecutor. |
| In Monday’s case, the Patent and Trademark Office was appealing a lower court decision that said it was wrong not to allow Booking.com to register its trademark. The office said a generic word such as “booking” does not qualify by simply adding “.com.” | |
| The justices alternately questioned Ross about whether she was relying on a court precedent made irrelevant by the Internet, and wanted Blatt to explain how a decision in her favor would not allow companies to monopolize a concept such as booking hotel rooms. | The justices alternately questioned Ross about whether she was relying on a court precedent made irrelevant by the Internet, and wanted Blatt to explain how a decision in her favor would not allow companies to monopolize a concept such as booking hotel rooms. |
| The case is U.S. Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com. | The case is U.S. Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com. |