Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugee
I don't think the justices each go through that many briefs -- at least not until after the clerks have gone through them and written bench memos summarizing them. I suspect the briefs get split up among the clerks -- if not just among a single judge's clerks maybe among the clerks of a couple different justices who tend to think/rule alike.
Don't discount the value in getting a number of slightly different perspectives on the isues and case law. Sometimes the main parties are so into their own position, they don't do the best job in their briefs of helping the judge see how to get there. And sometimes the parties miss important cases in their briefs -- one would hope not so much at the Supremes level but they definitely do at the Court of Appeals level -- so more amicus briefs increases the chance of all the relevant cases being cited in at least one of the briefs.
And even if they don't say anything new, I suspect there is the idea that the more support each side can show for its position the more likely the judge will be swayed to that side.
|
did you clerk? it sounds like it, and if so where?
p.s. the "numbers of briefs" element can't phase them, can it? I could see who signed the same argument helping- like if Sidd and I signed onto the same position, but not raw numbers.
