Dan Epps

Right. And as the merits cases go down also, it may be that Anything they can get on the merits docket, it's like, oh, good, this will justify our April.

I guess that's right. Also, so my understanding, though, is that the way it works is it requires five to summary reverse.

I guess that's right. Also, so my understanding, though, is that the way it works is it requires five to summary reverse.

except that four can grant and so if the four if it's five to four summary reverse and the four want to put the majority through oral argument they can they can force that but it's not that it takes you know it's not that it says takes five votes to do the summary reversal and then it takes six votes to also stop having oral argument if that's what you want to do

except that four can grant and so if the four if it's five to four summary reverse and the four want to put the majority through oral argument they can they can force that but it's not that it takes you know it's not that it says takes five votes to do the summary reversal and then it takes six votes to also stop having oral argument if that's what you want to do

Yeah.

Yeah.

I mean, I understand Justice Lita said that. I'm just not sure he's totally being accurate about his own rules.

I mean, I understand Justice Lita said that. I'm just not sure he's totally being accurate about his own rules.

Okay. but I do think it's a natural side effect of the four to grant rule that you could I mean so because if you have five to some earlier verse and the four say fine we're going to make you sit through the oral argument and the five are like oh that's a pain but it's sort of annoying for everybody you could see how then you would

Okay. but I do think it's a natural side effect of the four to grant rule that you could I mean so because if you have five to some earlier verse and the four say fine we're going to make you sit through the oral argument and the five are like oh that's a pain but it's sort of annoying for everybody you could see how then you would

I guess what I mean is you could see how it would emerge as an equilibrium, that the four – it's sort of like a chicken. The four would – their preference is to deny, but they can't do that, so they punish the majority by making them – Sit through an argument in a tedious case that they regard as backbound. Those arguments are now like three hours long. And there's no time limits anymore.

I guess what I mean is you could see how it would emerge as an equilibrium, that the four – it's sort of like a chicken. The four would – their preference is to deny, but they can't do that, so they punish the majority by making them – Sit through an argument in a tedious case that they regard as backbound. Those arguments are now like three hours long. And there's no time limits anymore.

Sufficiently waste everybody's time if you're the majority, but then as the majority, you might say, fine, we will just agree as a matter of custom, not to usually summarily reverse the only five. because we recognize that then we'll have to sit through the argument and that's a waste of time. That's possible.

Sufficiently waste everybody's time if you're the majority, but then as the majority, you might say, fine, we will just agree as a matter of custom, not to usually summarily reverse the only five. because we recognize that then we'll have to sit through the argument and that's a waste of time. That's possible.

It is different. I mean, they were longer in the 19th century.

It is different. I mean, they were longer in the 19th century.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah. I mean, I think it's – that's my impression as well. I'm not sure exactly what I'd compare it to. I do think the number of really terrible advocates has gone down.