7 Supreme Court and State Attorneys General 7 Supreme Court and State Attorneys General
7.1 Introduction 7.1 Introduction
7.1.1 General Introduction 7.1.1 General Introduction
Other than the U.S. Solicitor General, state attorneys general are the most frequent participants in the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court is more likely to take AG cases and cases supported by AG amicus briefs than any private litigant. AGs participate in most of the major hot button cases, criminal cases, and federalism cases heard by the Court. Increasingly, state solicitors general play a significant role in the Court. Recently, criticisms have been leveled against AGs and their unique and prominent role in litigating before the Supreme Court.
7.1.2 Detailed Roadmap to Core Readings 7.1.2 Detailed Roadmap to Core Readings
The readings begin with the statistics surrounding the states' participation in the Supreme Court to see what an outsized role they play. You should consider whether that is a good thing or not. The compendium of articles (Where Are They Now?) show the promise and peril of being SG -- it could help you become a judge or derail your career. You should ask if either outcome makes sense.
The Newsom article shows why people really enjoy being SG and what an SG does. In the Newsom amicus brief in Roper, you should ask whether you find it persuasive regardless of whether you agree with the argument, and what makes this different from other legal briefs. The edited Roper decision tells us what the Court thought.
Several articles look at the unique role played by states in SCOTUS. First, Mass. v. EPA explains why the states have an outsized role in SCOTUS and you should ask whether that makes sense. The AG memo on nationwide injunctions addresses another flashpoint today. The remaining cases concern the shadow docket, which is heavily used by states. Should the role of states in SCOTUS change?