Are The Elite Supreme Court Advocates Better — Or Just Better Known?

Does the demand for their services reflect better advocacy?

Ed note: This article first appeared on The Juris Lab, a forum where “data analytics meets the law.”

Of 17,000 lawyers who sought certiorari over nearly a decade, Reuters found that just 66 accounted for almost half the petitions granted. Put another way, for every 200 lawyers who ask the Supreme Court to hear their cases, one of those lawyers is almost as likely to land a case on the docket as the other 199 lawyers combined.

Chief Justice John Roberts is only the most decorated member of this rarified crew. Others include former Solicitors General and appellate stars with resumes shimmering with elite schools, prestigious clerkships, and marquee law firms.

Clients clamor to have these wunderkinds represent them at the Supreme Court. But does the demand for their services reflect better advocacy? Or do their glittering reputations and easy banter with the Justices simply allow them to pick stronger cases and to mold arguments to the tastes of an equally elitist Court?

Just as important, even if these star advocates shine, aren’t others just as good?

To help answer these questions, I reviewed 1,122 merits-stage briefs from the 2019 Term. To reduce the effects of selection bias and the limitations of win-loss records, I obtained BriefCatch scores on each brief. The algorithms draw from an Artificial Intelligence analysis of thousands of first-rate legal documents and judicial opinions, all published well before the 2019 Term.  

I divided the 1,122 briefs into three groups based on the counsel of record: 

  • Elite (Ranked in Chambers & Partners, Law360, and so forth)
  • Office of the Solicitor General
  • Everyone Else

I then ranked each group by Reader Engagement Score, a weighted composite BriefCatch score developed through factor analysis:

As the results show, although both “Elite” and “Other” briefs obtained a broad range of scores, the “Elite” scores skew higher. On the one hand, only 20 percent of “Elite” briefs scored below the average for “Other.” But on the other hand, 25 percent of “Other” briefs scored above the average for “Elite” briefs, and 5 percent scored more than an entire standard deviation above that average.

Here are the “Not Elites But Just As Good or Better Than Elites?”

Briefs for the prevailing party:

Author Case Brief Short Brief (under 3500 words)?
Cendali, Dale M. Lucky Brand Dungarees Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group Inc. https://perma.cc/DH63-KQ23 No
Citron, Eric F. Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org Inc. https://perma.cc/3CAJ-CFXG No
Cohen, G. Ben Ramos v. Louisiana https://perma.cc/5GSC-UBYU No
Crouse, Toby Kansas v. Glover https://perma.cc/2LMW-Q6RG No
Knight, John A. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission https://perma.cc/46TT-8ERX No
Komer, Richard D. Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue https://perma.cc/DSQ8-NB5Y No
Levy, Michael A. Kelly v. United States https://perma.cc/C8DA-5BLZ No
Lin, Elbert County of Maui, Hawaii v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund https://perma.cc/ZFR5-MV4L No
Martinez, Roman Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants Inc. https://perma.cc/C84F-XJD3 No
Rassbach, Eric C. Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru; St. James School v. Biel https://perma.cc/8JNC-SZND No
Roth, Yaakov M. Kelly v. United States https://perma.cc/ED2B-9FMQ No
Roth, Yaakov M. Kelly v. United States https://perma.cc/3W54-TEDV No
Tu, Travis J. June Medical Services LLC v. Russo; Russo v. June Medical Services LLC https://perma.cc/3RW4-WABQ No
Zabell, Saul D. Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda https://perma.cc/K6PQ-WRWH No

 

Briefs for the non-prevailing party:

Author Case Brief Short Brief (under 3500 words)?
Bursch, John J. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission https://perma.cc/GB4T-AV73 No
Lessig, L. Lawrence Chiafalo v. Washington https://perma.cc/86KP-EPFD No
Schrup, Sarah O’Rourke Kahler v. Kansas https://perma.cc/Z976-9CPY No
Sekulow, Jay Alan Trump v. Vance https://perma.cc/YB54-DW2Q No
Summa, Richard M. Shular v. United States https://perma.cc/9AQF-EGQJ No
Vladeck, Stephen I. Hernandez v. Mesa https://perma.cc/B9W7-FQMQ No

Amicus briefs:

Author Case Brief Short Brief (under 3500 words)?
Barthold, Corbin K. Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian, et al. https://perma.cc/Amicus8X-KMTQ No
Bolinder, Eric R. Maine Community Health Options v. United States; Moda Health Plan, Inc. v. United States; Land of Lincoln Mutual Health Insurance Co. v. United States https://perma.cc/ECZ9-R6W6 Yes
Crespo, Andrew Manuel Kansas v. Glover https://perma.cc/W82Z-BRAY No
Dubinsky, Gregory. Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico v. Aurelius Investment, LLC, et al. https://perma.cc/Y8C7-L5CT Yes
Duncan, Dwight G. Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania; Trump v. Pennsylvania https://perma.cc/2FBS-QBBH Yes
Goodrich, Luke W. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York https://perma.cc/8Q8A-E6R3 Yes
Green, Tyler R. Kahler v. Kansas https://perma.cc/3VGG-NECV No
Green, Tyler R. McKinney v. Arizona https://perma.cc/MG2W-JLC7 No
Gura, Alan New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York https://perma.cc/5225-3Q6C No
Gutman, Benjamin Ramos v. Louisiana https://perma.cc/HB22-62AF No
Harris, Sarah M. Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru; St. James School v. Biel https://perma.cc/D6RV-SBNV No
Hawley, Josh June Medical Services LLC v. Russo; Russo v. June Medical Services LLC https://perma.cc/6VZ5-FNTK Yes
Klukowski, Kenneth A. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York https://perma.cc/R453-PVB6 No
Letter, Douglas N. Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau https://perma.cc/L8GE-6QLG No
LiMandri, Charles S. Bostock v. Clayton County; Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda https://perma.cc/5ZXE-PMAQ No
Loss-Eaton, Tobias S. Chiafalo v. Washington; Colorado Department of State v. Baca https://perma.cc/MN4X-N3BH No
Martinez, Judy Perry Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. https://perma.cc/ED3L-MH35 Yes
Masri, Lena F. Hernandez v. Mesa https://perma.cc/D56R-L5DT Yes
Matz, Joshua Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania; Trump v. Pennsylvania https://perma.cc/ND2S-F3U7 No
Michel, C.D. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York https://perma.cc/AUH5-EQHY No
Mizer, Benjamin C. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York https://perma.cc/Z8L6-MRNU No
Ramey, E. Travis New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York https://perma.cc/ZKC5-5BNC Yes
Robinson, David A. Bostock v. Clayton County; Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda; R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission https://perma.cc/8MW5-H62M No
Roth, Michael D. Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants Inc. https://perma.cc/C266-APTB No
Schauf, Zachary C. Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants Inc. https://perma.cc/DT8P-D6BA No
Sekulow, Jay Alan United States Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc. https://perma.cc/CN9D-8SCC No
Shapiro, Ilya Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California; Trump v. NAACP; McAleenan v. Vidal https://perma.cc/B2BS-RXLF No
Sherman, Paul M. Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants Inc. https://perma.cc/92MW-H6K9 Yes
Thompson, David H. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York https://perma.cc/67KF-HRLY No
Tseytlin, Misha Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants Inc. https://perma.cc/47AG-K6RD No
Volokh, Eugene United States v. Sineneng-Smith https://perma.cc/9RXB-BABG Yes
Wessler, Matthew W.H. Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. Jander https://perma.cc/8D5E-4ZSS Yes

BriefCatch scores are objective and rigorous, but they are still imperfect measures of writing prowess. Not to mention that clients ultimately care about results, not advocacy skill itself. That said, this long list of names suggests that expanding the official Supreme Court Bar could not only diversify representation but encourage some of the laggards in the reigning elite to up their brief-writing game.

Read more at The Juris Lab …