'That’s Enough Frivolity': A Not so Funny Countdown of the Supreme Court’s Affordable Care Act Oral Arguments

39 Pages Posted: 14 Jun 2012 Last revised: 23 Jun 2012

Ryan A. Malphurs

Texas A&M University

L. Hailey Drescher

University of Kansas; University of Kansas

Date Written: June 6, 2012

Abstract

When the United States Supreme Court accepted petitions related to the Affordable Care Act, the Court extended oral arguments in an unprecedented fashion. We suggest the Court structured oral arguments in such a manner to achieve a comprehensive understanding regarding a pressing national and political issue. We studied the justices' interactions within oral arguments across the four cases, and disappointingly learned the justices took as less than fair approach when questioning parties. We provide readers and other scholars with both aggregate findings across cases and findings within individual cases in the appendices, along with a discussion of the most important behavior captured within our study.

Suggested Citation

Malphurs, Ryan A. and Drescher, L. Hailey, 'That’s Enough Frivolity': A Not so Funny Countdown of the Supreme Court’s Affordable Care Act Oral Arguments (June 6, 2012). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2079136 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2079136

Ryan A. Malphurs (Contact Author)

Texas A&M University ( email )

Langford Building A
798 Ross St.
College Station, TX 77843-3137
United States

L. Hailey Drescher

University of Kansas ( email )

1415
Lawrence, KS 66045
United States

University of Kansas ( email )

1450 Jayhawk Blvd.
Lawrence, KS 66045
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
302
Rank
80,628
Abstract Views
2,166