39 Pages Posted: 14 Jun 2012 Last revised: 23 Jun 2012
Date Written: June 6, 2012
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: 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