supreme court?

Question

Is it true that whatever you file in the Supreme Court goes to an attorney first and he decides whether a supreme court justice should look at the case? How experienced are these attorneys and can I ask for a supreme court justice to decide on my case instead of the attorney. I know thousands of cases go through every day,, I just do not have any confidence in the attorney, if they do decide whether the justice should look at the case, decide on my well-being. I would rather a supreme court justice decide. What do you think?.

Answer 1

You don't file directly with the justices. In fact, although individuals can submit a plea to the Supreme Court, almost none of them are ever seen by a justice. Remember that the usual role for this court is to review decisions of other courts, and as such the appeals are handled by attorneys.

The pleas arriving at the Supreme Court are reviewed by Clerks to the Justices. A summary of those that meet the requirements is laid before a Justice, and he/she decides whether it should be persued further within the system.

Answer 2

OK, so you want your case reviewed by the SCOTUS?

Remember that they handle only real judicial cases, COURT cases. They don't examine moot/theoretical questions, or issue interpretations or advice outside of actual cases.

Second, unless you're a minister (the kind at the head of a US gov department, not those in church), ambassador, consul, or other VIP defined in Art III of the Constitution, they'll hear your case only as a last appeal, after it has gone through initial trial, first appeal, and (unless it's a federal court case) State supreme Court appeal. If you've not yet gone through all this, and by then you should know better than ask here, don't even bother thinking of them. The number of cases they can even hear that has not gone through all the hoops is tiny,

Third... Well, you'll have to present the case to them. I guess that's where your question really comes in. I'm not sure of the process, but once a case has exhausted all other appeals, petitioning the SC can be done... I suspect that your lawyer (or yourself, but if you go that far, it's pretty sure you'll have a lawyer) will need to enlist the help of a specialist. That may be what you think about attorneys revieewing the case, because, unless you're able and willing to foot very high costs, convincing one to take and prepare your case may be difficult. When your brief is ready, it will be presented to the court, their clerks will review it, and based on the review, the judges will decide whether they find a reason to hear the case in full. If your case doesn't pass muster then, forget it, it's done.

To get a chance of being heard by the court, your case should present a specific legal problem that the court should have a reason to hear, such as the laws enforced by the judges going against the constitution or violating your basic rights in some manner. It should also be something new. The Supreme Court MAKES jurisprudence, if it's an already established kind of problem, then just get a good attorney to have the case law enforced.

Now, if you get to the stage of getting that brief made, in essence, whether to hear your case WILL be decided by the justices, since they vote themselves on what cases to take... what you'll need to of the line attorneys for is to frame the matter in a way that will show just what kind of imortant and interesting problem it is that they must tackle it.

So you SHALL need attorneys to get there, and they'll review your case before taking it, so it better have a chance to stand if they are to take it, but given the boost to an attorney's reputation (ando checkbonk) it is to get a case there, I guess they'll be eager to take it, if it is good... listen to them, and I hope your pockets are very deep indeed.

Answer 3

John is right, with these caveats --
Are you talking about a state supreme court or the U.S. Supreme Court? If it's the latter, each justice has (very, very bright) law clerks (who have usually been out of law school for may 2-3 years, oftentimes as clerks for lower court judges) who help review petitions to hear cases. All of the justices except for Justice Stevens participate in the "cert pool" -- where groups of clerks review the cases to see if the petition to be heard should be granted. Thus, it's just a few of the 9 justices' clerks making this determination. Of course, the justices make the final determination, but the recommendation of the cert pool is quite important.

If you're talking about a state supreme court, it will really depend upon the state and their workload. In most states, the justices' clerks will review the case and provide a recommendation whether it should be granted. But, in smaller states, the justices may know about important cases (because they'd read about them when the intermediate court of appeals handles them) so have an idea as to what they review.
Trying to do anything special (like sending a letter to the justice) would backfire -- you'd probably be treated as a "crazy" and given even less credence. Just make sure your moving papers are quality. And remember that most supreme courts (state or federal) hear only a very very small percentage of the cases that are petitioned to be heard, so don't be disappointed if you're not chosen.

Good luck.

Answer 4

It is true that the Supreme Court has attorneys (they're called law clerks) who review the thousands and thousands of petitions they receive. And you do NOT have the right to have the Supreme Court treat y our case any differently than everyone else's.
When you talk about "my case", are you speaking hypothetically? Do you know that a case has to go through several levels of appeal in lower courts, usually taking years and years, before a lawyer can ask the Supreme Court to take your case? The way you talk about re-writing the rules of the Supreme Court to fit your own whims, it just sounds bizarre, as if you haven't any experience with the legal system.

Answer 5

I think you're asking for the impossible.

First - working for the Supreme Court is a high honor. It doesn't go to just anyone who's passed the bar exam and a warm body test. You have to have very, very good skills and be very good at what you do to be considered for the job.

Second - this system of review, if it's how you describe it, probably evolved because the justices don't have time to sort through the thousands of cases that are submitted to the court each year, and still do their job well. What you are asking is for them to set aside a process that has worked well for them for probably many years, just because you think your case is the most important thing they'll see this year. I'd bet my lunch money that most of the other people involved in those thousands of cases think the same as you.

Answer 6

The justices have law clerks who are attorneys. They are there to research, review pleadings, make recommendations and help write opinions. The ultimate decision is made by the justice.