Alan B. Morrison
93 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. Arguendo 1
This Essay examines nine cases that the Court decided—many of them unanimously—and asks some rather mundane questions. Did the decision produce a winner and a loser, or was the outcome still unclear? Did the Court reach a conclusion where the record was fully developed? Did the Court order full briefing and oral argument when it should have been clear that summary disposition would have been the better course? Did the Court grant review on one question while passing on another seemingly antecedent question that would have provided much needed guidance to the lower courts? If the Court decided a significant issue, did it finish the job or leave part of the case up in the air?
The ultimate question that this Essay asks is whether the Court is doing its job properly in the routine nonideological cases, as well as in some very significant cases, too. This Essay concludes there is a potentially serious question as to whether the Court is paying sufficient attention to the details of a number of cases that do not make headlines—and in some instances, those that do—both when review is granted and at the final disposition stage.
