Interesting, but not terribly surprising, that the Governor and the R.I. Attorney General would have forfeited oral argument rather than allow Joe Larisa to make the argument; or at least, that Larisa believed them. As Justice Thomas said recently, nine times out of ten, oral argument doesn’t change his mind, but he did say a party can lose a case at oral argument. And since the Supreme Court granted cert on Rhode Island’s petitions, it is their case to lose at this point. So forfeiting oral argument might have made sense, strategically. Who knows….
From ProJo:
***The drama began at 11 a.m. when a court clerk placed a conference call to Larisa, assistant solicitor for Indian affairs for Charlestown; Theodore B. Olson, a prominent Washington, D.C., lawyer, and representatives of Governor Carcieri and Attorney General Patrick C. Lynch. The clerk said that the justices of the nation’s highest court had refused Larisa’s last-minute emergency motion to help resolve the dispute. The parties would have to decide for themselves whether Larisa or Olson –– the choice of the governor and the attorney general –– got to argue the case.
Turtle Talk 