On the subject of frequent participants in Supreme Court cases, the case of California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. ANZ Securities comes to mind. This case from 2017 saw two regulars of Supreme Court advocacy, Tom Goldstein and Paul Clement, representing the petitioner CALPERS and respondent ANZ Securities respectively. The decision was a close 5-4, affirming the judgement of the lower court. The prominence of such ‘repeat player attorneys’ like Goldstein and Clement has especially increased as the Court’s docket has shrunk.
Those who have regularly appeared before the Court can often be found in the Solicitor General’s Office (OSG). Characteristics such as experience before the justices and top-notch legal aptitude are crucial in these roles, so much so that the Solicitor General is known as the “Tenth Justice.” In private practice, these attorneys are highly sought after and their departure from the OSG can often lead to high-level recruitment, as evidenced by the case of Michael Dreeben, who was quickly hired by O’Melveny and Myers after numerous appearances before the justices.
Looking at former Solicitors General who have had significant repeat experience in private practice, names like Seth Waxman, Gregory Garre, Donald Verrilli, and Ted Olson stand out. Other notable attorneys, like Dan Geyser and Peter Stris, have been successful in boutique appellate practice despite not being part of the OSG.
Interestingly, the echelon of Supreme Court practice is not filled exclusively with OSG attorneys. Lawyers from large firms and smaller appellate boutiques have also found a place. For example, Lisa Blatt, with experience both in the OSG and in large firms Arnold & Porter and Williams & Connolly, has argued 46 cases in the Supreme Court.
Data used to analyze the occurrence of repeat player attorneys was gathered from the Supreme Court’s website and from Oyez.org. Although the trend of repeat players could be seen as limiting opportunities for other attorneys, it is essential to consider that intimate familiarity with the justices gained from these repeated appearances often proves beneficial for the cases.