Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. has served in the White House, been a top partner at Jenner & Block, earned degrees from Yale and Columbia Law, and clerked on the Supreme Court. Someone with those credentials doesn’t have too many bad days, making it all the more unfortunate that he seemed off his game during the highest-profile moment of his career–his Supreme Court argument in favor of health-care reform. One headline proclaimed Verrilli’s presentation “the worst Supreme Court argument of all time.” Other court watchers used descriptions such as “train wreck” and “disaster.” Sure, the solicitor general got off to a rocky start and seemed nervous, but in the long history of the high court, was his performance really that awful?
“It clearly wasn’t the worst argument–unprepared practitioners and state attorneys general have laid many eggs during oral argument,” says Lucas Powe, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law and a leading Supreme Court historian. Still, Powe adds, “I am unaware of an SG ever doing so poorly.”
David Garrow, a high-court historian and professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, says it “may well be fair” to characterize Verrilli’s argument as in the “bottom 20 percent” of performances by lawyers from the solicitor general’s office. But Garrow also recalls, “During the brief time Thurgood Marshall was solicitor general, before he became a justice, he had some mediocre days.”
It wasn’t the first time a lawyer arguing a landmark case before the justices stumbled. Deputy solicitor general Malcolm Stewart faltered during the Citizens United campaign-finance case in 2009. While arguing for a legal restriction on political spending by corporations, he wound up saying the law could also, in some circumstances, criminalize the publication of books–not exactly a popular idea. In the famous Roe v. Wade, Jay Floyd, the assistant state attorney general from Texas arguing in favor of an abortion ban, opened with a bad joke that was poorly received by the justices, and he struggled for the remainder of his time. Floyd lost. One thing in his favor–there was no Twitter or blogosphere in 1971. Verrilli isn’t so lucky.
This article appears in the May 2012 issue of The Washingtonian.
The Biggest Bomb?
The solicitor general was slammed for his “train wreck” of a Supreme Court argument. But there have been worse.
Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. has served in the White House, been a top partner at Jenner & Block, earned degrees from Yale and Columbia Law, and clerked on the Supreme Court. Someone with those credentials doesn’t have too many bad days, making it all the more unfortunate that he seemed off his game during the highest-profile moment of his career–his Supreme Court argument in favor of health-care reform. One headline proclaimed Verrilli’s presentation “the worst Supreme Court argument of all time.” Other court watchers used descriptions such as “train wreck” and “disaster.” Sure, the solicitor general got off to a rocky start and seemed nervous, but in the long history of the high court, was his performance really that awful?
“It clearly wasn’t the worst argument–unprepared practitioners and state attorneys general have laid many eggs during oral argument,” says Lucas Powe, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law and a leading Supreme Court historian. Still, Powe adds, “I am unaware of an SG ever doing so poorly.”
David Garrow, a high-court historian and professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, says it “may well be fair” to characterize Verrilli’s argument as in the “bottom 20 percent” of performances by lawyers from the solicitor general’s office. But Garrow also recalls, “During the brief time Thurgood Marshall was solicitor general, before he became a justice, he had some mediocre days.”
It wasn’t the first time a lawyer arguing a landmark case before the justices stumbled. Deputy solicitor general Malcolm Stewart faltered during the Citizens United campaign-finance case in 2009. While arguing for a legal restriction on political spending by corporations, he wound up saying the law could also, in some circumstances, criminalize the publication of books–not exactly a popular idea. In the famous Roe v. Wade, Jay Floyd, the assistant state attorney general from Texas arguing in favor of an abortion ban, opened with a bad joke that was poorly received by the justices, and he struggled for the remainder of his time. Floyd lost. One thing in his favor–there was no Twitter or blogosphere in 1971. Verrilli isn’t so lucky.
This article appears in the May 2012 issue of The Washingtonian.
Marisa M. Kashino joined Washingtonian in 2009 and was a senior editor until 2022.
Most Popular in News & Politics
The Army Says It Will Pay for Any Road Damage From DC’s Military Parade
The Latest on the June 14 Trump Military Parade in DC
Metrorail Will Soon Free You From the Tyranny of the SmarTrip Card
Washington DC’s 500 Most Influential People of 2025
Jeanine Pirro Wants Taxpayers to Fund Her Bottled Water
Washingtonian Magazine
June Issue: Pride Guide
View IssueSubscribe
Follow Us on Social
Follow Us on Social
Related
Kings Dominion’s Wild New Coaster Takes Flight in Virginia
What’s the Deal With “Republican Makeup”?
DC Might Be Getting a Watergate Museum
DC-Area Universities Are Offering Trump Classes This Fall
More from News & Politics
DC Archive or Student Housing? Bowser Proposal Prompts Debate Over the District’s Records.
Everything We Know About the Ultra-Exclusive MAGA Clubhouse in Georgetown
Report: Musk Did Shrooms on Campaign Trail, Very Hot Summer Awaits, and Congressman Wants to Rename WMATA “WMAGA”
Sad Elon Musk Packs Up His Chainsaw, Capital Jewish Museum Reopens, and We Found Afghan Ice Cream in Alexandria
Your Ultimate Guide to Pride in DC
The History of Pride in DC
The Missing Men of Mount Pleasant
5 Queer Lawmakers We’re Celebrating This Month