Jeffrey Sutton often wonders, sometimes aloud, why he chose to put himself and his family through the ordeal of arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court.
“There is only one other thing I liked even less (than writing) in high school and college, and that was speaking publicly,” Sutton said. “I don’t know how I fell into this.”
Sutton gave a sometimes-humorous account of his experiences arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court in a lecture sponsored by the Moritz College of Law’s Moot Court and Lawyering Skills Governing Board yesterday.
Sutton, a graduate of Ohio State, has argued 12 times before the U.S. Supreme Court, and has been nominated by President Bush to be a federal judge on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Jeff James, head of the Moot Court Board in the Moritz College of Law, said Sutton is one of the law school’s most distinguished graduates, which can motivate students.
“It encourages people to participate in our program because it gives them a tangible benefit that they can see,” James said. “If you practice this in law school, you can be this good.”
Sutton gave his impressions of all nine Supreme Court justices, describing their demeanor in the courtroom and the types of questions each justice is likely to ask.
“You have to be more careful with (John Paul) Stevens than (Antonin) Scalia,” Sutton said. “If Scalia’s unhappy, there are just so many visual clues – he’s rolling around; he’s just a little five year-old up there.”
Sutton also focused on the way he recommends lawyers approach arguing before the Supreme Court, saying he prefers a very gracious and courteous approach.
“Manners really matter in an oral argument, and they really matter in the Supreme Court,” Sutton said. “I think the court gets turned off by people who come up there and feel like the court’s lucky to have 20 minutes of their time.”
The most important piece of advice he was ever given, Sutton said, was from the longtime assistant to Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr., who served on the court from 1972 to 1987.
“She said it’s one thing: just answer the questions,” he said.
Sutton said this seemed simplistic at the time, but he realized the focus was not on him, but rather on the court. He said he thinks his purpose in oral arguments is to help the Supreme Court to make decisions.
Sutton said occasionally there are times when the justices obviously have an agenda, and lawyers must stand firm. He said a justice might try to push him across a line he does not want to cross, and that is when he has to forget manners temporarily.
Lastly, Sutton said Moot Court is important for students because it allows them to prepare for such high-pressure situations like arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court. He said ultimately there are few experiences in lawyering quite like going toe to toe with Supreme Court justices.
Jennifer Monty, a third-year law student, said having a lecturer like Sutton shows the quality of the law school at OSU.
“I think there’s a good, practical advantage to students at Ohio State. We have professors on the faculty who have argued before the Supreme Court, so that when we’re arguing we can go to them and have a one-on-one interaction,” Monty said.
