Reuters Legal Affairs Editor Joan Biskupic breaks down a Reuters analysis that reveals how a cadre of lawyers - primarily representing corporate America - has enjoyed remarkable success at getting cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
At the Supreme Court. Their words written in marvel at the very top. Equal justice under line but inside we found tiny group of lawyers this an emerging as first among equals. I've covered the supreme court for more than 25 years. And talked many times to the justices in their chambers and I have been noticing that something was being in the courtroom and also in the nature. The cases that they were taking. More and more we were hearing from fewer and fewer lawyers. And they weren't certain. Reuters went back nine years to more than 101000 petitions covering more than seventeen house. Last to see who had been most successful. Getting the ear of the Supreme Court we found that 66. Liners that are less than 1% of all filers. Turned actor nominee. In about 43%. Of the cases. And east lawyers had a lot of similarities to the justices themselves they were many who had been locked clerks of the justices. We're behind scenes justices. Who also had served in the prestigious office of the US solicitor general. With those kinds of similar backgrounds between the justices on the bench. And the lawyers appearing before them coming to them with their petitions. Echo chamber music narrow our world and critics say but we have now is definitely justices hearing from a group of only council. And essentially reinforcing. Narrow views of the law. 66 dollars and focused time pot yeah. Working for firms that largely represent corporate America. So that means that the issues that are near and years. To corporate America are able to be praying to the justices were clearly and frankly excepted by the justice is more. That means appear in employee who. Is alleging discrimination or you're a consumer who has complaint against a large corporation. You can't go to and these corporate lawyers because they would have a conflict of interest represented in that side. And they don't want to represent someone on that side it would undermine. Bad and the interests of their mainly corporate clients. I spoke with the majority of the justices in fact eight of the justices spoke on the record and there was a certain acceptance or acknowledgment. The fact that of course big businesses can. By. The best counsel possible impact Ruth Bader Ginsburg who is our senior liberal on Supreme Court said. You know business combined. That's council and that's its latest in America that's the reality. This writer's analysis was the most comprehensive ever to look at the petition Qaeda. Raiders researchers spent months doing this and that bottom. The combination of that examination. And interviews with justice and others. Indicate that essentially there's a new criteria that the justices are you seeing as they look at these protests instantly they look at appeals from. All sorts of courts throughout America that they're looking not just the merits of the legal issue but also with the merits of the lawyer. I.