The law firm of choice for internationally focused companies

+263 242 744 677

admin@tsazim.com

4 Gunhill Avenue,

Harare, Zimbabwe

Supreme Court Oral Arguments Include Toilet Flush In World’s Greatest Metaphor

No one wants to get a robocall, but there’s someone on the Supreme Court who may hate them even more. During oral argument on Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, the case considering whether the carve-out allowing government debt collection robocalls renders the whole Telephone Consumer Protection Act robocall ban unconstitutional, Latham’s Roman Martinez, counsel for AAPC, was minding his own business and outlining his case when someone forgot they had a hot mic:

Welcome to the Wednesday Oral Argument Morning Zoo! Let’s hope this ushers in a new era of judicial sound effect boards to give the audience a real show now that these arguments are going out live. Unfortunately, what this is really going to do is allow the Court to say, “this is why we can’t have transparency” and snuff out these public trust-building measures in the crib. Or, maybe that’s the wrong imagery — more like disposing of a goldfish.

It’s not clear who decided to flush Martinez’s argument but one assumes it has to be one of the justices or opposing counsel and it’s hard to believe even this Justice Department is taking a leak in the middle of an argument.

My money’s on Clarence Thomas. He spoke during arguments just the other day meaning he’s not due to have to pay attention for a solid five more years.

In any event, when history looks back, there may not be a more fitting historical record of the Roberts Court than this clip.


HeadshotJoe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.