The rules of oral argument at the Supreme Court are strict: when a justice speaks, the advocate has to shut up. But a law student noticed that the rules were getting broken again and again — by men. He and his professor set out to chart an epidemic of interruptions. If women can’t catch a break in the boardroom or the legislature (or at the MTV VMA’s), what’s it going to take to let them speak from the bench of the highest court in the land?
The key voices:
Tonja Jacobi, professor at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
Dylan Schweers, former student at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
The key cases:
2016: Fisher v. University of Texas
The key links:
Justice Interrupted: The Effect of Gender, Ideology and Seniority at Supreme Court Oral Arguments
Special thanks to Franklin Chen and Deborah Tannen.> Leadership support for More Perfect is provided by The Joyce Foundation. Additional funding is provided by The Charles Evans Hughes Memorial Foundation. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project in collaboration with the Legal Information Institute at Cornell.
