The gunshot-like sound frightened the Court, rattling the nerves of both the justices and the advocates. To ease the tension, Chief Justice Roberts joked “I think we’re… I think it’s safe. It’s a trick they play on new Chief Justices all the time.” His comment drew laughter and relief, but Justice Scalia’s welcoming reply of “Happy Halloween,” brought about even more laughter from the audience and the Court. Not to be outdone, Chief Justice Roberts replied “We’re even more in the dark now than before” (37-38:ln 18-25, ln1-2). While strange occurrences bring about unexpected moments for laughter in the courtroom, Justice Kennedy has relied on the jokes of the famous blue-collar comedian Bill Engvall in oral argument. Mr. Engvall is famous for his narratives in which he recounts encounters with foolish individuals who should wear a sign warning others of their stupidity. After the end of each story he announces “here’s your sign,” confirming an individual’s stupidity. Justice Kennedy once reused one of Mr. Engvall’s signature story noting “recently I lost my luggage, and I had to go to the Lost and Found at the airline, and the lady said has my plane landed yet" (Liptak 12/31/05). We are only missing Mr. Engvall’s tag line “Here’s your sign,” to complete the joke. Finally, newly appointed associate Justice Elena Kagan brings a humorous wit with her to the Court. In her oral arguments, before the Court as Solicitor General, she often drew laughter from the Court and attendees. In United States v. Comstock, General Kagan mistakenly called Justice Scalia "Mr. Chief," but with the same breath wryly corrected herself "excuse me, Justice Scalia — I didn't mean to promote you quite so quickly."
Her comments drew a round of laughter and prompted Chief Justice Roberts to respond "Thanks for thinking it was a promotion," causing Justice Scalia to continue the joking, turning to Chief Justice Roberts and sarcastically remarking "And I'm sure you didn't" (26, ln: 6-14). These comments from the justices clearly offer a lighter side to the Court’s serious nature. Research on humor and laughter spans a wide variety of topics and working environments, but few studies have ever considered the role of humor and laughter at the Supreme Court. This article attempts to turn scholars’ attention towards laughter and humor at the Supreme Court in the hopes that others will expand upon research generated within this study.
The only study to consider laughter in Supreme Court oral arguments was completed by Jay Wexler in 2005 and was titled"LaughTrack." The article was a simple three page study that tracked the number of "(laughter)" notations in the Court’s 2004-2005 oral argument transcripts.
Read the rest of Ryan A. Malphurs article at the Communication Law Review, Volume 10, Issue 2
Pages: 1 · 2
More Articles
- Rose Madeline Mula: If You Can't Stand the Heat
- Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Statement on Supreme Court Ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
- Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Delivers Remarks on the First Anniversary of the Attack on the Capitol Washington, DC ~ Wednesday, January 5, 2022
- Jo Freeman Reviews: Justice, Justice Thou Shalt Pursue: A Life’s Work Fighting for a More Perfect Union By Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Amanda Tyler
- Rose Madeline Mula Writes: I Feel Like That Carton of Milk In the Refrigerator Which Is Beyond Its Expiration Date
- Jo Freeman Writes: The Trumpsters are Coming; Donald Trump’s Devoted Followers Demand Four More Years
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Partial Remarks at the University of Buffalo, August 26, 2019: "If I am notorious, it is because I had the good fortune to be alive and a lawyer in the late 1960s"
- Rose Madeline Mula Writes: Look Who's Talking
- “Housewife” to “Hussy”; A Revisit To Grammarphobia: From Domestic to Disreputable
- Rose Madeline Mula Writes: Addicted to Amazon