Chief Justice John Roberts on the topic of writing

Bryan Garner conducted a series of interviews with eight of the nine U.S. Supreme Court Justices. In this episode, Chief Justice John Roberts answers questions about the importance of writing in the legal profession.

[@jackdowd6238]

Been watching SC justice interviews for the last year....finally someone asking sharp,concise questions

[@catman351]

Thanks for posting this. I do examinations on applications literally every day of the week and rendering a legal opinion with a high degree of precision is an art form. Three hundred cases later, I am still learning. Thanks for posting this ditty with Chief Justice Roberts. This interview is refreshing in light of all the bad writing negatively reinforced through today's casual participation on line, on the Internet, and every other wired and wireless medium.

[@imgamerful]

I hope everything went well for you.

[@cabalofdemons]

I'm not a fan of Chief Justice Roberts's ideology, however he is spot on in regards to the significance of legal writing. In my opinion, he is the strongest writer on the SCOTUS and it's good to hear his perspective on writing briefs. I am a 2L, and my writing improved after reading an article written by Roberts about legal writing. Now I write clear, concise and simple.

[@jairosequeira2293]

Do you have a link to the article written by Roberts that you are referring to? Thank you.

[@cabalofdemons]

@@jairosequeira2293 You can google Chief Justice Roberts court opinions.

[@jenniferturner2850]

I'm not shocked at all by how incredibly asinine most of these comments are. I'm sure there is some organized public forum somewhere for you to bash any and all things politician. I used this video as a tool for learning. Maybe you folks should do the same thing.

[@imgamerful]

Agreed

[@jaironporter942]

whose here because of school

[@hamletgiragosian6147]

It's "who's". irony central

[@yevgeniyzharinov7473]

I'm here because I am interested.

[@bryonwatkins1432]

Not I. I have, BEFORE taking law classes, studied Constitutional Law, Law Treatises, and Statute construction, for two years prior!!!! Also, have had my share of reading 📖 a plethora of briefs and amicus curiae’s!!!! I LOOOOVE constantly studying laws and the Rules of Procedures!!!! The FRCP 12(b)(6); 8(a), and 9, are especially interesting 🧐!!!!

[@rexdarnell]

It's surprising to me that an interview with the leader of one of our three branches has 39 comments 12 years after it was released.

[@borntodoit8744]

why are you vague? - are surprised its only 39 comments after 12years OR - are you surprised 39 adverse comments after 12years? I'm happy to have had a chance to listen to the insight

[@nathanli3024]

He is correct. Briefs are way, way more important than oral arguments. Oral argument is a piece of cake for most experienced lawyers on the appellate level if one have their position fully thought out when writing the briefs.

[@WayneTDowdy3]

Thanks for sharing. I always enjoyed reading your well-written opinions.

[@writersblock26]

Thank you for posting this, courtpoint.

[@johnf6687]

This Judge is a good man 👍

[@albertlugassy3610]

Thank you great information to educate also the public .

[@psychcowboy1]

Chief Justice gives advice on writing that is about as complicated as a 7th grade writing class. Give a clear explanation? Impressive. A well written brief is clearer? That is some off the charts insight. Some briefs are better than others? Hey Justice Roberts can you give this lecture to my Fourth grade class? Welcome to the practice of law, also known as the emperor's new clothes. You have to be prepared to ask questions to decide the case with a dialogue? Wow. You should know what you have to find out? Opinions state what the law is? Actually let's do this to my second grade class.

[@강경복-b7r]

로버츠 미 대법원장님 지구에서 출중 뛰어나시고 휼륭하신 대법원장님 산하 대법관님들 화이팅!!! 👍👍👍👍👍

[@arznodoubt]

yea finally audio. well done

[@FranzVonGaart]

7:52 - best teacher's of writing

[@psychcowboy1]

There have been good and bad legal writers, good writers also are good readers, good analogy and reference and plain spoken, a good thought and decision process, how you reach a result, it is very clear, a crisp diction, good clarity is good, clerks learn from judges, you develop as a writer when you read, if you read stuff that is badly written then you are writing not that well, it is important to read good writing to be a good writer, good writing has good English, make sure opinions are well written. A well written brief is a good argument. Chief Justice gives advice on writing that is about as complicated as a 7th grade writing class. Give a clear explanation? Impressive. A well written brief is clearer? That is some off the charts insight. Some briefs are better than others? Hey Justice Roberts can you give this lecture to my Fourth grade class? Welcome to the practice of law, also known as the emperor's new clothes. You have to be prepared to ask questions to decide the case with a dialogue? Wow. You should know what you have to find out? Opinions state what the law is? Actually let's do this to my second grade class.

[@venkataramana2532]

Justice Jackson "he" or "she" it isn't clear.

[@johnjobe-ck8pm]

writ is the issue, with conflicting international languages, and criticisms about false statements and unlawful writing ,is a need for clarification, review and examination for a true fact with evidence and proof of intent.

[@Chesterbarnes1]

excellent

[@trimmtrabb]

re-upload w/ audio, please.

[@imgamerful]

I think they just uploaded it

[@georgesenda1952]

what in the hell does the Chief Justice or anyone's sexuality ( or lack of it ) have to do with the issue at hand, which is good or bad legal brief writing ( and by inference the ability to write consisely in general, which is a skill that is disappearing in this texting culture ) ? muck muck needs to get his head out the muck and should be ashamed of himself if he had any shame which he probably doesn't have any concept of.

[@yevgeniyzharinov7473]

Where are his oral arguments t be found?

[@exhalesolutions]

Yevgeniy Zharinov You should Google "Oyez" and you'll find the oral arguments for most Supreme Court cases. To find cases that Justice Roberts wrote himself will require additional searching.

[@beaujits1129]

Too much words actually dilutes the true meaning

[@costernocht]

Too bad comments weren't disabled. What a sewer.

[@sarahpamula778]

God loves England.

[@imagrandpa]

Roberts now considers himself an Obozo Judge!!!! LOL!!!

[@lilyshamanova5941]

WHAT a charismatic person.I am in love)))

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

1:58 min ... sounds like dating or a relationship tiff. A hug sounds good.

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

Quaere what type of court and or where. Part V: Powers of the Parliament. Section 51 "... subject to this Constitution, ... to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth ... "; and, (xxiiiA) "... medical ... (but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription)"; and, The Australian Constitution is entrenched; and, When it comes to Chapter III, although not specifically, but, very generically Australian judicial philosophy, is inclined towards proponents of natural law, like Finnis, and perhaps Fuller; and, Calvo clause. Deux de jeux: deuce or égalité. Game: truth tables: Two de Morgan's rules: 1. NOR'ed: inverted (complement) and AND'ed; 2. NAN'ed: inverted (complement) and OR'ed; and, Set theory: set_difference; finite set = multisets without game structure for sets; and, Match. Triple point: Order of reflection. Identity AND law (A.1= A); and, Bragg's Law: ABC and A'B'C'; and, Integrity: entire: intact, whole, to touch; and, Thermodynamic equilibrium: sublimation, fusion, vaporisation. Eleonora Formato née Szczepanowski South Australia

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

Stupid question: are you Norm? Dennis Miller +one ?

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

"See the man with the lonely eyes take his hand, you'll be surprised" ... lyrics from the song "Give a little bit" by Supertramp, album, "Even in the quietest moments ... "

[@eleonoraformatoneeszczepan8807]

14:33 min ... your analogies are not tripe, and, to the contrary, they a very insightful.

[@vosharap]

06:41

[@mizellcommunity901]

What lawyer?? pharma poparus disabled prosecutor ADA title ll Access to the court account mizell vr Hernandez x3 appeal

[@sarahpamula778]

1776.

[@danrayfast9106]

So how much did it take to buy your vote this time ? How do you sleep at night knowing you sold out on America! Writing in the legal profession? Manipulating the legal profession for personal gain would be closer to the truth !

[@deeroberts8090]

Fast idiots LOL nice section title 😂

[@mizzyroro]

I got the same diatribe from law lecturers towards those who write "poorly". To me this is just an attack by type A personalities against type B personalities. Well here's what we type Bs think of that argument your honour. Saying that when you find a case from the 1870s that's "poorly written" and you throw your hands up in the air and go find something else shows the weakness in type As. They can't handle adversity. Everything has to be perfect for them to be successful. When things don't go well they fall apart. We type Bs would wrestle through the chaos of that case and find the treasures in it while you would have missed that chance because you gave up since you couldn't handle it. Not everybody writes well. Not everybody does everything well. But the poorly written brief or opinion may have valuable gems that you may miss because you are unwilling to get your hands dirty and dig through it. Albert Einstien was a perfect example of a highly successful type B.

[@sunnywakefield4659]

HE DOESNT KNOW ANYTHING !

[@ConservativeMotion]

I will not say that he did anything except go against the American people. I have no idea what his thought processes are. The supreme court and the Federal Judges should be elected not appointed. That is the only way that these people, will have to answer to the American people. I am all for Terms and limits on them. If the President has a term limit then the other 2 branches should have term limits also. I would say 2 terms . 8 years is enough.

[@terryhyche7867]

Traitor. Blackmail is not a justice make.