The dispute over whether former President Donald Trump can appear on the Colorado ballot will be resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court on February 8, 2024. Numerous individuals and organizations have submitted “amicus curiae” briefs, which provide different perspectives on the case. The court has strict word count limits for these briefs, ranging from 6,000 to 13,000 words. Compliance with these limits is crucial because judges are busy and need concise arguments.
Many lawyers attempt to evade these word limits and write as much as possible. However, judges prefer leaner and more focused arguments to conserve their attention. Chief Judge Ruggero J. Aldisert has expressed that briefs are often “too long, too long, too long.” Some lawyers interpret word-limit certifications as an effort to restrict the persuasive power of lengthy briefs, leading to objections in court.
These objections typically ask the court to determine if the filing exceeded the word or page limit and to take action against the violation. Lawyers may request the offending party to refile a shorter version or ask for extra space for themselves. In some cases, lawyers may even face sanctions for their misconduct. These conflicts can further burden judges who already have a lot to read and many decisions to make.
One specific issue that arises in these conflicts is the interpretation of “double-spaced.” Lawyers have argued about the precise definition and measure of double-spacing, with some claiming that the spacing used by the opposing party does not meet the standard. These arguments often involve typography and software defaults. Judges must carefully consider these disputes while reminding lawyers that the length of an argument does not guarantee success and can lead to confusion.
In summary, compliance with word count limits in court filings is crucial to conserve judges’ attention and ensure concise arguments. Lawyers often attempt to evade these limits, leading to objections and conflicts. One specific issue that arises is the interpretation of double-spacing, which involves typography and software defaults. Judges must carefully consider these disputes and remind lawyers of the importance of clarity and conciseness in arguments.
