•  
  •  
 

Journal of Undergraduate Research

Keywords

appellate level, oral argument, rhetorical analysis, reforms

College

Humanities

Department

English

Abstract

The United States court system faces an ever-growing caseload problem. The issue gets aggravated at the appeals court, where fewer judges face a disproportionate volume of cases. Two approaches have historically been taken to address this burden: selecting more judges and streamlining trial procedures. Critics of the former approach fear that the quality of judges must inevitably fall as more judges are selected (Martineau 1986). While many experts favor appellate level oral argument reform, several at times contradictory theories exist as to where the appellate procedure can best be streamlined without compromising justice (Berman 2001). The prevailing theories focus on the oral argument, arguing either to eliminate, reduce, or even expand its role in the process. Although some courts have given trial runs to potentially more efficient procedures (Mathy 1985), experts hesitate to implement reforms without anticipating their consequences as much as possible.

Download

Share

COinS