In this intriguing article from The New York Times, we learn about the mysterious decline of the summary reversal—a judicial tool once used regularly by the Supreme Court. Unlike full-blown rulings or emergency shadow docket orders, summary reversals are unsigned decisions based solely on the initial briefs of a case, primarily used to counter lower court decisions that conflict with established precedents. As Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. put it, “We use them when a lower court decision is squarely contrary to one of our precedents.” Interestingly, a new study in The Columbia Law Review shows that during the first 15 terms after Chief Justice Roberts joined the court in 2005, more than seven summary reversals were issued per term, but in recent terms, the court averages only about one per term, highlighting a significant shift in their application.

Key Points:

• Definition: Summary reversals are unsigned decisions on the merits based on the initial round of briefs, distinct from full rulings and emergency orders.
• Usage: They are typically used when a lower court decision conflicts sharply with existing Supreme Court precedents.
• Historical Trend: The study found that in the 15 terms following Chief Justice Roberts' appointment in 2005, the court averaged over seven summary reversals per term.
• Recent Decline: Over the past four terms, the average has dropped to roughly one summary reversal per term.
• Authority Quote: Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. explained their use, stating, “We use them when a lower court decision is squarely contrary to one of our precedents.”
• Implication: The decline raises questions about the evolution of judicial tools and decision-making processes within the highest court.

Enjoy diving deeper into this fascinating evolution of the Supreme Court's approach to using summary reversals!
Link to Article