Morrison Foerster is an international law firm with lawyers practicing throughout the United States, Asia, and Europe. Click to discover more.

mofo_share_image.jpg

Morrison Foerster

favicon.ico

favicon-16x16.png

favicon-32x32.png

apple-touch-icon.png

MoFo Favicons

Terms / Notices

Cookies

Privacy Policy

Attorney Advertising

Secure Login

Alumni

  Facebook

MoFo Facebook

  Linkedin

MoFo LinkedIN

Twitter

MoFo Twitter

YouTube

MoFo Youtube

Morrison Foerster - Footer

You have not solved the recaptcha challenge yet or session expired, try again.

Email Disclaimer

Disclaimer

Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our <a href="https://www.mofo.com/about/privacy-policy.html">Privacy Policy</a>, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

Feedback

mofo-logo-2022.svg

People

Capabilities

Resources

About

Culture

Offices

Careers

Stay Connected

Joe Palmore spoke to the New York Times for an article covering how the Office of the Solicitor General under the Biden administration will soon have to decide whether to disavow positions taken by the preceding administration in major cases.

Supreme Court Test for Biden: How Boldly to Disavow Trump’s Agenda

About Morrison Forester

people-default-header-desktop.jpg

people-default-header-mobile.jpg

Default Meta Data

Joe Palmore spoke to the New York Times for an article covering how the Office of the Solicitor General under the Biden administration will soon have to decide whether to disavow positions taken by the preceding administration in major cases.When the Obama administration filed a brief in 2012 changing a position taken by its predecessor, saying it was the product of “further reflection,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. complained at oral argument. He said the new position was prompted not by further reflection, but rather by a change in administrations.Joe was presenting oral argument at the time, and he remembers it vividly.“We had included a footnote – Footnote 9 in the brief – noting a change of position, and we used a phrase that had been commonly used by the office until then, which was ‘upon further reflection,’” he said. “My understanding is that after my experience, the office no longer uses that formulation of words when changing a position.”He added: “I was the unlucky lawyer who happened to be at the podium when the chief said what he said. I think the message was meant more for the solicitor general, not for me.”Read the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/us/biden-trump-solicitor-general-supreme-court.html?referringSource=articleShare">full article</a> (subscription may be required).