Closed Mouth Matches Mind

Two years and 144 cases have passed since Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas last spoke up at oral arguments. It is a period of unbroken silence that contrasts with the rest of the court's unceasing inquiries.

This according to an AP article on the Supreme Court, No Questions in 2 Years. Contrary to Thomas' silence, the piece contrasts his demeanor with that of the rest of the Court:

Hardly a case goes by, including two appeals that were argued Monday, without eight justices peppering lawyers with questions. Oral arguments offer justices the chance to resolve nagging doubts about a case, probe its weaknesses or make a point to their colleagues.

* * * *

Leaning back in his leather chair, often looking up at the ceiling, Thomas takes it all in, but he never joins in.

As the article observes, the other justices grill the lawyers appearing before the court with questions. This is consistent with my experience clerking on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. The cases that are argued before these courts often present unusual or novel questions of law, so questions on the issues raised are a natural part of the decision-making process.

Of course, this is not necessary if your mind is as closed as your mouth.