Supreme Court oral arguments carry strict etiquette, a fact that surfaced when Geoffrey Pipoly quoted former President Donald Trump’s harsh remarks about Haiti during Mullin v. Doe. Pipoly’s repetition sparked a brief exchange with Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who had earlier mangled the quote. The incident highlights how attorneys navigate courtroom protocol while making politically charged points.

The Supreme Court’s Guide for Counsel, released late last year, spells out dos and don’ts for attorneys. It dictates that only “Mr.” addresses the Chief Justice, while others are called “Justice” or “Your Honor.” It also warns against interrupting Justice Roberts, who has enforced the rule in cases like Trump v. Cook during high‑profile.

The guide further advises attorneys to answer questions directly, preferring a simple “yes” or “no” before elaboration. It discourages jokes, noting that humor rarely lands unless it stems from unplanned moments. Even so, some lawyers, such as Lisa Blatt, push boundaries and occasionally elicit laughter with off‑script observations in the courtroom during daily sessions today.

These guidelines aim to preserve decorum while allowing substantive debate. By enforcing respectful address, limiting interruptions, and prioritizing concise answers, the Court seeks to focus on legal merits rather than theatrics. The result is a more predictable environment where arguments hinge on evidence and reasoning, not on style or off‑hand remarks for the public record.