Photo courtesy of Mark Waggoner.
0614 Mark Waggoner
Local attorney Mark Waggoner stands on the steps of the Supreme Court chambers after arguing Lane v. Franks before the court this year.
When Mark Waggoner took on the case of former Central Alabama Community College President Dr. Steve Franks, he had no idea it would make it to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Each year the Supreme Court only grants and hears oral arguments for less than 1 percent, or about 75-80 cases, of the approximately 10,000 petitions it receives, according to supremecourt.gov.
This year, Franks’ case was one of them.
On April 28, Waggoner, a Mountain Brook resident and attorney with Hand Arendall, argued in Lane v. Franks. He asked the court to affirm a circuit court ruling that Franks did not violate the First Amendment when he terminated Edward Lane from his position with the college. Lane believed he was fired because of his testimony in another fraud case regarding a no-show employee whom he fired, but Franks maintained that it was because the program Lane managed was cut.
Waggoner first realized that the case might be different from others he had tried when the 11th Circuit recognized other circuits had decided the free speech issue differently. Goldstein & Russell, a boutique firm that specializes in representing cases before the Supreme Court, took note of the case and took action on Lane’s behalf.
In January, the announcement came that America’s highest court would hear the case. Waggoner’s firm was immediately contacted by lawyers in Washington, D.C. and New York City who more frequently try Supreme Court cases with offers to help with the case.
Waggoner said he was thankful that his client had the confidence that Waggoner could handle it on his own.
For the month leading up to the April 28 court date, Waggoner worked through what felt like cramming for law school exams in preparation, and he participated in two practice, or moot, arguments with a lawyer consultant and colleagues playing the roles of other key players.
“It was a constitutional law free speech question. That’s what the Supreme Court cuts its teeth on, so I definitely had to get ready,” he said.
Waggoner admits he was nervous as he prepared, but once he entered the court chamber, he was overwhelmed by its ornate decorum and the ambience of the lawyers’ lounge. He had also been told that the justices liked to see lawyers from places like Alabama or Michigan instead of East Coast ones, who come to their court on a regular basis.
That morning he sat through the first case on the docket, one about patents, and then came time for his long-awaited one-hour hearing. He listened as other lawyers and Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange took their place in the lectern before he stepped up for his 20-minute segment.
Waggoner said he was struck by how close he stood to the justices, with Chief Justice John Roberts within 10 feet of him and the others to Roberts’ left and right in order of seniority.
Within 30 seconds, the justices were peppering him with questions; most of the six who spoke asked several. The justices had read the briefs and knew the facts, Waggoner’s position and what the law states. Now they wanted to hear about the constitutional implications of his argument.
“They realize their decisions have far-reaching and national impact, and they want you to help them understand not just about how this impacts this case but what ramifications it has in the big picture,” Waggoner said. “If it’s made it to them, it’s not an easy case. Even though the questioning is hard and can be aggressive, it is focused and respectful, and they are in no way trying to embarrass or belittle you.”
Waggoner had entered the court through a basement entrance with metal detectors, but he left through the main doors at the front and found himself at the top of its iconic white steps.
“That’s when I was like, ‘Wow, what just happened?’” he said.
Back at home now, Waggoner’s firm has posted a photo of him on those steps. He has a quill pen that is given to lawyers who sit at a counsel table in the Supreme Court and a copy of a sketch of himself by Supreme Court artist Art Lien (no cameras are allowed in the court). As his friends can tell you, he has a wealth of stories about the experience that these objects signify.
The Supreme Court was scheduled to release its verdict on Lane v. Franks by the end of its session in June.
