John J. Bursch
Private practice · Caledonia, Michigan · State Solicitor General, Assistant to the Solicitor General, State Attorney General's office, Attorney · argued OT 2010–2025
14arguments since OT 2010
9–4record (side argued for), 69%
52Justice remarks faced per argument (open period; all advocates 47)
62%of those remarks read as doubt by Jev (all advocates 63%)
Arguments by term
Side wonSide lostPending / unclear
Arguments
| Term | Case | Side | Role | Result | Remarks faced | Doubt (Jev) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OT 2025 | Enbridge Energy, LP et al. v. Nessel, Attorney General of Michigan | Petitioner | Attorney | Lost | 51 | 52% |
| OT 2024 | Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic | Petitioner | Attorney | Won | 64 | 72% |
| OT 2019 | No. 18-107 | Petitioner | Attorney | – | 28 | – |
| OT 2016 | Lee v. United States | Petitioner | Attorney | Won | 79 | 56% |
| OT 2016 | Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc. | Petitioner | Attorney | Lost | 61 | 60% |
| OT 2014 | Obergefell v. Hodges | Respondent | State Attorney General's office | Lost | 98 | – |
| OT 2013 | Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action | Petitioner | State Solicitor General | Won | 36 | 76% |
| OT 2013 | Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community | Petitioner | State Solicitor General | Lost | 71 | 62% |
| OT 2013 | Burt v. Titlow | Amicus (for petitioner) | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 17 | 37% |
| OT 2012 | Linda Metrish, Warden v. Burt Lancaster | Petitioner | State Solicitor General | Won | 43 | 64% |
| OT 2012 | Greg Mcquiggin, Warden v. Floyd Perkins | Petitioner | State Solicitor General | Won | 56 | 78% |
| OT 2011 | Carol Howes, Warden v. Randall Lee Fields | Petitioner | State Solicitor General | Won | 22 | 75% |
| OT 2011 | Blaine Lafler v. Anthony Cooper | Petitioner | State Solicitor General | Won | 37 | – |
| OT 2010 | Talk America v. Michigan Bell Telephone Company Dba AT&T Michigan | Petitioner | State Solicitor General | Won | 36 | 47% |
Names, roles and sides from each transcript's list of appearances; results from the Supreme Court Database (did the side argued for win). Remarks faced: Justice turns of five words or more right after this advocate spoke, open period only. Doubt: TypeSafe's Jev reading of those remarks (an experiment, available where our research run covered the case).