Zachary D. Tripp
Private practice · Washington, D.C. · Assistant to the Solicitor General, Attorney · argued OT 2014–2025
13arguments since OT 2010
6–3record (side argued for), 67%
62Justice remarks faced per argument (open period; all advocates 47)
63%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 | Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety et al. | Petitioner | Attorney | Lost | 107 | 55% |
| OT 2022 | Bartenwerfer v. Buckley | Respondent | Attorney | Won | 36 | 62% |
| OT 2018 | Quarles v. United States | Respondent | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 40 | 73% |
| OT 2018 | Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC | Amicus | Assistant to the Solicitor General | – | 77 | – |
| OT 2018 | Nielsen v. Preap | Petitioner | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 74 | 72% |
| OT 2017 | Dahda v. United States | – | Assistant to the Solicitor General | – | 56 | – |
| OT 2017 | Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran | Amicus (for respondent) | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 5 | 83% |
| OT 2017 | Westerngeco LLC v. Ion Geophysical Corp. | Amicus | Assistant to the Solicitor General | – | 16 | 41% |
| OT 2016 | Coventry Health Care of Missouri v. Nevils | Amicus | Assistant to the Solicitor General | – | 8 | 67% |
| OT 2016 | Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp. | Amicus (for petitioner) | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 17 | 78% |
| OT 2015 | Ross v. Blake | Amicus (for petitioner) | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Won | 14 | 40% |
| OT 2015 | Kingdomware Technologies, Inc., v. United States | Respondent | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Lost | 57 | 63% |
| OT 2014 | Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank | Amicus (for petitioner) | Assistant to the Solicitor General | Lost | 75 | – |
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).