The incomparable Ed Kneedler – SCOTUSblog

On April 23, 2025, United States Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler made his 160th argument before the Supreme Court, following which he will be retiring. This article is one in a series of tributes from Mr. Kneedler’s former colleagues on his remarkable career.

Ed Kneedler retires as the most prolific Supreme Court advocate in modern history. One hundred sixty arguments – a truly staggering number. But Ed’s legacy is far more than a number. Ed distinguished himself at the podium not just by his poise and steady defense of the government’s interests, but by his candor to the court. Ed embodies the ideal that the responsibility of the government lawyer is not to win the case at any cost, but to do justice by best serving the interests of the people – and the court. That means never overselling an argument or fact and even being able to acknowledge a weakness in your position. Ed taught that lesson to me, as he did to scores of other lawyers who had the privilege of serving with him. 

But arguments are just the tip of the iceberg. The truth is much of the work of the SG’s office is far less glamorous. One of the solicitor general’s most time-consuming responsibilities is reviewing – and, ultimately, approving or denying – every request to appeal a decision in the federal courts on behalf of the United States or one of its agencies or officials. Thousands of these requests are made each year, generating a pile of memoranda in each case. I shudder to think of how many of these “appeal recs” Ed did as an assistant and deputy during his four-and-a-half decades in the SG’s office. It must have been several thousand.

Lawyers who apply to work in the SG’s office are typically drawn to the arguments. But when you arrive, you learn that much of your time is spent on these appeal recommendations. Digging into cases that likely will never see the light of a Supreme Court argument, assessing the government’s interests, and kicking the tires on proposed arguments. There can be a natural tendency to plow through these recommendations to focus on the higher-profile work of the office like merits briefs and arguments. But no one took these recommendations more seriously than Ed. He took a no-stone-unturned approach in every case, no matter how obscure. 

That impressed me more than any oral argument. It’s easy to show up for the spotlight. Ed was just as relentless in his representation of the government in working on appeal recommendations in cases that no one ever heard of as he was in the many landmark cases he briefed and argued that are standard fare in law schools today. Where some may have seen enough to conclude that an appeal could go forward, Ed would propose a new version of an argument, question whether an argument worked, or even question whether a ruling for the government was right – in other words, whether justice had actually been done.

As a young assistant in the office, there was no more powerful example than seeing one of the most experienced deputies in OSG history working around the clock to make sure the office got it right even in this more mundane part of the docket. Ed didn’t have to work late into the night on these recommendations. But he did. And so others followed his lead. Ed led by example. And his impact on the SG’s office – and lawyers in the office – was profound.

Not just as a mentor and teacher, but as a person and friend. When I joined the office as an assistant, Ed was my boss. Later, when I returned to the office, I served alongside Ed as a deputy. And, eventually, when I became solicitor general, Ed became one of my own deputies – an absurd luxury. But in a mark of who he is, Ed was the same person throughout. A great colleague who was always happy to make time for you in working through a difficult legal issue, a good friend who was quick to ask about how you and your family were doing, and someone who always gave you his frank – and unvarnished – opinion on how the government’s interests were best served in a case, regardless of what the conventional thinking may have been.

Ed always had the government’s interests foremost in mind. I served with Ed for nearly eight years and during two administration changes. I never once heard Ed knock an incoming or outgoing administration or complain about a particular policy or action we were responsible for defending. Ed’s concern was the interests of the United States, and how he could best advance those interests as the government’s lawyer. I’m sure he personally disagreed with the government’s position in some cases. He’s human, even with his 160 arguments. But Ed never gave it anything but his all in defending the government’s position. Few lawyers can say they ever gave more to defend the interests of the United States than Ed.

Ed’s retirement is a big loss for OSG and truly the end of an era for the office and Supreme Court bar. I first heard about Ed Kneedler working for John Roberts as a young lawyer in private practice. And I have since had associates who worked with me go on to the SG’s office only to regale me with their own Ed Kneedler stories. Ed was a constant who connected so many people, and so many different periods, within OSG. It has been said that everyone thinks that the true heyday of the SG’s office was when they worked there. But everyone can agree that the office was at its best when Ed worked there.

While a loss for the SG’s office, I am happy for Ed. As much as he loves the law and OSG, Ed always had a special twinkle in his eye in talking about his wife, Lynn, their family – and now grandchildren – and time spent in Maine. It makes me smile to think of all the joy this new phase will bring to him. After all those appeal recommendations, he deserves it.

Gregory Garre is a partner at the law firm of Latham & Watkins LLP. He previously served as the 44th Solicitor General of the United States (2008-2009), and before that as Principal Deputy Solicitor General (2005-2008) and as an Assistant to the Solicitor General (2000-2004).