back to top


After a routine Supreme Court argument on Wednesday, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. asked the lawyer who had represented the government to return to the lectern.

“You have just presented your 160th argument before this court, and I understand it is intended to be your last,” the chief justice told the lawyer, Edwin S. Kneedler, who is retiring as a deputy solicitor general. “That is the record for modern times.”

Chief Justice Roberts talked a little more, with affection and high praise, thanking Mr. Kneedler for his “extraordinary care and professionalism.”

Then something remarkable happened. Applause burst out in the courtroom, and that led to a standing ovation for Mr. Kneedler, with the justices joining, too.

“It was a rare moment of unanimity and spontaneous joy from all nine justices on the bench,” said Richard Lazarus, a law professor at Harvard. “They were all beaming.”

Kannon Shanmugam, a veteran Supreme Court lawyer, said it was “one of the most electric moments I’ve ever seen in the courtroom.”

The tribute to Mr. Kneedler’s candor and integrity came against the backdrop of a different kind of courtroom behavior. In the early months of the second Trump administration, its lawyers have been accused of gamesmanship, dishonesty and defiance, and have been fired for providing frank answers to judges.

Mr. Kneedler presented a different model, former colleagues said.

“Ed is the embodiment of the government lawyer ideal — one whose duty of candor to the court and interest in doing justice, not just winning a case, always carried the day,” said Gregory G. Garre, who served as solicitor general under President George W. Bush.

Mr. Shanmugam said Mr. Kneedler’s loyalty was to the rule of law. “He would much rather get the law right at the risk of losing,” Mr. Shanmugam said, “than win at the cost of misrepresenting the law.”

Seth P. Waxman, who was solicitor general in the Clinton administration, said Mr. Kneedler was the opposite of a partisan.

“In all the years that I worked with Ed in the Justice Department, I did not know his politics,” Mr. Waxman said.

Mr. Kneedler joined the Office of the Solicitor General, the elite unit of the Justice Department that represents the federal government in the Supreme Court, in 1979, served in many administrations and helped tutor the solicitors general who came and went.

“I was incredibly lucky to have Ed as a deputy when I was S.G.,” Justice Elena Kagan, who served as solicitor general in the Obama administration, said in a statement. “There’s pretty much no legal question he can’t answer. And he has a bone-deep understanding of the traditions and ethos of the S.G.’s office.”

She added: “I learned from him every day, and I did my job far better because he was there. In all the time I’ve spent in government, I’ve never known a finer public servant.”

That was something like a consensus view among former solicitors general. Mr. Waxman, for instance, called Mr. Kneedler “a national treasure.”

Noel J. Francisco, the solicitor general in the first Trump administration, said that Mr. Kneedler was “not just a font of knowledge, but of wisdom.”

Elizabeth B. Prelogar, the solicitor general in the Biden administration, said that “Ed Kneedler represents the very best of what it means to be a lawyer for the United States.”

Mr. Kneedler’s retirement is part of a wave of departures from the solicitor general’s office, which is quite small. After the solicitor general and a handful of deputies, there are just 16 line lawyers. About half of them are leaving, The Washington Post reported this month.

Mr. Kneedler, 79, did not respond to requests for an interview. When he received an award this month from the University of Virginia’s law school, his alma mater, he said he was “a career civil servant, not in the press if I can avoid it.”

At the ceremony, Mr. Kneedler gave extended remarks, making points that in another era might have seemed unremarkable. These days, they verged on provocative.

Calling himself a “citizen lawyer,” he praised the many federal employees he had worked with, saying he had been impressed by their “compassion and understanding for our country, and dedication to our country.”

He said his office analyzed legal issues with rigor and care, at least in cases on the court’s regular docket. Since Mr. Trump took office in January, the government has filed a torrent of emergency applications on what critics call the court’s shadow docket.

“When we don’t have emergencies like we have a number of now,” Mr. Kneedler said, “we have a very structured decision-making process.”

Leslie Kendrick, the Virginia law school’s dean, asked Mr. Kneedler a few questions, one of which was premised on his office’s “commitment to providing nonpartisan representation for the United States, regardless of cause, regardless of the political leadership of the other two branches.”

Mr. Kneedler did not quite adopt the premise. “We are lawyers for the United States,” he said, “and the administration in office is the ultimate determiner of what the interests of the United States are.”

But he ended his remarks on a hopeful note. “We’re all part of a process that is leading us to a more perfect union,” he said, “which means a union in which we are coming together, not apart.”

Before the standing ovation at the Supreme Court on Wednesday, Chief Justice Roberts, himself a veteran of the solicitor general’s office, added what he called a personal note as he spoke to Mr. Kneedler.

“I recall that on two occasions you and I argued on the same side here, me representing a private client and you the United States,” the chief justice said. “We lost each of those cases. I’m sure it was my fault. Mr. Kneedler, thank you for your outstanding service to court and country.”

Extra cancer screenings for women with dense breasts could save hundreds of lives, study finds | Science, Climate & Tech News

Share post:


Extra cancer screenings for women with dense breasts could save hundreds of lives, according to a new study.

Researchers from the University of Cambridge found extra scans for some women could identify an extra 3,500 early-stage cancers that can be “hidden” during regular mammograms.

Around 10% of women have very dense breasts, which means they have more fibrous and glandular tissue and less fatty tissue than other women.

These women are up to four times more likely to develop breast cancer compared to women with low breast density.

Image:
Mammogram images showing fatty/less dense (left) and dense (right) healthy breasts. Pic: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

More than 2.2 million women receive breast screening in the UK each year but mammograms, which are used for breast screening, can be less effective at detecting cancer in dense breasts.

This is because denser breasts look whiter on mammograms, which makes it harder to spot small early-stage cancers which also appear white.

Some 9,361 women across the UK with dense breasts whose mammograms showed they did not have cancer were studied in the trial, which has been published in the Lancet medical journal.

A total of 85 cancers were found among these women when the scientists trialled three extra testing methods.

Louise Duffield, a 60-year-old grandmother of four from Ely in Cambridgeshire, was diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer as a result of the trial.

Image:
Louise Duffield had a previously undiagnosed tumour removed after taking part in the trial. Pic: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust/PA

In 2023, she was invited to take part following her regular mammogram, which showed that she had very dense breasts.

As part of the trial, Ms Duffield had an AB-MRI scan, a faster type of MRI, which identified a small lump deep inside one of her breasts.

Soon after the MRI, Ms Duffield had a biopsy that confirmed she had very early breast cancer within the ducts of one of her breasts.

Six weeks later, she had surgery to remove the tumour – by that time, it had already grown larger than it appeared on the scans.

“It’s been a stressful time and it’s a huge relief to have it gone,” said Ms Duffield. “The tumour was deep in the breast so if I hadn’t been on the trial, it could have gone unnoticed for years.”

Image:
Breast scans using CEM (left) and AB-MRI (right) show tumours not seen on mammograms. Pic: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

The location of her tumour meant it would have been hard for Ms Duffield to find through self-examination, and since it was not detected during her regular mammogram, it would have been at least three years before she was invited for another.

The two methods examined in the trial were contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), where dye is used to make blood vessels more visible, and AB-MRIs.

The experts calculated that adding either of these methods to existing breast screening could detect 3,500 more cancers per year in the UK.

As screening reduces death for about 20% of cancers detected, this could mean an extra 700 lives saved each year, they said.

Read more from science, climate and tech:
Can Labour’s new local cash idea win over Reform voters?
West Nile virus found in UK mosquitos for first time
Facial recognition tech finds sex offender with six-year-old girl

A Department for Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “Research is being conducted into the use of additional tests for women with dense breasts, as part of the NHS breast screening programme.

“The UK National Screening Committee is reviewing this evidence as it becomes available.”

Exit mobile version