Cases involving constitutionality of federal or state statutes

(a) Constitutionality of Federal Statute. A party who draws in question the constitutionality of any Act of Congress in any proceeding in the Supreme Court to which the United States, or any agency thereof, or any officer or employee thereof, as such officer or employee, is not a party, upon the filing of the record, or as soon thereafter as the question is raised in the Supreme Court, shall give immediate notice in writing to the Supreme Court of the existence of said question. The Clerk of the Supreme Court shall thereupon certify such fact to the United States Attorney for Page 34 of 40 Revised February 17, 2026 the District of Rhode Island. (b) Constitutionality of State Statute. A party who draws in question the constitutionality, under the United States Constitution or the Rhode Island Constitution, of any Act of the General Assembly of Rhode Island in any proceeding in the Supreme Court to which the State of Rhode Island, or any agency thereof, or any officer or employee thereof, as such officer or employee, is not a party, upon the filing of the record, or as soon thereafter as the question is raised in the Supreme Court, shall give immediate notice in writing to the Supreme Court of the existence of said question. The Clerk of the Supreme Court shall thereupon certify such fact to the Attorney General of Rhode Island. Rule 33. Stenographic recording and taking of testimony in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court does not record its proceedings. If a party desires to preserve a stenographic record of the proceedings, including cases in which testimony is taken before the Supreme Court, the party shall move in advance of the proceedings for permission to employ a certified court stenographer at his or her own expense.