On Monday, lawyers for the ex-Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling provided the Supreme Court with a long-list of reasons as to why it could overturn Skilling's conviction on lengthy jail time, from the "wave of passion" that had managed to purportedly poison the jury pool in Houston to the vagueness of the all the charges that had been lodged against him.

While the justices did not seem very moved by the arguments that the trial should never have been carried out in Houston to begin with, they did have some very pointed questions about the speedy process with which the judge selected a jury.

Also, the court continued to maintain its skepticism about a federal law making it a crime to keep the public or one's employer deprived of "honest services", asking whether the law is way too vague to signal exactly what constitutes criminal behavior.

"The sentiment on the ground in Houston was that Houston citizens, as we pointed out in our brief, in fact referred to what happened in the wake of the collapse of Enron in terms that were similar to the way they referred to a terrorist attack. They in fact talked about it in terms of the 9/11 attack", said Skilling's lawyer Sri Srinivasan.