The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit made an announcement on Tuesday: do not type in the centuries-old Garamond font. In a notice issued Tuesday, the court’s clerk said the D.C. Circuit was revising its handbook “to encourage the use of typefaces that are easier to read and to discourage use of Garamond.”
“Certain typefaces can be easier to read, such as Century and Times New Roman,” the handbook revision reads. “The court encourages the use of these typefaces. Briefs that use Garamond as the typeface can be more difficult to read, and the use of this typeface is discouraged.”
Garamond has been known to look unclear when enlarged on a computer screen, Garamond’s italics are difficult to read, and its section symbol has been described as "ugly." The font can also be used to shave several pages off a brief because it is more compact than most fonts.
DC Circuit is not alone in its assessment that Garamond isn’t the most effective brief font. Five years ago, Virginia’s Supreme Court expanded its list of expanded fonts from three options (Arial, Courier, Verdana) to 16 typefaces including Tahoma, Palatino Linotype, and Constantia. No Garamond. Maryland’s Court of Appeals approved 12 fonts and Garamond was not on the list, though the court specifies: “This list is provided for your guidance — these fonts are suggested, not mandatory.”