"Just after 10:10 a.m., after the argument had been underway for four or five minutes, the center curtains stirred behind the Chief Justice, and Justice Scalia moved a short distance to the stage, or to his seat on the bench (which is often his stage, of course). A few minutes later, an aide brought his silver coffee go-cup and some case materials. At 10:21, Justice Scalia felt sufficiently up to speed to chime in. 'Can I ask something about this,' he said to the lawyer before him. The solicitous tone was uncharacteristic, and reminiscent of the courtly way that now-retired Justice John Paul Stevens would enter an argument before asking a razor-sharp question. Before too long, with a few sips of his coffee, Justice Scalia was back to himself, interrupting the lawyers to grill them without asking their permission."
That's the end of the (surprisingly long!) essay at SCOTUSblog about what Supreme Court observers experienced as the dramatic absence of Justice Scalia on a morning when 2 of his opinions were announced. Chief Justice Roberts took over the reading of the announcements, noting only that Justice Scalia had asked him to do so. What thoughts raced through the heads of the observers before they got the word that Justice Scalia was — how mundane! — stuck in traffic?
January 14, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
Here in SWVA they have canceled schools because of a dusting of snow. (There might have been more in the mountains, but it's less than a quarter inch here in town.) People in this area seriously freak out when they see the white stuff. In DC it might even be worse.
This may have been the cause of the traffic problems:
"For scores of choking passengers caught in a smoke-filled Metro train Monday and waiting to be rescued from a tunnel, the ordeal seemed interminable. By some accounts, 40 minutes or more went by before firefighters showed up and forced open the doors. A lot of riders said they feared they would die. And one woman did."
(Yes, the train is underground, but rescue needed to come from above.)
"Court observers" try hard to make the material interesting, that's for sure.
""Court observers" try hard to make the material interesting, that's for sure."
Well, they are there in person. They have access. What is that effort for?
The written opinions are instantly available to all, and the oral argument transcripts come out the same day. No one hears what the Justices are doing behind the scenes. So what is the added value of the access. An aide brought Scalia coffee in a silver cup!
Actually, you can't observe what's in the cup, so the access didn't reach that information. It's just an inference. But the cup was silver! We have learned that!
Was the cup silver or was it a silver thermos of coffee guaranteed to stay warm for up to 24 hours?
I find the reference to a silver cup to be unlikely - who drinks out of a silver cup or mug? Where does one procure such a thing?
However, a silver thermos or similar would be well within the norm and would serve to keep coffee at the ready and warm during a long session.
Silver? Really? What proof? Not a silver colored metal like stainless steel?
My car is silver. Expensive!!
This may have been the cause of the traffic problems:
"For scores of choking passengers caught in a smoke-filled Metro train Monday and waiting to be rescued from a tunnel, the ordeal seemed interminable. . . .)
Hardly necessary to to invoke that for a traffic jam in D.C. The dusting of snow we got last night is plenty of excuse.
Post a Comment