Underneath Their Robes

A Law Clerk Hiring Update: Alito Adopts Two SOC Clerks

Word on the street is that the Supreme Court's latest member, Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., has hired two of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's clerks: Ben Horwich and Sasha Volokh (previously profiled here).

No word yet on the other two Alito hires, the fate of Justice Alito's circuit court clerks, or the fate of Justice O'Connor's two other clerks, Amy Kapczynski and Tali Farhadian (one of whom may remain with SOC, since retired justices are entitled to a clerk). If you have any info, please email A3G!

Update: A reader passes along the rumor that "Tali, who clerked for SOC in OT 2004 and stayed on for the start of OT 2005, at the Justice's request, is moving or may have already moved back to New York. This would suggest that the other clerk, Amy, will be SOC's one clerk."

Further update: Two reliable sources confirm that Amy Kapczynski will in fact be serving as the law clerk to retired Justice O'Connor.

Apology from A3G, and Her Excuse: Forget War; Moving Is Hell!

Article III Groupie apologizes for her recent absence from these pages, and she knows that you have every reason to be upset. Please forgive her; she has been preoccupied by her recent move to Washington, D.C.

A3G has spent the past few weeks packing up all her worldly possessions, frantically moving them hundreds of miles, and fighting with utility companies in her new home city. In case it has been a while since you last moved, think back on how terrible that experience was -- then multiply it by, say, 17. Murphy's Law has applied to A3G's move!

Article 3 Groupie is still in the process of unpacking her stuff and furnishing her apartment at night, while trying to adjust to the demands of her new job by day. It has been overwhelming, exhausting, and stressful. It may take A3G several weeks -- or months -- to regain the semblance of a normal life.

But once A3G retakes control of her existence, you'll start seeing UTR posts on a more regular basis. A3G will be, as Dame Edna might say, "Back with a vengeance!"

In the meantime, for those of you looking for your regular fix of Supreme Court law clerk hiring gossip, check out Prettier Than Napoleon, by Amber Taylor. At least for the time being, given how crazy A3G's life is right now, she's happy to delegate the duty of stalking the Elect to Ms. Taylor.

So what brings A3G to our nation's capital? Well, she is working once again in the litigation department of a large law firm -- although she's switched over to appellate work, to avoid the document-review drudgery that caused her to suffer through many late nights (and broken nails). Meanwhile, her alter ego is blogging professionally -- yes, for a living, and actually not a bad one -- over at the politics blog Wonkette.

Speaking of Wonkette, A3G urges you to check it out, if you haven't done so lately. In the past week, there have been numerous posts of interest to Article III groupies. Here are a few recent posts that UTR readers are sure to enjoy:

-- a litany of juicy judicial sightations;

-- an imagined conversation between Senator Lincoln Chafee and then-Judge Samuel Alito, Jr., while staring at the Supreme Court building;

-- a Wheels-of-Justice-type post, describing Justice O'Connor gassing up her Buick and navigating Washington traffic;

-- some keen observation of how the four Supreme Court justices who attended the State of the Union behaved themselves;

-- some backroom gossip about various players in the Alito confirmation battle (including UTR's Prom Queen, the telegenic and talented Rachel Brand); and

-- a gossipy analysis of Senator John Kerry's decision to filibuster the Alito nomination -- featuring tidbits about Mirah Horowitz (OT 2001/Breyer), a well-connected and high-powered member of the Elect (that's redundant).

Oh, why bother making A3G dig up the links to all those Wonkette posts? Just make things easy on yourself by adding Wonkette to your blogroll or RSS feed. Enjoy!

A special note to UTR readers who live in New York (or would like to move there): A3G's apartment is for sale! The birthplace of UTR -- a lovely junior one bedroom, with an unbeatable location close to numerous cultural attractions, major subway lines, midtown offices, and Central Park -- is on the market. In case you might be interested, here's the listing. Thanks!

A special note to UTR readers who live in Washington: Wanna come over and help A3G unpack her thiings and organize her apartment? A modest cash stipend may be available. Please note that this would be a one-time-only kind of thing, with you working for A3G as an independent contractor.

No employer-employee relationship would be created; A3G ain't paying Social Security taxes on you. Who do you think she is -- Zoe Baird? (Oh, wait...)

A Law Clerk Hiring Update: Justice Kennedy's Swinging Clerks!

Much ink has been spilled over how Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, after Justice O'Connor's replacement by Judge Alito (knock on wood), will become the Supreme Court's one and only "swing justice." Well, if that's the case, then meet the four swinging AMK clerks, for October Term 2006:

1.  David Foster (Harvard '05/Kozinski)

2.  Lisa Marshall (Yale '05/Leval)

3.  Eric Murphy (Chicago '05/Wilkinson)

4.  Mark Yohalem (Harvard '05/Rymer)

This is an interesting crew. Compared with the current crop of Kennedy clerks, which balances a Garlandista and a Tatel Tot against a Kozinski clerk and a Roberts clerk, this group may skew slightly more conservative: only of the four (Lisa Marshall) comes from a liberal feeder judge (Leval).

For a compilation of A3G's prior reports on OT 2006 law clerk hiring, along with some additional intelligence, check out this post at Amber Taylor's blog, Prettier Than Napoleon.

Welcome, New York Times Readers

If you've reached Underneath Their Robes via the link in Professor Jeffrey Rosen's interesting essay, "Judicial Expsoure," in this week's New York Times Book Review, welcome! Even though Professor Rosen decries the public's increased interest in, and focus upon, the personal lives of federal judges -- a view from which Article III Groupie obviously dissents -- she is grateful for the shout-out.

Professor Rosen mentions Judge Alex Kozinski's self-nomination as a judicial hottie; if you're looking for it, click here. Rosen also alludes to "giddy fan e-mail messages" sent to A3G from Judge Richard Posner; some of them can be accessed here, here, here, and here.

By the way, some time ago, A3G contacted the Legal Affairs editors responsible for the Debate Club and suggested an online debate between herself and Professor Rosen, on the subject of whether the greater attention being paid to the personal lives of judges was a salutary or unwelcome development. The Legal Affairs folks were enthusiastic; they said they would check with Professor Rosen and get back to her.

A3G never heard back from them, so she assumes that the good professor was not interested in going toe-to-Prada-clad-toe with her. Perhaps he feared -- not without foundation -- that such a debate would rapidly veer away from substantive discussion and towards the trading of catty bon mots. But if you ever change your mind, Professor Rosen, A3G is ready and willing to take you on!

UTR Cribs: The Late Chief's Teepee Sold

Yes, Article III Groupie realizes that this "news" was reported last week, concerning a real estate transaction that took place last year. But A3G has been extremely busy, preparing for her upcoming move to Washington, D.C. (where she will be joining the appellate practice of a large law firm; she's had it up to here with "trial work," a.k.a. document review). So if she's a little behind the times, please -- cut her some slack!

Last week, Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts, the Reliable Source gals, offered this juicy tidbit (scroll down to last item; via How Appealing):

SURREAL ESTATE

Seller: The family of William Rehnquist

Price: $747,000

Details : The 16th chief justice of the United States and his wife, Natalie, bought their North Arlington home near Marymount University in 1983 for $207,500, according to public records. He continued living there after her death eight years later, and it was in this three-bedroom, three-bath brick townhouse that Rehnquist himself succumbed to thyroid cancer Sept. 3. His daughter, Janet , a Washington attorney, handled its sale shortly before Thanksgiving.

A3G can add one more detail (which she feels it raises no security issue to mention, since Chief Justice Rehnquist has passed away and his family has sold the house): the Rehnquist residence was located at 2329 N. Glebe Road, Arlington, Virginia.

Speaking of Supreme residences, Washingtonian Magazine -- perhaps inspired by UTR Cribs? -- ran an article in its December 2005 issue entitled "At Home with the Supremes." In this fascinating piece, the magazine offered photographs, descriptions, assessed values, and market values for the houses of all nine current Supreme Court justices (plus the possible next justice, Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr.).

Unfortunately, this mouthwatering article isn't available online. And you don't want to borrow A3G's copy, since the pages are stuck together (no, not with hair gel; that's dried-up drool). But if you can locate your own hard copy of the December 2005 Washingtonian, turn to page 92, for an article that gives new meaning to the term "real estate porn." Scrumptious!

A Law Clerk Hiring Update: Nino Rocks Out!

The Rock Star of One First Street has selected the members of his glorious band, "The Originalists," for October Term 2006. Here are the four fortunate fellows who will be clerking for Justice Antonin Scalia in OT 2006:

1. Dan Bress (UVA '05/Wilkinson '05-'06)

2. Louis A. Chaiten (Northwestern '98/Sutton '03-'04)

3. Joshua Lipshutz (Stanford '05/Kozinski '05-'06)

4. Hashim Mooppan (Harvard '05/Luttigator '05-'06)

If you're feeling a sense of déjà vu, well, there's good reason. This all-male crew is remarkably similar to Justice Scalia's current crop of clerks: a Kozinski clerk, a Luttig clerk, and a Wilkinson clerk, all coming to One First Street directly from their circuit court gigs; and one clerk who graduated from law school a few years ago, clerked for a well-regarded conservative judge, and burnished his credentials with a stint at the DOJ's prestigious Office of Legal Counsel (a.k.a. Finishing School for the Elect).

Will Justice Scalia, like the late Chief Justice Rehnquist, play tennis with his clerks? Perhaps. If recent news reports are correct, it looks like Nino would rather spend his time on the court than at the Court!

Last night, Nightline reported:

At the historic swearing-in of John Roberts as the 17th chief justice of the United States last September, every member of the Supreme Court, except Antonin Scalia, was in attendance. ABC News has learned that Scalia had instead spent his afternoon on the tennis court at one of the country's top resorts, the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Bachelor Gulch, Colo., during a trip to a legal seminar sponsored by the Federalist Society.

Not only did Scalia's absence appear to be a snub of the new chief justice, but according to some legal ethics experts, it also raised questions about the propriety of what critics call judicial junkets.

As far as A3G is concerned, however, the "judicial junket" issue is not the most problematic aspect of this whole episode. Far more troubling: the brilliant Justice Scalia's ineptitude with a tennis racket!

Yes, it's true. Justice Scalia can dissent like nobody's business; but the most gifted prose stylist on the Supreme Court is no great shakes on the tennis court. The Nightline broadcast was accompanied by grainy, surreptitiously taken video footage of Justice Scalia in his tennis whites. And based on that footage -- which shows Nino offering up anemic, underhanded serves; hitting wild, flailing backhands; and lumbering across the court, with a sluggish shuffle of feet -- A3G would respectfully suggest: "Justice Scalia, please -- stick to the duck hunting!"

Justice Is Blind: Is THAT What You Call "Good Behavior"?

Here are a few blind items of judicial gossip to usher in the new year:

1. This prominent appeals court judge parties a little too heartily for his own good. At one legal conference, he got so drunk that he had to be carried back to his hotel room -- where the partying continued, through the consumption of tequila shots! The following day, he was spotted with a bad hangover and a pronounced limp (the result of injuring his foot on the dance floor the night before).

2. In contrast to the jurist just mentioned, who may engage in excessive fraternization with non-judges, this Supreme Court short-lister isn't exactly Miss Congeniality. After she delivered a speech at a midwestern law school, she had lunch with some law students and faculty members -- where she proceeded to alienate the entire group, with her pedantic, constant correction of minor misstatements, made by her dining companions in casual conversation.

This judge's distance caused several attendees to dub her "an ice queen." When one law student asked about the judge's family, in a well-intentioned effort at small talk, the judge responded frostily: "I'd rather not get into such matters -- and certainly not with you!" (While a judge's reluctance to discuss her personal life is entirely understandable, the "certainly not with you" was gratuitious; the inquiry could have been deflected far more politely.)

3. This East Coast circuit judge, who was a distinguished legal academic before taking the bench, has a weakness for reruns of Xena: Warrior Princess.

4. After this comely district judge was nominated as a judicial hottie, a former colleague emailed her about the contest and said that he would vote for her. The judge subsequently declared herself to be "mortified" by the proceedings -- but maybe she was just upset that she didn't make the top five!

5. This female circuit judge was asked for her reaction when a colleague of hers was nominated as a judicial superhottie, but she was not. This judge quipped: "Well, I've been dubbed a judicial diva. Hotness fades; but diva-hood is forever!"

Truer words were never spoken...

In re: "Those 'Happy Homos'"

Some of you may have read this interesting New York Times profile of David B. Lat, who serves as Article III Groupie's mouthpiece to the world. Lat has some corrections, clarifications, and comments on Jonathan Miller's article, which should hopefully appear in these pages in the near future.

For the time being, however, A3G would like to defend David Lat against a specific accusation that has been leveled against him by some who have read the article. If you've met David Lat in person, you know that although he's a genial and pleasant fellow, he's a bit of a wimp. This is why he needs a strong woman -- to wit, Article 3 Groupie -- to rush to his aid.

Miller writes:

[Lat] skipped the sixth grade, and attended Regis High School, the prestigious all-boys Catholic high school in Manhattan, where he gained a reputation as a skilled debater (he sang the Banana Boat song when he delivered a speech about Haitian refugees). From there he went on to Harvard, where he socialized little while earning a degree in English and adopted a conservative worldview, writing lacerating opinion columns for The Harvard Crimson.

He declared, among other things, that campus liberals had no "no broad, overarching philosophy." He lamented the revocation of Ireland's ban on divorce, and repeatedly castigated the school's Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Student Association.

In one column, entitled "Those 'Happy Homos,'" he wrote: "National Coming Out Day is just another event in the recent rash of identity-based pride rallies. These alleged celebrations of diversity have devolved into mutual masturbation festivals. They reassure people who are still deeply troubled by their lifestyle choices and are desperately seeking a stamp of approval. We have a duty to deny them this approval."

Those statements brought a harsh rebuke from members of the organization in a subsequent letter to the editor that called the column "spiteful and logically vapid."

Based on the foregoing, some of you have accused David Lat of being "homophobic." Much could be said on this subject; but for present purposes, suffice it to say that nothing could be farther from the truth.

Just as Samuel Alito should not be judged based on statements in a job application from 20 years ago, Lat should not be judged based on his (literally) sophomoric ramblings in a college newspaper, from over a decade ago. These "youthful indiscretions" -- of a hotheaded, rabble rousing campus conservative -- should not be viewed as an accurate reflection of who Lat is today. Nor do they represent the views he currently holds on such issues as homosexuality, gay marriage, etc.

Also, for the record, the reference in the column's title to "Happy Homo[s]" -- which could be viewed as derisive or derogatory -- should not be ascribed to Lat. If you read the column in its entirety, you'll see that the title was merely quoting from posters that were put up around the Harvard campus by the BGLSA.

More on this subject may follow in a subsequent post. But for the time being, A3G wanted to get these thoughts into circulation, to stop the flood of hate mail that poor Mr. Lat has been receiving from people who believe, incorrectly, that he harbors some animosity towards gay Americans (or, for that matter, gay persons of any nationality).

Article III Groupie's Fifteen Minutes

Article III Groupie's alter ego, David Lat, is going to be on tonight's installment of The Charlie Rose Show, where he will discuss the Alito confirmation hearings.  The show will air at 11 p.m. Eastern time.

It's well worth watching, not because of Mr. Lat's presence, but because of the great legal minds -- all former Supreme Court clerks, of course -- who will be chatting with Mr. Rose during the show: Professor Charles Fried, of Harvard Law School; Professor Noah Feldman, of NYU Law School; and Professor John Yoo, of Boalt Hall. Evan Thomas, assistant managing editor of Newsweek magazine, will also be interviewed. 

Although Lat will never join the ranks of the Elect, at least he gets to be on television with them. Neato!

In addition, last Friday, while he was traveling in India, David Lat participated in a telephone interview with Mary Darcy of WAMC (Northeast Public Radio). Lat explained the meaning of various legal terms and concepts expected to get bandied about at the Alito hearings. You can access an audio clip of that interview via this page (scroll down to "download me"; Lat's interview begins at around the 6:45 mark).

Where in the World Is Article III Groupie?

Article III Groupie just returned to blogging -- but now, sadly enough, she must take her leave of you once again. She's going to be out of the country for the next two weeks or so, attending the overseas wedding of a close friend.

If she gets the chance, A3G will try to do a little blogging and e-mailing while she's away. But she's uncertain about how much internet access she will have in her destination. So please don't be surprised if A3G doesn't blog much over the next two weeks (and please don't be offended if she's unable to respond to your email).

This means that A3G will probably miss much of the upcoming Supreme Court confirmation hearings for her beloved Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. The thought of being away from C-Span and the internet during the Alito hearings, which start up on January 9, upsets A3G as much as missing the Barneys Warehouse Sale did last August. But she had no control over the timing of either the hearings or her friend's wedding, so there's no sense in fretting.

Some people might be relieved to hear that A3G won't be blogging much, if at all, about the Alito hearings. A UTR reader recently drew A3G's attention to this interesting passage in an article in today's New York Times by David D. Kirkpatrick:

"[Judge Alito] will have a couple hairs out of place," said one participant [in the process of preparing Alito for the hearings, a.k.a. the "murder boards"].

"I am not sure his glasses fit his facial features. He might not wear the right color tie. He won't be tanned. He will look like he is from New Jersey, because he is. That is a very useful look, because it is a natural look. He's able to go toe-to-toe with senators, and at the same time he could be your son's Little League coach."

UTR's correspondent remarked to A3G: "You seem to have had an effect on mainstream media judicial coverage!" And the self-involved A3G can't help thinking that Kirkpatrick's source was preemptively refuting an anticipated negative review of Judge Alito's personal style from A3G (especially with that pointed reference to the Garden State, which she and Judge Alito share as a home state).

But if this White House insider was worried about A3G mocking Judge Alito, he need not fret. A3G confesses that, like the notorious Robin Givhan, her assessments of style are often colored by ideological considerations. So even if Judge Alito turns out to be a fashion disaster at the hearings, A3G will probably pull her punches, declining to savage such a staunch conservative. (This self-admitted bias also explains A3G's somewhat harsher treatment of the more dubious Harriet Miers, who was no favorite of conservatives.)

Some of you might be wondering: Where will A3G be spending the next two weeks? Well, if you were a "spicy blogger," where would you go for vacation? Why, India, of course!

Yes, that's right. While Senatrix Dianne Feinstein is asking Judge Alito how he feels about Roe v. Wade "as a man," A3G will be shopping for saris "as a woman." She also looks forward to savoring some samosas (pictured at right) -- hopefully they won't give her gastrointestinal distress. In case she doesn't get to blog between now and the start of the hearings, A3G wishes Judge Alito the very best of luck in his quest for a seat on the Supreme Court!

Article III Groupie: The Bitch Is Back!

Happy New Year, my little judicial chickadees!!!

Going into a new and exciting year of judge-watching, Article III Groupie is delighted to be blogging once again at Underneath Their Robes. She'd like to take this opportunity to thank all of the commenters and e-mail correspondents who have warmly welcomed her back to the blogosphere. But was there ever any doubt that A3G would return to you? As the old saying goes, "You can't keep a good [wo]man down!"

To those of you who were "nice" to Article Three Groupie during her absence from UTR, she thanks you for your support during a stressful and trying period. To those of you who were "naughty," saying all sorts of mean things about the undersigned blogress -- and you know who you are -- A3G says: "You ought to be ashamed of yourselves. That's no way to treat a lady!"

Okay, fine, Article 3 Groupie knows what you're thinking: of all the denizens of the blogosphere, A3G, the queen of snark, has no standing to complain of harsh treatment. To quote another aphorism, "Live by the blogger's keyboard, die by the blogger's keyboard."

So A3G will leave you with a different saying: "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned!"*

--Article III Groupie

P.S. To any people who are scandalized by the title of this post, please note that it's simply a reference to a song by Sir Elton John.

* Actually, any threat of A3G attacking her detractors is completely idle; A3G plans to be gracious in victory. To borrow a turn of phrase from her fellow diva, hotelier Leona Helmsley, Article 3 Groupie has better things to do than worry about "the little people."

Justice Scalia: The Stand-up Comedian of One First Street?

Here at Underneath Their Robes, Justice Antonin Scalia has a nickname of long standing: "The Rock Star of One First Street." But perhaps it's time to bestow a new moniker upon Nino: "The Seinfeld of One First Street"?*

Rumor has it that Justice Scalia, deeply disappointed about not even being considered for the job of Chief Justice, has been more disengaged from life at the Court ever since. Well, if Nino is dissatisfied with life inside the marble palace, maybe he should think about hitting the stand-up comedy circuit.

According to this NYT article by Adam Liptak, a fascinating and fabulous study by BU Law School Professor Jay D. Wexler has scientifically determined that Justice Scalia is the funniest Supreme Court justice. As noted in the lede of Liptak's piece, Justice Scalia is "19 times as funny as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg."

Breaking news: "Nino is much funnier than Ruthie." Gee, tell Article III Groupie something she doesn't already know! Guess this is what passes for news on a long holiday weekend. (Liptak's funny and well-written article has been hovering at or near the top of the Times's "Most E-mailed Articles" list since its publication.)**

Okay, in fairness to Liptak's excellent article and Professor Wexler's brilliant study (pdf), here are some more newsworthy tidbits:

1. RBG is physically capable of laughter. Wexler writes:

And, of course, it is widely believed that Justice Ginsburg doesn't even laugh herself, much less make others laugh. The notion that Justice Ginsburg does not laugh is mistaken.  As one of Justice Ginsburg's clerks during the OT '98 Term, I can attest that she does, in fact, laugh. Maybe not often, perhaps not loudly or with great vigor and the wild waving of arms, but laugh she does.

(Prior to clerking for Justice Ginsburg, Professor Wexler served as a Tatel Tot and went to Stanford Law School.)

2. The legal deities known as Supreme Court clerks -- a.k.a. "the Elect" -- make mistakes. Liptak writes:

Last November, Sri Srinivasan, a government lawyer, apologized to Justice David H. Souter for referring to him as Justice Scalia.

"Thank you," Justice Souter said, with characteristic self-deprecation, "but apologize to him."

"[Laughter.]"

Srinivasan, an Assistant to the Solicitor General, clerked for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

3. The Supreme Court is getting funnier under Chief Justice John Roberts. Liptak writes:

The New York Times, building on Professor Wexler's pioneering work, analyzed the available transcripts for the term that began this October. The mood under Chief Justice Roberts has brightened, the analysis found, with the average number of justice-generated laughs per argument rising to 2.9 from 2.6 the previous term.

In the current term, the Times analysis found, there has also been movement in the funniness-of-individual-justices department. Justice Breyer has taken the lead, at 28 laughs, edging out Justice Scalia, with 25. They also tied in the largest-number-of-jokes-in-a-single-argument category, each squeezing five into a single hour.

Chief Justice Roberts made a strong early showing, coming in third, with 13.

Not only is the new Chief a total hottie; he's also hilarious!

Professor Wexler explains his study in a short, very funny article in the unfailingly entertaining Green Bag. Check it out by clicking here (pdf). Enjoy!

* Actually, "The Seinfeld of One First Street" is already taken as a nickname. Here's a little known fact: Seinfeld once clerked for Justice Scalia!

No, not that Seinfeld; Gil Seinfeld, a Harvard Law grad and no relation to Jerry (as far as A3G knows). As one would expect from a Guidomaniac, Gil is fairly liberal -- he was the token liberal or "counterclerk" in the Scalia chambers that Term. (N.B. Justice Scalia doesn't always adhere to the practice of hiring one liberal clerk; check out the comments to this PrawfsBlawg post. Of Justice Scalia's four current clerks, all are conservative.)

** Speaking of the NYT "Most E-mailed Articles" list, please feel free to e-mail this AP wire story to 20 of your closest friends. (The last line of the piece, however, requires a correction; if you're reading this post, you know that UTR no longer requires a password.)

This Blog Is Back Online

This Blog Has Been Taken Offline

Article III Groupie: Under Her Robe

Article III Groupie recently gave Jeffrey Toobin, the brilliant legal affairs writer at the New Yorker, a peek beneath her robe. Toobin now reports that one David B. Lat, a federal prosecutor in Newark, New Jersey, claims responsibility for this blog. (To learn more about David Lat, check out Howard Bashman's comprehensive write-up.)

A3G will now share her thoughts on Toobin's article with you. Toobin writes:

In the months since Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement, Americans have become obsessed with judge-watching. The new pastime practically eclipsed the World Series, with fans paying more attention to Harriet Miers’s eye makeup than to Jermaine Dye’s batting average. Consequently, this has been a good year for a Web site called Underneath Their Robes, which has established itself as the unofficial blog of record about the federal judiciary. There’s plenty of inside dope on the site, including comprehensive dossiers on various jurists and the identities of each new group of law clerks at the Supreme Court, but its real appeal lies in the distinctive voice of its pseudonymous author, Article III Groupie. (Article III of the Constitution established the federal judiciary.)

A3G, as she calls herself, writes like a boozy débutante, dishing about the wardrobes, work habits, and idiosyncrasies of the “superhotties of the federal judiciary” and “Bodacious Babes of the Bench.” The author is keen on the new Chief Justice, writing, on one occasion, “Judge Roberts is lookin’ super-hunky tonight, much younger than his 50 years. . . . The adorable dimple in his chin is making A3G dizzy.” In contrast, she had doubts about Harriet Miers, posting a “Hairstyle Retrospective” and noting, “If Harriet Miers wins confirmation, maybe Supreme Court justices should start wearing powdered wigs.” Her posts on the new Supreme Court nominee, Samuel Alito, have included a report—a “judicial sight-ation” — of the Judge stopping in at a Newark pizza shop, and a sizing up of Alito’s teen-age son: “Since he’s 19, A3G is permitted to say: he’s a hottie!”

A3G has a minor clarification to add. Although it's true that Article III Groupie calls herself "A3G," it should be noted, in the interest of complete accuracy, that this moniker was bestowed upon her in the first instance by Judge Alex Kozinski, the #1 Superhottie of the Federal Judiciary.

The article continues:

The blog has many fans, including Richard Posner, the legal scholar and federal appeals-court judge in Chicago. “The beauty contests between judges can’t be taken very seriously, but I enjoy the site,” he said. “It presents good information about clerkships and candidates. It’s occasionally a little vulgar, but this is America in 2005.”

Judge Posner is brilliant, but he's wrong to dismiss judicial beauty contests as a joke. Judge Posner: Have you seen Judge Kimba Wood and Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw? Babes ipsa loquitur!!!

Back to the article:

In the autobiographical section of the blog, A3G says that she attended an Ivy League college and a top-five law school, clerked for a federal appellate judge, and had several interviews for clerkships on the Supreme Court—“but they ended in tragedy (i.e., with her not getting a job with the Supremes).” She goes on, “Article III Groupie then went to work for a large law firm in a major city, where she now toils in obscurity. During her free time, she consoles herself through the overconsumption of luxury goods.”

In real life, A3G is a thirty-year-old Newark-based assistant U.S. attorney named David Lat. “The blog really reflects two aspects of my personality,” he said over lunch recently. “I am very interested in serious legal issues as well as in fun and frivolous and gossipy issues. I can go from the Harvard Law Review to Us Weekly very quickly.” Lat, who has a boyish face, lives in Manhattan and commutes to New Jersey, and he writes his blog entries in his spare time. Like A3G, he graduated from Harvard College and Yale Law School, and he worked briefly at a big New York law firm. Although his current job as a prosecutor has required him to pare back his life style, he says, “I still hoard toiletries from luxury hotels all over the world.” Lat interviewed for a Supreme Court clerkship, with Justice Antonin Scalia, but he didn’t get it.

A few quibbles here (despite the meticulous fact-checking of the New Yorker's Tim Farrington, who even asked Lat to confirm whether his face can be fairly characterized as "boyish"). First, it's not entirely accurate to say that "A3G is... David Lat." Lat offers this explanation, which A3G reprints herein with his permission:

It's not fair to say that I "am" A3G. With apologies for this self-aggrandizing (but helpful) comparison, one would not say that Vladimir Nabokov "was" Humbert Humbert or that J.K. Rowling "is" Harry Potter. A3G is, like Chief Justice Roberts on the Supreme Court, "h[er] own [wo]man." Like Judge Posner's cat Dinah (also featured in the New Yorker -- with a picture), A3G is fiercely independent and answers to no one. In fact, when I have something to report to A3G, I email her about it -- just like any other reader of UTR.

Thus, my persistent denials of being A3G have been, in a technical and perhaps Clintonian sense, quite correct. My opinions and those of A3G are not exactly the same. In fact, some of the people that A3G has offered snarky commentary on are people for whom I harbor admiration, affection, or both. In short, A3G does as she pleases, and I cannot be blamed or held accountable for any of her misdeeds, indiscretions, or occasional vulgarity.

Article 3 Groupie agrees with these observations from Dave Lat, and she would like to underscore that the views stated in this blog -- all on frivolous, non-substantive issues, such as judicial fashion -- represent the views of no one but herself. They do not represent the views of A3G's Biglaw employer, David Lat, or David Lat's employer.

A3G has some additional tidbits and quibbles to add. The article reports that Lat, after clerking for a federal appeals court judge (Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain (9th Cir.)), "worked briefly at a big New York law firm." For the record, Lat worked for two-and-a-half years at the fantastically high-powered firm of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen, & Katz. Wachtell Lipton is a famously hard-working place; as the old saying goes, "Wachtell years are like dog years." So "brief[]" is not a fair characterization of Lat's tenure there, which involved thousands upon thousands of billable hours.

In addition, like A3G, Lat had more than one interview for a Supreme Court clerkship. In addition to interviewing with Justice Scalia, as noted in Toobin's piece, Lat also interviewed for a clerkship with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, with the AMK screening committee (which at the time consisted of Tom Hungar and Brett Kavanaugh; the Kid from Tegucigalpa was no longer participating).

And now, the conclusion of the article:

“Yale treats certain judges like celebrities,” [Lat] said. “And I’ve always had a certain status anxiety about not having clerked on the Supreme Court.” (A3G often refers to Supreme Court clerks as “the Elect.”) “My interest in celebrity has kind of metastasized from the judges to the clerks,” he added.

Lat is proud that some of his catchphrases have slipped into wider circulation—“litigatrix,” “judicial diva,” and “bench-slap” (for disputes among judges). Although he intended to remain anonymous, the success of the blog made coming clean irresistible. “I felt frustrated that I was putting a lot of time into this and was unable to get any credit for it,” Lat said. “But eventually these things have a way of coming out anyway. I only hope that the judges I appear in front of don’t read it.”

A3G's final comments: (1) once again, the views expressed in this blog are exclusively those of A3G, and no one else; and (2) Dave Lat is a very interesting individual, and he has asked A3G to mention that he would be happy to entertain further media inquiries. Lat would be delighted to write op-eds on issues concerning the federal judiciary, to offer radio or television commentary on the same, to cater your next special event, and to entertain at children's birthday parties. (You may contact him by emailing A3G, who will make sure that he gets your message.) Thanks for reading!

Judicial SIGHT-ation: Justice O'Connor at "Cabaret"

Here's a quick judicial sightation (and proof that the beleaguered Article III Groupie still exists). A UTR reader provides this report:

Last night, Justice O'Connor was spotted at Georgetown Law School! She, with her husband and two other guests, attended a performance of Cabaret by the Georgetown Gilbert & Sullivan Society (Motto: "The only theater group with its own law school!"). The cast of mostly law students was totally jazzed that she came! (If you squint at this picture, you can make out the back of the Justice's head, reading a program in the dark.)

During intermission, the Justice was overheard praising the talents of the actors and singers. And rightly so -- the show is fantastic! Sadly, she left before the end of the show, probably because it was very late in the evening.

A3G, if you post this today, you can let your readers know that they can be as cool as Justice O'Connor by attending our show for closing night tonight, Saturday, Nov. 12 at the Georgetown Law Center, Hart Auditorium, 8 PM.

Fantastic! A3G, who is an avid theatregoer, urges all of her D.C.-based readers to check out the show. If you're not familiar with "Cabaret," by the great team of Kander & Ebb, this commentary by Jay Tamboli contains a concise and enticing description:

You’d think watching a musical about Nazis, abortion, and girls dancing in their underwear would be awkward enough sitting next to your girlfriend, but try it sitting near a Supreme Court Justice. “Undue burden” indeed!

Yes, "Cabaret" is that exciting -- a show not to be missed. And if you're lucky, perhaps another justice of the SCOTUS will make an appearance at this evening's performance. If so, you know whom to tell about it!

Judicial SIGHT-ation: Judge Alito Drowns Sorrows in Pizza

This blog has been the source of numerous celebrity sightings of Judge Samuel A. Alito. UTR correspondents have spotted Judge Alito on his way to get coffee and at a local supermarket (where he bagged his own groceries). Indeed, Article III Groupie fears that it's only a matter of time before she and her readers are slapped with a temporary restraining order, directing them to stay 500 feet away from Judge Alito.

But before that happens, let's get in one more judicial sightation of Judge Alito! Here it is:

Hi A3G. It's your loyal Newark correspondent, writing in with a judicial sightation of your beloved SCOTUS nominee, Judge Samuel Alito.

This sighting is an oldie, but a goodie; it took place a few weeks ago. I wasn't going to share it with you at first because it arguably places Judge Alito is a less-than-flattering light. But now that his own mother* has openly talked about how disappointed Judge Alito was when he didn't get nominated the first time around, losing out to Harriet Miers, I feel at liberty to share this with you.

On the Friday after the Miers nomination was announced (on that Monday), I was walking along Broad Street in downtown Newark with a few colleagues. We were on our way back from lunch. And suddenly, my heart skipped a beat. Like any good Article III groupie, I recognized the man walking toward us, heading down Broad Street in the other direction: the Honorable Samuel A. Alito, Jr.!

Judge Alito was walking by himself, unaccompanied by his law clerks, and he was looking absolutely inconsolable. His face bore an expression of the most exquisite and profound sadness -- a look of misery so intense that only the great Isabelle Huppert could conjure it up. If I knew any of this year's Alito clerks, I would have whipped out my cell phone then and there, called one of them up, and said, "Remove all sharp objects from chambers immediately!"

As we walked past Judge Alito, I looked over my shoulder to see where he was heading. He walked into Queen Pizza -- an eatery that some of us refer to, with a mix of affection and indigestion, as "the pizza dump." The pizza at Queen is decent and cheap ($1.50 a slice). But it's hardly an establishment fit for an Article III demigod! The thought of a Supreme Court short-lister eating there depressed me.

Here's my speculation: devastated by his losing the Supreme Court nomination to Harriet Miers, Sam Alito was heading in to the Queen to grab some Italian comfort food. Perhaps he ordered up a plate full of ziti, just like Mamma Rose used to make?

By the way, A3G, rumor has it that the Alito clerks maintain their own (ironic?) version of Zagat's, dedicated to describing Newark's many fine eateries (yes, that was sarcastic). If the Michelin Guide can make it to New York, can a hop across the Hudson to Newark be far behind?

A3G thanks her reader for this scrumptious sightation. It appears that Supreme Court nominees enjoy a slice of pizza every now and then (as do the justices themselves; Justice Scalia reportedly frequents AV Ristorante, where he orders pizza with anchovies). Supreme Court justices: They're just like us!!!

On a somewhat related note, in light of the news reports quoting Rose Alito concerning her son's disappointment when Harriet Miers was nominated, some of you have asked whether Judge Alito might be the judge mentioned in this "Justice Is Blind" item (item #3). Alas, A3G can neither confirm nor deny the identities of any of the judges mentioned in her blog's blind items (which are some of the most sensitive and controversial things that she publishes). She appreciates your understanding.

* Since her son's nomination to the Supreme Court, poor Rose Alito, besieged by the media, has become "a prisoner in her longtime home" (as reported in The Trentonian, via How Appealing).

UTR Featured in Time Magazine!

As an admittedly vain and self-involved individual, Article III Groupie cherishes all mainstream media mentions of UTR (which she lovingly collects in the left-hand column of her humble blog). And the latest addition to the UTR Press Book is a very exciting one: a mention in Time magazine!!!

Now A3G feels especially guilty for being AWOL from the blogosphere...

"The Little Supremes": Law Geeks on the Make

If you're suffering from UTR withdrawal, just read this awesome article, by Anna Schneider-Mayerson of the New York Observer, entitled "The Little Supremes." The subhead says it all: "Meet the Next Generation of Robertses and Alitos: Blazers, No Nose Rings, Strunk and White Sarcasm; ‘If They Wanted It,’ One Says, ‘They Wouldn’t Say It.'"

Schneider-Mayerson's article is a fascinating, detailed study of the folks she dubs "Little Supremes": "a handful of earnest, platinum-résumé’d law geeks whose prospects for the Big Bench are the source of constant speculation among friends and colleagues." This glamorous group is dominated (unsurprisingly) by members of the Elect, including several whose names have been splashed generously over the pages of this blog (e.g., Noah Feldman, Kermit Roosevelt, David Schizer, etc.).

Article III Groupie's final reason for recommending this article to you: it includes a shout-out to UTR! Here's the relevant discussion:

At N.Y.U., as at other top schools, somewhere between 15 and 40 students with the top grades get special counseling for prime clerkship placements, the goal being to send the top Supreme Court clerkship candidates to "feeder judges," said [Professor Burt] Neuborne.

These are the old kingmakers of an old profession. In the first half of the century, it was Second Circuit Judge Learned Hand; in the 25 years after that, Second Circuit Judge Henry Friendly. At least six of his former clerks are on the federal bench—including Justice Roberts and Judges Pierre Leval, A. Raymond Randolph, Michael Boudin, William Curtis Bryson and Merrick Garland.

The feeder judges tend to be Supremes-in-waiting themselves. These days, some of those judges are political iconoclasts Richard Posner and Alex Kozinski, conservative sparring partners Michael Luttig and J. Harvie Wilkinson III, and Second Circuit Clinton appointees Pierre Leval and Guido Calabresi.

"I think Guido picks winners," said Mr. Roosevelt, who didn’t get a clerkship offer from Judge Calabresi but did clerk on the D.C. circuit, considered a training ground for Supreme Court justices.

And it’s a betting man’s game. The wildly irreverent, anonymous legal Web log Underneath Their Robes keeps tabs on where feeder-judge clerks end up, and refers to Supreme Court clerks as "members of the Elect."

Delightful! And don't miss the rest of Schneider-Mayerson's article, which is packed full of such juicy tidbits. You can access it by clicking here. Enjoy!

A3G: Not Dead (Yet)

Here is a great and gossipy article, by the Femme Fatale of One First Street, about the first few weeks of the Roberts Court.

Here is an interesting profile of Judge Alito.

Here is the wedding announcement of William Howard Taft V, a former law clerk to Judge Alito. Yes, the bridegroom is a descendant -- specifically, a great-great-grandson -- of William H. Taft, former Chief Justice of the United States (and POTUS too, but that's small potatoes here at UTR).

Article III Groupie is stressed, depressed, and oppressed by the law firm powers-that-be. It's only Wednesday, and she has already pulled one-and-a-half "all-nighters" (after spending most of the weekend in the office). This explains why A3G hasn't been blogging (or emailing) over the past few days. But she hopes to return to the blogosphere soon. Later!

Justice Ginsburg, Mountain Momma

"Country roads, take her home

To the place where she belongs

Justice Ginsburg, mountain momma,

Take her home, country roads..."

Actually, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is an improbable "mountain momma." One would be hard-pressed to pick a Supreme Court justice who would be more out of place in West Virginia than RBG. But this, dear readers, is a world full of surprises.

Last month, Justice Ginsburg made her way to the Mountain State. On October 20, Ruthie gave a speech at the West Virginia University College of Law, the Edward G. Donley Memorial Lecture. A video of her remarks can be accessed via How Appealing.

A West Virginia-based reader who was on the scene chimes in with a plethora of judicial sightations:

Although we did not have Nino, Breyer, and several other judges in the same room, I thought that I would send along some details of Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s visit to West Virginia University College of Law on Thursday, October 20. Ever since the Roberts nomination, I’ve had a questionably healthy obsession with the federal judiciary, and your site has joined the list of places that I visit daily.

Although Rehnquist and O’Connor both paid visits to Morgantown in the last decade, Ginsburg’s delivering the Donnelly Memorial Lecture truly brought many people from the federal judiciary to our state’s sole law school. Judge M. Blane Michael and Judge Robert B. King from the United State Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit made it to the events. Judge Irene Keeley* (whom I would like to nominate for your judicial hottie list, see photo at right) and Judge Robert Maxwell from the U.S.D.C. for the Northern District of West Virginia, plus Judge Robert Chambers from the Southern District, all attended.

WOW! That's an impressive line-up; Justice Ginsburg was welcomed by a gaggle of federal judicial celebrities. (And their presence can't be chalked up to a desire to suck up to their circuit justice; that would be Justice Thomas Chief Justice Roberts.)

Ginsburg held a morning session to which only law students were admitted, in which she answered questions about a number of topics including foreign law, Kelo, the ERA, and her personal career. She talked about the change from Rehnquist to Roberts, observing that Roberts is young enough to be the son of most of the court members, and that all of the justices recognize him as the best advocate to come before the court prior to his D.C. Circuit appointment. Um yeah, that’s kind of an awesome compliment. She also talked about how her daughter and son-in-law were 2Ls on the law review at HLS when Roberts was managing editor and that she had the inside scoop about his fairness, efficiency, and goodness from her family connection.

Her afternoon session, with the judicial faces mentioned above, was broadcast throughout the state. Though much of her talk on women in the law was general, she tailored some of her remarks to West Virginia, which was unique -- thanks, RBG clerks! She started her afternoon talk with a very nice tribute to Rehnquist, and she ended it with some words about O’Connor.

Fantastic and fascinating! It sounds like Justice Ginsburg's trip down the country road went very well indeed. Perhaps RBG will visit West Virginia again in the near future? (And no, vacationing at The Greenbrier doesn't count.)

(If you're wondering about why Article III Groupie isn't blogging about the Alito nomination, she has a good excuse. A3G has been getting killed at work lately -- see, she really does work at a law firm -- and she's several days behind in her newspaper and blog reading. So, in order to avoid embarrassing herself, she's going to hold off on blogging about current events until she has done her catch-up reading. Please bear with her!)

* Like Justice Ginsburg, Judge Keeley was also born in Brooklyn, New York.

Judge Alito's Sense of Humor

Although federal judges aren't widely regarded as the funniest people, many of them are actually hilarious. For example, our beloved Supreme Court nominee, Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., has a great sense of humor (as one can see over at his blog).

Judge Alito's sense of humor has been described as "quiet and sly." It's not as flashy as that of Justice Antonin Scalia, nor as snarky as that of the young John Roberts, but it's definitely there (notwithstanding Dana Milbank's somewhat juvenile attempt to portray Judge Alito as a humorless nerd).

Here are two anecdotes demonstrating that Sam Alito is a pretty funny man:

1.  Take a look at this "Justice Is Blind" item, which appeared in the pages of this blog back in October 2004:

The Hallways of Justice. This district court diva, who harbors delusions of grandeur, placed large stonework lions on either side of the door to her chambers. Her neighbor down the hall, an appeals court judge, found the lions absolutely ridiculous (and ugly to boot). Shortly thereafter, he placed two hideous, plastic pink flamingos flanking the entrance to his own chambers.

The district court diva took the hint. She removed her leonine decorations sua sponte, without waiting for the mandate to issue from the appellate court...

Who was the appeals court judge in this humorous tale? Why, it was none other than Judge Samuel Alito! (For confirmation, check out this article, by the excellent Jan Crawford Greenburg.)

2. Professor Eric L. Muller -- who used to urinate next to Judge Alito, with whom he worked in the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Jersey -- offers this funny Alito story:

When [Sam Alito] left the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Third Circuit, those of us in the Appeals Division decided to give him a going-away present. You know those office ink-pad stamps that say "CANCELLED" or "DRAFT" or "RECEIVED" or whatever? We had one made that said "AFFIRMED," to make Sam's job [hearing] criminal appeals that much easier. A little prosecutor's in-joke, you know?

A few months later, an unmarked envelope arrived for us in the Appeals Division. Inside was a slip opinion of the first criminal appeal Judge Alito had heard, with the word "AFFIRMED" stamped about 20 times all over the front page.

We never did figure out who it was from.*

Delightful! Although several justices, such as Justice Antonin Scalia and Chief Justice John Roberts, are quite funny, the Court could always use another member who knows how to laugh. Let's get Judge Alito confirmed to the SCOTUS, ASAP!

* Before you jump to the conclusion that Judge Alito failed to recuse himself when he should have, please note Professor Muller's update to this post:

[T]he opinion we received in the mail with the "AFFIRMED" stamp all over it was not in a case litigated by our office. As I recall, Sam Alito recused himself from all cases that had been pending during his tenure as U.S. Attorney in New Jersey, and even from those that followed his tenure as U.S. Attorney for a period of many months, if not more.

Rosemary Alito: Judicial Sis, Leading Litigatrix

In his remarks accepting President Bush's nomination to the Supreme Court, Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., thanked various people for their love and support over the years. One of those people was his younger sister, Rosemary Alito, whom Judge Alito described as "a great friend and an inspiration as a great lawyer, and as a strong and independent person."

A "strong and independent," high-powered female lawyer? The type of woman who, if she were a judge, would be a judicial diva? Rosemary Alito definitely piqued Article III Groupie's interest. Having already reported on the Alito children, A3G decided to conduct a little investigation into the Supreme Court nominee's little sis; here's what she learned.

Rosemary Alito is New Jersey's leading labor law litigatrix. (Less colorful accounts describe her as "well-regarded," "highly accomplished," and one of New Jersey's "top employment lawyers.") She's a partner at Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Nicholson Graham, working out of the firm's office in Newark, New Jersey. Prior to being scooped up by K&L in a talent raid, she was a partner for many years at McCarter & English, one of the state's largest firms.

As noted in her firm bio on the K&L website, Rosemary Alito was selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America, and she received the Trial Bar Award from the Trial Attorneys of New Jersey in 1999. She's the author of the treatise New Jersey Employment Law, as well as numerous articles. WOW -- clearly legal genius runs in this family! (Interestingly enough, insofar as Judge Alito focused on appellate litigation during his pre-robescent legal career, judicial sis Rosemary is probably a better trial lawyer than her big brother.)

Rosemary Alito is also "incredibly well-connected" in New Jersey legal circles. Rumor has it that "she was considered for the position of U.S. Attorney by Bush II, which ultimately went to Christopher Christie." UTR's source reports that "[t]here were two stumbling blocks for her getting the job: (1) her lack of criminal law experience (although that was true of Christie as well), and (2) her dating one of the state's top criminal defense lawyers, Michael Critchley (not sure if they're still an item)."

Let's close this post with a delicious celebrity sighting of both Alito siblings. A UTR reader reports that Judge Alito and his sister, while both brilliant and tremendously accomplished, have somewhat different personalities. Judge Alito, who tends toward the formal side, appears to excel in more structured social settings; Rosemary Alito, in contrast, is better one-on-one.*

Here's the judicial sight-ation:

Hi A3G. I'm a New Jersey lawyer and a devotee of your wonderful blog. I just wanted to write to you about my judicial sightation of Judge Samuel Alito and his very impressive sister, Rosemary Alito.

I saw Judge Alito and his sister at a Federal Bar Association (FBA) event for new lawyers about two years ago. Judge Alito was one of the speakers, and his sister Rosemary was presiding over the meeting; she was President of the FBA (and may still be, I'm not sure).

Before the formal event started, there was a cocktail hour. There was a real contrast during this period between Judge Alito and his sister. Judge Alito seemed a bit awkward, and he seemed to have a hard time moving from one conversational circle to the other, which is a critical skill for cocktail parties. I chatted with him briefly -- I had a friend who had clerked for him -- and our conversation, while very pleasant, ended a little abruptly.

Rosemary Alito, on the other hand, was a cocktail party natural, circulating throughout the room smoothly and gracefully. She's a striking woman, tall and attractive, and she was strikingly dressed, in a rather daring leopard-print skirt. Rosemary Alito is clearly an expert at "working it"; she knows how to charm and disarm the most powerful men. She would approach various giants of the New Jersey bar, in a casual and friendly fashion, exchanging cheek-kisses and touching some of them lightly on the forearm. When one of them would tell a joke, she would throw back her magnificent mane of dark hair, and let out peals of full-bodied laughter. One could learn a lot from her!

Once the more formal proceedings started, Judge Alito came into his own. Rosemary Alito gave introductory remarks, and while she did an excellent job in presiding over the meeting, her performance wasn't as awe-inspiring as it was during the cocktail party.

Judge Alito, however, was a fantastic speaker. He was giving a speech on tips and pitfalls in appellate advocacy -- a pretty boring topic. But he was actually hilarious! I can't remember any of his specific remarks (it was two years ago), but he had lots of funny (yet good-natured) anecdotes about bone-headed things lawyers had done. The audience was eating out of his hand!

Here in the Garden State, we're thrilled that one of our own has been nominated to the Supreme Court. Most New Jersey lawyers are more liberal than Judge Alito, but he has a great reputation in our legal community for his brilliance, his kindness, and his integrity. We're pulling for him!

Wonderful! A3G thanks her reader for this detailed report. And she hopes that, as we saw in the case of John G. Roberts, Jr., people of good will on both sides of the aisle can come together behind a nominee who is indisputably bright and fair. In terms of a SCOTUS nominee from a Republican president, liberals could do a lot worse than Judge Samuel Alito.

* This is consistent with what Professor Eric Muller, who worked with Judge Alito in the U.S. Attorney's Office, recently observed: Sam Alito is "a bit shy and a touch awkward" in "small-ish interpersonal settings," but "remarkably at ease and exceedingly funny" when speaking to a larger group."

Judge Alito: Some Raves From His Clerks

As a 15-year veteran of the federal bench, Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., has many former law clerks (some of whom may hope to win clerkships with him at One First Street if he's confirmed). A number of these clerks have been quoted in the mainstream media news stories about Supreme Court nominee Alito, and their comments collectively establish the following:

(1) Judge Alito, while generally conservative, is not particularly ideological or doctrinaire, choosing instead to approach each case on its own facts (much like Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.);

(2) consistent with this non-ideological bent, Judge Alito is non-ideological in his clerk hiring, having had a number of liberal law clerks over the years (many more than Justice Antonin Scalia, to whom he's often compared; Justice Scalia sometimes hires one liberal clerk per Term, the so-called "counter-clerk"); and

(3) Judge Alito's clerks love him, offering nothing but praise for his amazing intellect, kind demeanor, and unimpeachable personal integrity.

As it turns out, a number of Alito clerks are readers of UTR, and what they've shared with Article Three Groupie is consistent with the foregoing. One former Alito clerk, with fairly liberal leanings, wrote A3G as follows:

I'm thrilled about Judge Alito's nomination. As a former Alito clerk, I'm not exactly objective, but I have a sound basis for my opinion. No one has taught me more about the law than Judge Alito, and I've never met anyone with his level of brilliance and integrity.

I've also never met anyone who is such a talented and efficient writer. He'd disappear into his office for a bit, then emerge a short while later with a beautifully polished piece of writing for us to comment upon, cite check, etc. He's a great, great pick.

Another former Alito clerk offered these comments:

I've enjoyed reading your blog for a while, but your Alito coverage has been really outstanding! Of course, I'm not quite impartial -- I'm a former Alito clerk, in fact one of the Gang of Four that was responsible for mixing the original "Bold Justice Blend." Needless to say, my former co-clerks and I are all ecstatic about the President's pick.

I visited the Judge's chambers in Newark today, and of course had to make a pilgrimage to Ward's Coffee Shop on Broad Street. I thought you'd be interested to know that the lovely lady who mans the counter, Vera Barbosa, has become an overnight media sensation and is loving every minute of it. Apparently, in the last 24 hours, she's been interviewed by reporters from Time, People, CNN, NBC, and "The Sun" (maybe the British tabloid?). The media spotlight, combined with the hordes of trick-or-treaters (Ward's is famous for its penny candy selection) has made this perhaps the busiest and most eventful day in the shop's 132-year history. I have a feeling that UTR's Alito coffee coverage is to thank for this unexpected media frenzy....

Very few people can offer better insight into what a judge is like than his clerks -- which explains why clerks are some of A3G's best sources. And based on what his clerks have to say about him, Judge Alito deserves speedy confirmation to the SCOTUS, in a landslide vote.

(Update: Don't miss this very interesting interview of Katherine Pringle, a liberal (and gorgeous) former Alito clerk, by David Kravitz of Blue Mass. Group. Kravitz, by the way, is one of the "Super-Elect," having clerked for two Supreme Court justices: Justice Breyer and Justice O'Connor.)

Let's conclude this post with an excerpt from this very interesting New York Times profile of Judge Alito:

Whatever his fate in the nomination process, Judge Alito has already achieved an unusual kind of renown at the T. M. Ward coffee shop near the federal courthouse in Newark, where a popular blend is called "Bold Justice -- the Judge Alito blend."

The owner, Jeffrey Sommer, described the blend of Java, New Guinea and other coffees as "strong in the cup with some sweetness and a winey aftertaste." Mr. Sommer said the judge stops by for a cup most days, and sales "really took off" in recent months.

"Customers usually just say, 'Give me an Alito,' " Mr. Sommer said.

Give us an Alito -- Amen to that!!!

The Alito Children: In Their Own Words

President Bush's wonderful Supreme Court nominee, Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., is married to Martha Alito (maiden name: Martha-Ann Bomgardner), a former law librarian and now a homemaker. They have two children: Philip Alito, 19, and Laura Alito, 17.

Based on the Google searches people have been running to reach Underneath Their Robes, it's clear that the public is interested in learning more about Judge Alito's lovely family. Although the Alito offspring "ain't exactly dancing Jack" (gavel bang: Law Dork), Phil Alito and Laura Alito are still attractive and accomplished young people. Let's learn a little more about them, shall we?*

Phil Alito is a second-year transfer student at the University of Virginia. In high school, Phil was a moot court champ (see item #12); he also played tennis and soccer. Phil is pictured at left, and since he's 19, A3G is permitted to say: he's a hottie!

Phil's father, it's worth noting, was also quite handsome in his youth. If he had not gained a little weight and lost a little hair in the intervening years, Judge Samuel Alito might have made UTR's list of male superhotties of the federal judiciary.**

Philip Alito spent his freshman year of college at Colgate University, where he was an editor of The Forum, "a non-partisan publication that seeks to encourage and facilitate the discussion of contemporary legal, political and social issues." Phil clearly has a robust and irreverent sense of humor; check out his editor bio from the Forum (Google Cache is wonderful, isn't it?):

First, God made the heavens and earth. Then came Arby's, followed shortly by Carl Jr. and other inferior brands of fast food. Fast foward. Homer's epics, Texas was created, Davy Crockett, king of the wild frontier, died at the Alamo, King Kong attacked Manhattan, and then, in a completely reactionary move, I was concieved. [A3G: Okay, let's net get into the details about that...]

I was born 9 months and 2 weeks later by a midwife/wolf named Janie Jean, who would prove very influential during my formative years. Shortly after, I became interested in politics and got involved with Gary Condit (not like that). I served as a parking aide to Nancy Pelosi (I won't even start on her) but was fired when Barbara Boxer came onto me. Eventually, I decided that my teeth needed to be cleaned, so I came to Colgate with a band of gypsies (who I have declared war on and will one day destroy). I decided to join "The Forum" to make friends but obviously that hasn't worked out. So, soon I will probably find a cow at a nearby farm and ride my way to glory in either LA or at the Calgary Rodeos.

Hmm... Will Senator Barbara Boxer vote against Judge Alito because his son accused the good senatrix of making unwanted sexual advances? Only time will tell...

(Update: Chris Geidner, over at Law Dork, analyzes some of the Forum op-eds penned by Phil Alito -- including one discussing the importance of Supreme Court appointments.)

Judicial daughter Laura Alito is a 17-year-old student at James Caldwell High School in West Caldwell, New Jersey. She is a rather attractive young woman, as you can see in the photograph at right, and a very successful competitive swimmer. On the internet, you can find her musings on friendship:

Friendship is defined as the relationship between two people based on affection and respect. But how many people actually truly value their friendships? It seems to be a growing theme that most people take their friends for granted and think they will always be there for them. Friendship is one of the most important things that people can learn. They learn how to be kind to others, respect people for who they are, and most importantly to just have someone whom they can trust and establish a bond.... I think everyone should learn to value his friendships a little more because one never knows what tomorrow might bring and maybe all you’ll need is just a friend to lean on.

Very interesting! President Bush, now that you've nominated a solid conservative with fabulous credentials to the Supreme Court, all that Harriet Miers business is forgiven and forgotten. But A3G can't help noticing: If only you had heeded Laura Alito's wise words about not taking your friends for granted, we might have been spared much aggravation -- as well as tasteless references to a distinguished jurist as "sloppy seconds."

* Before you accuse A3G of violating the privacy of the Alito kids, please note that all of the information she obtained about them was from the internet; as such, it's fair game under the "plain view" doctrine. Having information available about you on the internet is the cyber-equivalent of having a sign trumpeting the information on your lawn. You can't claim a Fourth Amendment violation after the police arrest you for growing marijuana in your front yard, can you?

** One might argue that Judge Alex Kozinski, who prevailed in UTR's judicial hottie competition, also carries more pounds and less hair than he did in his youth (when he successfully competed on The Dating Game, in 1968). But Judge Kozinski more than made up for any shortcomings with a very vigorous campaign in the hottie contest!

Please, Senator Schumer, No More Bus Analogies!

Commenting on speculation over the weekend that a SCOTUS nomination for Judge Janice Rogers Brown would be announced at a wreath-laying ceremony for Rosa Parks, Article III Groupie expressed her fear that such a move would lead to "tortured, bus-related metaphors."

Even though that scenario did not come to pass, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) decided to offer us a tortured, bus-related simile anyway. He was quoted in this Washington Post article as follows:

"Like Rosa Parks, Judge Alito will be able to change history by virtue of where he sits," Schumer said. "The real question today is whether Judge Alito would use his seat on the bench, just as Rosa Parks used her seat on the bus, to change history for the better or whether he would use that seat to reverse much of what Rosa Parks and so many others fought so hard and for so long to put in place."

It goes without saying: this is perfectly dreadful stuff. A3G agrees with Hugh Hewitt:

Chuck Schumer just argued that it is possible that Judge Alito, as Justice Alito, would roll back the achievements of Rosa Parks. That can only be understood as Schumer's belief that Judge Alito could find segregationist policies acceptable under the constitution. While it is undeniable that the nomination of Robert Byrd would have raised such a question, it is preposterous and indeed base to even hint at such a thing about a distinguished judge and public servant.

Aside from being utterly without foundation, Senator Schumer's bus analogy is silly and stupid. And if you're going to be silly and stupid, why not go all the way? Expect Senator Schumer -- who displayed an interest in movies during the Roberts confirmation hearings -- to deliver the following remarks during the floor debate on Judge Alito's nomination (in that nasal and annoying voice of his):

We've all seen the movie Speed. Think of the Supreme Court as a bus. The Supreme Court Bus, with moderates like Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony M. Kennedy at the wheel, is hurtling down the Highway of Justice. If the speed of the Supreme Court Bus drops below 50 miles per hour, the Bomb of Reactionary Conservatism will explode -- making meaningless all of the distance that the bus has traveled since the days of the Warren Court.

We can't let that happen. Our Supreme Court Bus still has many miles to travel down the Highway of Justice. We must stop Judge Samuel Alito now, before he stops our Bus!

Heaven help us... Can someone please throw Chuckie from the bus?

Happy Halloween from A3G!

Article III Groupie has been very busy blogging about our fabulous Supreme Court nominee, Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. But A3G didn't forget that today is a special day. Happy Halloween!

Alas, this year there's no special Halloween-related programming here at UTR. But feel free to go back and check out last year's holiday post, Judicial SIGHT-ations: Halloween Special Issue, in which A3G revealed what Judge Alito's colleague, Judge Walter K. Stapleton, dressed up as for Halloween last year. Or head over to Judge Alito's blog, to find out what costume he donned tonight. (Here's a hint: invisible jet sold separately.)

Did A3G go trick-or-treating today? Sadly enough, no; she didn't have the time. But if she could have, she would have dressed up as the scariest person that she can think of. "I'll get you, Ninth Circuit conservatives, and your little dogs too!"

Power-Washing the Supreme Judicial Deck

Looking for information about the latest Supreme Court nominee, Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr.? You've come to the right place. Just scroll down the page to the next post, or click here or here. But if you're looking for some Alito counterprogramming, then continue reading this post, a quick digression from UTR's Supreme Court nomination coverage.

Article III Groupie knows next to nothing about sports, but a more sports-minded reader brought this New York Times article to her attention. It's a profile of the handsome and hunky Nick Hartigan, who is the Ivy League's "leading rusher" this season. (A3G has no idea what that means; perhaps Gregg Easterbrook can enlighten her. She gathers that it's a good thing.)

Unless the football player in question is someone like Justice Byron White or Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., pigskin prowess doesn't interest A3G. But a reader emailed her about the Hartigan profile because of this tidbit:

After Nick Hartigan finished his freshman year at Brown University, he and two friends started a power-washing business to clean the wooden decks of homes in Washington and its suburbs. One of their first customers was the Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who learned Hartigan was studying political science and told him, according to Hartigan: "It's gobbledygook. You need to study history." So, Hartigan said, he decided, "O.K., I'm double-majoring in history."

How kind of Justice Kennedy to offer academic advice to the college kid washing his deck! Happily enough, AMK's advice has served Hartigan well:

Hartigan kept that promise and is carrying more than just the football as he nears the end of his senior season as the leading rusher in the Ivy League with 946 yards, on 176 carries.

He has a 3.91 grade point average, he has been nominated for a Rhodes scholarship, he is writing a senior thesis about religion in recent American politics, he is applying to law schools like Harvard and Yale, and he wants a career in law and government.

As you explore your budding interest in the law, Nick, please feel free to email A3G; she'd be happy to offer you information and advice about legal careers. In return, you can "power-wash her deck" -- any day of the week!

The Alito Nomination: A Few Quick Reactions

Article III Groupie actually has a very busy day -- and week -- ahead of her, so she's disappointed that the official announcement of Judge Samuel A. Alito's Supreme Court nomination comes at such a hectic time for her. But hey, the world doesn't revolve around A3G; it just seems that way sometimes. And even if President Bush's timing may not be ideal, his chosen nominee certainly is! (Check out Michelle Malkin's comprehensive round-up of blogospheric reaction, as well as Confirm Them, of course.)

Links to much of UTR's extensive past coverage of Judge Alito are collected in this post; if you're hungry for more information about the nominee, they should keep you well-fed for quite some time. In addition, here are some off-the-cuff observations and queries, plus a few links, concerning this morning's announcement by President Bush that he'll be nominating Judge Alito to the SCOTUS:

1. Does anyone know: When was the last time that a Third Circuit judge was nominated to the Supreme Court (if ever)?*

2. It's interesting to see President Bush turning once again to the Third Circuit for a home run of a pick (Michael Chertoff, Sam Alito), to salvage an initial nomination disaster (Bernard Kerik, Harriet Miers).

3. Judge Alito's acceptance speech was elegant, eloquent, excellent. A3G felt a shiver run up her spine when Judge Alito started to get choked up near the end of his remarks.

4. Some helpful surveys and analyses of Judge Alito's jurisprudence in specific areas: business law (Larry Ribstein); securities law (Dave Hoffman); copyright law (William Patry); sentencing and criminal law (Doug Berman).

5. Battle of the "juniors": Is Samuel A. Alito, Jr., an even stronger SCOTUS nominee than John G. Roberts, Jr.? Professor Ann Althouse thinks so; Ed Whelan, who clerked for Justice Scalia, shares that opinion.

6. Judge Alito is fairly affluent, even if he's not as filthy rich as the justice he would replace if confirmed, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. (Gavel bang: How Appealing.)

7. Democratic Senators Frank Lautenberg and Bill Bradley supported Samuel Alito's prior nominations to serve as U.S. Attorney for New Jersey and a judge on the Third Circuit. (Robe swish: How Appealing.)

8. Judge Alito's family is quite attractive. Judge Alito and his wife, Martha Alito, have two children, Philip Alito and Laura Alito. The kids are too old to be as adorable as Jack Roberts and Josie Roberts, but they're still rather photogenic.

9. Check out the results of Hugh Hewitt's cool SCOTUS poll, which show (a) tremendous support for the Alito nomination and (b) a willingness to consider the consitutional option if the Democrats attempt to mount a filibuster. (Granted, the audience of Hewitt's blog is not representative of the public at large; conservatives like A3G are overrepresented in his readership. But the poll results are still encouraging.)

10. Based on the Google searches bringing people to this blog, it's clear that many of you are curious about Judge Alito's religion. As noted by Professor David Bernstein, Judge Alito is Catholic; if he is confirmed, there will be a Catholic majority on the Supreme Court.

11. Alito's mother, Rose Alito, is amusingly outspoken. This AP article reports as follows:

[Judge Alito] was born on April Fool's Day to a mother who was candid enough to tell the world he was upset that he didn't get the Supreme Court nomination a month ago.... More candid that her son might wish, she said, ''I think he was upset that he didn't get there in the first shot, that Miers got it.''...

If confirmed, Alito would be the fifth Catholic on the Supreme Court. ''Of course he's against abortion,'' his mother said, another comment supporters in Washington might wish she'd held back.

12. As noted here, Judge Alito helped coach his son, Phil Alito, to victory in the 2004 Duke University Moot Court Competition. Phil and his partner, Justin Greenbaum, had to argue "a hypothetical case in which an alternative student publication wanted to publish an article about Sept. 11 praising the terrorist attacks and the students publishing the literary magazine charged their constitutional rights were violated by the school's censorship."

As noted in this comment, given the case the students had to work on, they couldn't have asked for a better coach. At the time, Judge Alito had pending before him a high-profile appeal raising First Amendment issues in the student newspaper context. How neat!

* Update: This appears to be the first time that a Third Circuit judge has been nominated to the Supreme Court. A reader drew A3G's attention to this helpful chart of former Third Circuit judges and how their judicial appointments were terminated (e.g., by resignation, death, and even an impeachment back in 1913). No appointment on the list was terminated because of appointment to the Supreme Court. Although it's possible that a Third Circuit judge could have been nominated but not confirmed to the Supreme Court, A3G is not aware of that happening.

A further update: Howard Bashman confirms that "Judge Alito is also the first judge serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ever to have been nominated to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court." Howard is also a big fan of Judge Alito:

At some point over the days to come, I will explain why I enthusiastically support this nomination. For now, my wife (who thinks Judge Alito is a great person, too) and I just want to take a moment to wish Judge Alito well in the days ahead, for he is a truly kind, intelligent, and compassionate person who undoubtedly will serve the Nation with great distinction on the Supreme Court just as he has served to this point with great distinction as a U.S. Court of Appeals judge.

Judge Samuel Alito: Under His Robe

According to news reports, Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., will soon be named as President Bush's Supreme Court nominee. To learn more about Judge Alito, check out these three great reports, from people with firsthand knowledge of what Sam Alito is really like: Eric Muller, Orin Kerr, and Michael Cernovich.

Of course, as a leading judicial celebrity, Judge Samuel Alito is no stranger to the pages of Underneath Their Robes. To locate Article III Groupie's prior posts on Judge Sam Alito, go to Google and type in the following (or click here):

--site:underneaththeirrobes.blogs.com alito

In addition to A3G's recent open letter to President Bush in favor of nominating Judge Samuel Alito, here are a few highlights from UTR's coverage of this superb jurist:

1. A judicial sightation of Judge Alito, "wandering down Broad Street in Newark, New Jersey," in the direction of T.M. Ward's Coffee Shop.

Ward's, by the way, has named a blend of coffee after SCOTUS nominee Alito. In the wake of President Bush's official announcement, expect sales of "Judge Alito's Bold Justice Blend" to skyrocket! The Philadelphia Inquirer has this report:

At T.M. Ward Coffee Co. in downtown Newark, near Alito's office, the judge is known more for his taste in coffee than for his legal philosophy. Store clerk Vera Barbosa said that Alito's law clerks wanted to do something special for his birthday a few years ago, so they persuaded the store to come up with a special blend for him.

"Judge Alito's Bold Justice Blend" -- a mix of Colombian, Java and New Guinea with a bit of espresso -- remains a hot seller at the coffee shop, Barbosa said, and Alito often stops by for it - by the cup and by the pound.

"He's a great man," Barbosa said. "He's very polite. He comes in whenever he has a chance. He's very nice."

2. A comparison of Judge Alito to the lovely and talented Kate Winslet, in The Race to the Courthouse: Some Insights from the Oscars.

Back in that post, A3G compared five Supreme Court short-listers to the five nominees for Best Actress at this year's Oscars. A3G wrote:

Both Alito and Winslet have been on the scene for a while, and they are justifiably held in high regard. For many years, they have been working hard and turning in fine performances. They are personally pleasant, and they are exceedingly well-liked.

But they face the same problem: How can they steal the momentum from their flashier, more aggressive colleagues? Despite his misleading nickname of "Scalito," the unassuming Judge Alito isn't nearly as forceful a personality as Justice Scalia. How can Judge Alito avoid becoming breakfast for Judge Luttig's pack of hungry wolves -- the powerful network of well-placed Luttigators, who all share a cult-like devotion to the aggrandizement of their former boss?

By the way, although A3G loves nicknames, she will generally avoid using the moniker of "Scalito" (whose origin is explained at Stuart Buck's blog). As noted by Fred Barbash and Peter Baker of the Washington Post, "most observers believe that [nickname] greatly oversimplifies his record. Alito is considered far less provocative a figure than Scalia both in personality and judicial temperament. His opinions and dissents tend to be dryly analytical rather than slashing. In addition, his appeals court record is not uniformly conservative on the sorts of issues that arise in Supreme Court confirmation battles."

So, although conservatives should be happy that President Bush has selected a nominee "in the mold of Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas," liberals should not have a reaction of knee-jerk antipathy towards Judge Alito.

3. A judicial sightation of Judge Alito at the local Shoprite supermarket. According to UTR's source, the possible future Associate Justice "bags his own groceries"!

4. A lengthy footnote about Judge Alito, in a post suggesting that President Bush nominate Jennifer Lopez, Oprah Winfrey, or Janet Jackson's right breast to the Supreme Court. A3G expressed fear that Judge Alito's status as one of the Great Unwashed would hurt his SCOTUS candidacy. She's happy to be wrong!

5. A quick post noting that Judge Alito "is known for being brilliant, mild-mannered, and unfailingly polite."

6. In this post about then-Judge Michael Chertoff, a former colleague of Judge Alito, A3G noted (item #14) that Judge Alito's wife, Martha Alito, "was formerly the law librarian in the U.S. Attorney's Office where he worked."

7. In this post about Judge Consuelo M. Callahan, A3G identified Judge Alito (and then-Judge Roberts) as a top SCOTUS possibility. A3G described Judge Alito as "relatively young, impressively credentialed, and reliably conservative, but not fierily or flamboyantly so."

The moral of the story of Judge Alito's nomination: sometimes nice guys do finish first. On behalf of UTR's readers, A3G says:

WE LOVE YOU JUDGE ALITO!!!

Breaking News: Judge Alito Is the SCOTUS Nominee!!!

There's no official announcement yet, but news outlets are reporting that President Bush has selected Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., as his nominee to the United States Supreme Court. An announcement is expected at 8:00 a.m. EST.

Article III Groupie didn't predict that Judge Alito would be the nominee, at least not in recent weeks.* SCOTUSblog's Tom Goldstein did predict Alito, making him three-for-three in major SCOTUS predictions -- the undisputed champ of Supreme Court prognostication.

In this case, A3G is absolutely thrilled to be wrong. Judge Alito is a simply sensational choice, her personal favorite among all the short-listers. A3G is honored that the president and his advisors heeded her impassioned, eleventh-hour plea to select Samuel Alito over J. Michael Luttig for the Court.

Judge Alito, A3G can't accept flowers from you; but a shout-out on your blog would be lovely, thanks! An offer to clerk for you on the Supreme Court would also be accepted with gratitude.

Congratulations, Judge Alito!!!

* Back in this post, in November 2004, A3G mentioned Judge Sam Alito -- alongside then-Judge John G. Roberts, now Chief Justice Roberts -- as a top SCOTUS possibility.

UTR Discovery Request: What Is Harriet Miers Reading?

Now it's time for a break from UTR's copious SCOTUS speculation. A reader recently sent Article III Groupie a link to the AP photograph at right, along with this email:

a3g, while i'm sure you're busy dealing with real issues like the next supreme court nominee, i'm still trying to follow good ol' harriet (you know, i wouldn't want to upset specter & have him think i was denying harriet's due process). i stumbled across this image & thought you'd be the perfect detective to solve my quandry.

clearly, from the picture, harriet has bought a new book -- 20% off nonetheless (at least we know she's thrifty!) -- to help her cope with her supreme court withdrawal. while i want to think it's a self-help or motivational book, the cover looks a lot like dan brown's "da vinci code." so what's she reading?

Does anyone know the answer to this question? A3G does see a resemblance to the Da Vinci Code, and she wouldn't be surprised to learn that Harriet Miers has picked up that book, given HEM's weakness for books that are "guilty pleasures" (which A3G discussed back in this post).

But A3G doesn't think that the Da Vinci Code is Harriet's purchase -- if you click on the photo and take a closer look, you'll see that the title lettering on Miers's book starts too far down the page. If you think you might know the book that Harriet bought, please post a comment to this post. Thanks!

Driving Miss Janice: Will Judicial Diva Brown Take the SCOTUS Wheel?

Earlier today, Professor Doug Berman raised this possibility:

This article reports that President Bush "and First Lady Laura Bush were scheduled to participate in a wreath-laying ceremony this evening honoring late civil rights activist Rosa Parks."  Wouldn't it be an incredible moment of political theater and strategy to announce the SCOTUS nomination of Judge Janice Rogers Brown at this event?  The President could describe Brown as the judicial equivalent of Rosa Parks, and framing the nomination in such terms would, I think, greatly impact the political dynamics and debate surrounding this nomination.

Professor Ann Althouse condemned such a stunt as being in "mind-shattering bad taste"; A3G largely agreed, but added that it might also "partake of a certain 'so bad it's good' quality." (Carol Platt Liebau seemed to share A3G's view: it would leave President Bush open to charges of politicizing an apolitical event, but it would undoubtedly give rise to "a blockbuster moment.")

It now appears that there will be no SCOTUS announcement today, so this point may be moot. But if you're curious about what A3G meant when she said that announcing a Jance Rogers Brown nomination at a Rosa Parks ceremony might be "so bad it's good," consider how it would allow Judge Brown to deliver nomination acceptance remarks dominated by tortured, bus-related metaphors:

Back when I was a state court judge, a status that some commentators have described as "icky," I was sitting at the back of the judicial bus.  When I was confirmed to the exalted D.C. Circuit, our nation's preeminent federal appeals court, I moved up to the front of the bus. Now, if confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court, I will be driving that damn bus. I've come a long way, babies!

Of course, even if tonight's ceremonies for Rosa Parks come and go without an announcement, Judge Brown might still end up as the nominee. Feddie is now predicting that she will get the nod, and Erick thinks it is a definite possibility. With everyone fixated on Judge Alito and Judge Luttig, nominating Judge Brown would take many by surprise -- and President Bush sure likes surprises.

SUPREME COURT NOMINATIONS ARE FUN!!!

A Win-Win-Win-Win Situation?

This comment, by an unidentified reader of this blog, led Feddie to offer this exciting speculation: President Bush's Supreme Court nominee will be Judge Edith Hollan Jones, "The Horsewoman of the Right-Wing Apocalypse" (a high compliment here at UTR).

Meanwhile, all of the Alito-Luttig speculation has led Professor Douglas Berman to offer this equally delicious possibility: President Bush will nominate Judge Janice Rogers Brown to the Court, perhaps at this evening's wreath-laying ceremony in honor of the late Rosa Parks. (Professor Ann Althouse opines that announcing Judge Brown's nomination at the Rosa Parks ceremony would constitute "[a]n incredible moment of mind-shattering bad taste," and A3G is inclined to agree with her. But such a move would partake of a certain "so bad it's good" quality, too.)

Friends, we find ourselves in a win-win-win-win situation. All of the folks whose names have been bandied about in the past few days -- Samuel Alito, Michael Luttig,* Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, Edith Jones, Karen Williams, Alice Batchelder, Emilio Garza -- would be great SCOTUS picks. They are all brilliant, splendidly credentialed, highly conservative jurists. Barring a very unforeseen development, we will all be extremely happy campers in the very near future.

* Does Article 3 Groupie harbor "player hate" for Judge Luttig, whose unmatched ability to feed his clerks to the Court leaves the rest of us out in the cold? Of course she does; she feels great resentment and schadenfreude towards Judge Luttig and his hardy crew of Luttigators. But A3G can't deny that Judge Luttig is a legal genius and a staunch conservative. As such, he would be an excellent SCOTUS nominee, as well as a very fine justice if confirmed. (A3G does not put much stock in these rumors about Judge Luttig, which are inconsistent with the incredible intellect he has demonstrated over his long judicial career.)

Alito : Luttig :: Clement : Roberts

The growing Supreme Court buzz around Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr. is reaching highly suspect, Clement-ine proportions. Is the White House trying to fake us out using the same strategy that it previously employed? Article III Groupie is reminded of the old saying that President Bush once horribly mangled: "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."*

Perhaps because of this feeling of déjà vu, A3G's theory that Samuel Alito is playing "Edith Brown Clement" to the "John Roberts" of Judge J. Michael Luttig is gaining traction. Over at the Washington Post's excellent Campaign for the Court blog, Fred Barbash provides this helpful round-up of the Alito buzz in the morning newspapers -- which he dubs "the Edith Brown Clement Memorial Sweepstakes."

The similarities to the Clement situation are striking. Speculation about Judge Clement's supposed absence from chambers on the day of President Bush's nomination announcement -- Clement was rumored to be on vacation** -- fueled the rumor that she was going to be the nominee. Similarly, the Alito buzz is being fed by his own absence from chambers (and presence in D.C.), as reported in today's Washington Post:

Adding to the speculation were reports by those close to the process that Alito arrived in Washington Thursday night. Asked why the judge came to town and whether he was in chambers yesterday, Alito's clerk laughed and said he would have to take a message. The White House, meanwhile, declined to comment.

To all the liberal interest groups and left-wing bloggers, A3G says: Don't be fooled; don't take the bait. Sic your attack dogs on Luttig -- he's your man. Even though Alito would be a great SCOTUS pick, he is a mere decoy.

Update: There is a long and provocative reader comment appended to this post, which appears to be based on these rumors about Judge Luttig (first reported at TalkLeft, as far as A3G knows; scroll down to the bottom of the page).

* President Bush said, "Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."

** This rumor was incorrect, according to this reader comment, as well as this Washington Post article (which places Judge Clement in New Orleans on that day). A3G read about Judge Clement's supposedly being on vacation here (see update #2).

The Miers Confirmation Hearings: Ten Possible Strategies

(No, the title of this post is not in error; keep on reading for the explanation.)

Doonesbury was plannning to devote a series of comic strips to the Harriet Miers nomination. After the Miers nomination got pulled, the comic strips did too. For those of you who are curious, you can check out the strips -- which are quite amusing -- by clicking here. (Gavel bang: Howard Bashman/How Appealing.)

In a similar spirit of not letting Harriet Miers-related efforts go to waste, Article III Groupie offers you the post appearing below. This post was more or less fully drafted, and A3G was just putting the finishing touches on it, when news of Harriet Miers's withdrawal broke. A3G thought she would just delete this post. But since she put so much work into it, she figured she might as well share it with her readers, in case some of you might find it interesting or amusing.

So here it is, for what (little) it's worth in the post-Miers era. It's the perfect thing to post on a slow weekend evening. Enjoy!

********************

Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers is preparing frantically for her confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which are currently set to start the week of November 7. In preparing for those hearings, Miers is going to need all the help she can get. Right now she is going through "murder boards," led by the beautiful and brilliant Rachel Brand (who would, despite her youth, be a better SCOTUS pick than Harriet Miers). But even UTR's Prom Queen may not be able to spin straw into gold.

Well, Article III Groupie is here to help. She would like to offer Harriet Miers ten suggested strategies to employ at her upcoming confirmation hearings:

1. "Talk to the Hand." Senator Arlen Specter observed that Harriet Miers is in need of a "crash course on constitutional law." Well, if she's worried about forgetting the names and holdings of any important Supreme Court decisions, she can always take this approach...

2. She Gets By with a Little Help from Her Friends. Harriet, take a page from the playbook of your boss: inside your decolletage, or maybe within the thicket of your disastrous hair, conceal a radio transmitter. Then let legal geniuses like Brett Kavanaugh and William Kelley feed you the answers to all of the senators' questions!

3. Running Out the Clock. Because Harriet Miers is not exactly brilliant, her main goal in the hearings is to avoid total embarrassment. Unlike John G. Roberts, she can't hope to impress the senators or the American people with her legal acumen; she just wants to escape relatively unscathed.

So, like a basketball team with a healthy lead in the fourth quarter, Harriet Miers should try to run out the clock. She should speak very slowly and deliberately, and she should take many long pauses -- before, during, and after her response to each query. This will prevent the senators from getting in too many of those pesky questions of theirs, and it will minimize Harriet Miers's chances of embarrasing herself. As she demonstrated in her visits to various senators, every time Harriet Miers opens her mouth, something stupid comes out.

How will Harriet Miers know if she is doing a good job? If the transcript of her confirmation hearings looks like a Harold Pinter play! ("Pause." "Silence." "Slight pause." "Long silence.")

4. More Public Scatology. This strategy should be used in conjunction with "Running Out the Clock," supra. Whenever she's asked a question that she needs time to think about (or consult with someone about), which will be often, Harriet Miers will also ask to go the bathroom.

When Chairman Specter expresses irritation with the countless bathroom breaks -- which Harriet Miers's boss, President Bush, is also known to take -- Harriet Miers will then come clean. She will patiently explain to the Committee that she suffers from explosive diarrhea. At that point, the members of the Committee, completely disgusted and grossed out by the thought of Miers's exploding bowels, will immediately adjourn the hearings -- FOREVER!!!

5. Turning the Tables. This tip is also a variation on "Running Out the Clock." As the Roberts confirmation hearings painfully reminded us, senators love to talk, and talk, and talk... There were times during the Roberts hearings when a senator would ramble on for so long, it was possible to forget there was a nominee in the room!

Harriet Miers can use this senatorial loquaciousness to her advantage. She should sit in her chair, very patiently and silently, as the senators ramble on; she should give no indication whatosever of impatience or any desire to speak. When the senator finally finishes his speech and poses a question, she should then "turn the tables" on him. In good Socratic fashion, just like a law professor, she should ask: "Well, Senator, what do you think?"

The proper response would be: "Excuse me, Counsel Miers, but these are your confirmation hearings." But how many senators will actually respond like that? Have you ever known a member of Congress to turn down an opportunity to talk? There is nobody alive who loves the sound of his own voice more than a United States Senator.

6. "Ain't I a Woman?" Harriet Miers should -- and will -- "play the gender card" at her hearings. One of the (few) talking points that the White House has been pushing to sell Harriet Miers is her series of female "firsts": first woman hired at her firm, first female president of her firm, first woman president of the Dallas Bar Assocation and the Texas State Bar, etc. In her opening statement, Harriet Miers will probably allude to her achievements as a female lawyer. When Senatrix Dianne Feinstein starts grilling Miers about abortion, Miers will probably spout some platitude about how she, as a woman, is especially sensitive to women's issues. (And we know that Miers is very good with the platitudes.)

7. Stand Behind Her Man. Ever since President Bush's announcement of the Harriet Miers nomination, the nominee's voluble ex-boyfriend, Justice Nathan Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court, has been serving as her unofficial spokesperson. Justice Hecht is everywhere, serving as the mouthpiece of Harriet Miers (and perhaps in ways that might cause him to be subpoenaed by the Judiciary Committee, thanks to his participation in the infamous conservative conference call).

So, dear Harriet, why not just let Nathan Hecht take your place at the confirmation heaings? If he can blab to people about how you'll vote on Roe v. Wade, surely he can field a few questions from a handful of senators about your jurisprudence. Up to this point, Justice Hecht has been doing all the talking for you, and we've all gotten used to this arrangement. So why change things now?

8. The Art of Seduction. Seduction is the oldest trick in the book for a woman who wants something from a powerful man (or men). And employment of feminine wiles is not without precedent at Senate confirmation hearings. At her 1983 confirmation hearings for the district court, Judge Maryanne Trump Barry (3d Cir.) successfully flirted up a storm. At the end of her hearings, Senator Strom Thurmond, who was at the time the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, told her: "I’m sure your attractiveness as a lady will not handicap you in your work, and I wish you well in your tenure on the bench."

So does this mean the senators will succumb if Harriet Miers starts batting her eyelashes at them? Alas, most of them will probably be unmoved; Harriet Miers is no longer the hottie that she was in her youth. But she might get Senator Ted Kennedy's vote...

9. Adoption of an Incomprehensible Accent. Speaking of the late Senator Thurmond, A3G always found his thick Southern accent impossible to understand. In Harriet Miers's case, she should adopt a Texas twang so heavy that no one -- not even her fellow Texan, Senator John Cornyn -- can understand her remarks. The Senators will then treat her testimony like a collection of auditory Rorschach blots: each senator will hear exactly what he wants to hear.

For example, take the sentence "I would overrule Roe v. Wade." Mumble it in a super-strong Texas accent, slowly and incoherently, as if you were mentally challenged. It kinda sounds like "I'd uphold the rule of Roe v. Wade," doesn't it?

10. The Familial Charm Offensive. This is a strategy that worked beautifully for Chief Justice Roberts. He deployed the adorable Jack and Josie Roberts masterfully, using his photogenic children to distract and to win brownie points from the senators.

Yes, it's true; Harriet Miers doesn't have any children. But she does have an aged mother, and that's almost as good. Once 93-year-old Sally Miers starts flashing those gums for the members of the Judiciary Committee, her daughter's speedy confirmation will be guaranteed!

Sorry, Judge Alito; the Luttigators Have Won

Article III Groupie tried; she really did. But it looks like her effort was too little, too late. One woman -- even a woman armed with a fabulous blog and a killer shoe collection -- is simply no match for an entire network of ruthless Luttigators, working overtime to send their former boss to One First Street (in between writing cease-and-desist letters to The Onion). The underdog might win in the movies, but this is real life.

Earlier today, A3G made her strongest pitch as to why President Bush should nominate Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., to the Supreme Court, instead of Judge J. Michael Luttig, the boringly obvious, inside-the-Beltway favorite. But despite A3G's best efforts, and a promising early lead for the widely admired Sam Alito, it looks like the tide has turned -- as A3G knew it would. Going into the weekend, Judge Luttig now has the upper hand. Expect a JML coronation early next week.

Gavel bangs for the Hugh Hewitt and Confirm Them links: Reasoned Audacity, by Charmaine Yoest. Yoest which also offers -- in the left-hand column of her blog -- a poll inviting readers to vote on who should be the next SCOTUS nominee. Check it out!

The current leader in Yoest's poll, by a hefty margin? No surprise here: Judge Janice Rogers Brown, that scrumptious judicial diva!

Update: A3G realizes that Judge Alito is leading the field right now over at TradeSports, as noted over at Financial Rounds. But she has her doubts concerning the reliability of TradeSports when it comes to predicting SCOTUS nominees more than a few hours in advance. When the rumor mill was churning over Edith Brown Clement, her stock was way up at TradeSports. Then, when the news of John Roberts's nomination leaked shortly before the press conference, her stock plummeted, and his skyrocketed. For fairly comprehensive analysis of TradeSports and SCOTUS nominees, check out this VC post and the many related posts referenced therein.

A3G to President Bush: Pick Alito, Not Luttig

Article III Groupie just voiced her suspicion that President Bush has decided to nominate Judge J. Michael Luttig of the Fourth Circuit to the Supreme Court, passing over Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., of the Third Circuit. But in case no decision has been reached, A3G respectfully offers President Bush the following top 10 reasons to nominate Judge Alito over Judge Luttig:

10. As many astute observers have noted, Judge Alito would involve less of a confirmation fight than Judge Luttig. At this point in your presidency, with high-ranking administration officials under indictment or investigation, the last thing that you need is a protracted battle with the Senate.

9. The unfailingly gracious Judge Alito is much nicer than the sometimes abrasive Judge Luttig. Professor Orin Kerr, who knows Judge Alito -- they both clerked for Judge Leonard Garth -- describes Sam Alito as "one of the most likable people you'll ever meet. He comes off as modest, quiet, and very thoughtful, but he also has a sharp sense of humor." This congeniality would be an asset in winning over Senate Democrats (many of whom supported Judge Alito's confirmation to the Third Circuit).

In contrast, a UTR tipster has the following to say of Judge Luttig: "I've never heard [Luttig's] career put forward as evidence that nice guys finish first..."

8. "Alito" is easier to pronounce than "Luttig." (It's LOO-tig, not LUTT-ig.) Do you really want all the television commentators mangling your nominee's last name?

7. Judge Luttig is already close friends with Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia and Thomas. If you appoint Judge Luttig to the Court, you will only exacerbate the serious problem of "lunchroom cliques" among the nine justices.* Two words, Mr. President: Mean Girls!

6. Making a Supreme Court justice out of Judge Samuel Alito, who never clerked for the Court, would send this positive message to those of us who never were Supreme Court clerks (a.k.a. "the Great Unwashed"): "So you didn't get that Supreme Court clerkship. Fine; life goes on. Just keep on plugging away, and there's hope for you yet. Someday you might actually SIT on the Court!"

Appointing Judge Michael Luttig, on the other hand, would send us this demoralizing message: "When you didn't get that Supreme Court clerkship, your legal career turned into one big dead-end -- before you even reached the age of 30. What's the point in going on? Surrender, Dorothy!!!"

5. Mike Luttig would be another white-male-from-within-the-Beltway -- exactly like your last SCOTUS appointment, Chief Justice John G. Roberts. To be sure, as white males, neither Alito nor Luttig would do much to help "diversity" on the Court. But at least Sam Alito comes from outside the D.C. metro area! (Also, Judge Alito surely deserves some reward for spending the last 15 years of his career in lovely Newark, New Jersey.)

4. On a related note, Judge Alito has more diverse and more "real world" legal experience than Judge Luttig. Luttig has been a fixture in Washington's elite legal and political circles ever since he left the chambers of Chief Justice Burger. Judge Alito, in contrast, has a nice mix of experience, both in Washington -- where he worked in the Solicitor General's office and served as deputy assistant attorney general at the DOJ -- and outside of Washington, where he served as an assistant U.S. attorney, and later the U.S. Attorney, in the District of New Jersey.

In attempting to place Harriet Miers on the Supreme Court, Mr. President, perhaps you were trying to add more of a "real world" perspective to the Court. Well, if you're worried about the Supreme Court becoming a legal ivory tower, appoint the former federal prosecutor to the Court -- not a graduate of that most ivory of towers, the Finishing School for the Elect, where lawyers write detailed memoranda on obscure questions such as "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, consistent with the strictures of 5 U.S.C. §§ 3345-3349d."

3. Judge Luttig said mean things about Harriet Miers, your good friend and trusted advisor, on his blog, Luttig's Lair. How can you reward him with the plum of a Supreme Court nomination? Go instead with Judge Alito, who hasn't said anything negative about Harriet Miers over on his own blog.

2. Judge Luttig doesn't need to be appointed to the Court, since he's already a de facto "Tenth Justice." Through the Luttigators that he places at One First Street -- whose first allegiance is not to God, country, nor Yale, but to one J. Michael Luttig -- Luttig exerts a tremendous influence on the Court. His fingers are already in every SCOTUS pie; he doesn't need you to make it official.

1. The final reason to pick Judge Alito over Judge Luttig: Because you can, Mr. President; because you can.

Conventional wisdom and the conservative establishment would tell you to prefer Judge Luttig, a former Supreme Court clerk, over Judge Alito. But you are the President of the United States, and you -- unlike the rest of us -- don't need to bow down before Judge Luttig just because he's one of the Elect.

Rumor has it that you didn't like Judge Luttig much in his interview, finding him "nerdy," in an unpleasant rather than endearing sort of way. Follow that instinct, Mr. President. Strike a blow for the non-elites -- as you sometimes like to do -- and nominate Judge Alito to the Supreme Court!**

* This is a joke. Although Justices Scalia and Thomas are close jurisprudentially, they are not especially close personally. In fact, Justice Scalia has told people that he wishes he had a closer relationship with Justice Thomas. As for Chief Justice Roberts, he is probably too new to the Court to have fallen into any clique.

** Although Judge Alito is not as "elite" as Judge Luttig, insofar as Judge Alito never clerked for the Court, his qualifications are otherwise beyond reproach: Princeton College, Yale Law School, federal appeals court clerkship, U.S. Attorney's Office, Solicitor General's Office, Department of Justice, etc.

SCOTUS Scuttlebutt: Naming Names

President Bush's announcement of his next Supreme Court nominee apparently won't come today, but could arrive as early as next week. Here are three good articles offering speculation about who the SCOTUS nominee might be (gavel bangs to Feddie and to Howard Bashman, who also gets birthday wishes):

1. Bush Is Not Expected to Feel Need to Pick Woman Again, Neil A. Lewis (NYT)

Money quote:

One lawyer close to the president said that when Mr. Bush chose Ms. Miers he did so after concluding there was not a long roster of female candidates with whom he felt comfortable.

"When he chose her," said the lawyer, "she was one of three finalists and the other two were men."

The other two candidates, the lawyer said, were federal appeals court judges, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and J. Michael Luttig, both of whom remain leading candidates who would bring strong legal and judicial credentials to any confirmation battle.

2. Miers, Under Fire From Right, Withdrawn as Court Nominee, Michael A. Fletcher & Charles Babington (WP)

Money quote:

Miers's withdrawal touched off a fresh wave of speculation about whom Bush would nominate for the seat. Some conservative activists predict Bush will reconsider some previously thought to be in the running, including federal appellate judges Samuel A. Alito Jr., J. Michael Luttig, Karen J. Williams, Michael W. McConnell and Priscilla R. Owen. Another federal judge mentioned is Diane S. Sykes.

Others speculated that Bush might nominate a senator with judicial experience, such as John Cornyn (R-Tex.), to avoid a contentious battle because senators would be unlikely to reject one of their own. Cornyn, a former Texas Supreme Court justice and one of the few to actively back Miers, played down that possibility, saying: "I doubt it will happen." 

3. Bush Pulls Plug on Miers, Jan Crawford Greenburg (Chicago Tribune)

Money quote:

The group [of leading contenders] includes Samuel Alito, J. Michael Luttig, Priscilla Owen and Karen Williams, the official said. All four judges had been interviewed by Bush or top administration officials and indicated they would accept the nomination if asked.

********************

Right now it seems that Judge Alito and Judge Luttig are generating the most buzz. Judge Alito may enjoy a slight lead over Judge Luttig (per Tom Goldstein of SCOTUSblog* and Erick of Confirm Them), perhaps because he's widely viewed as more confirmable than Judge Luttig. According to Neil Lewis of the Times, Judges Alito and Luttig both "would draw Democratic opposition," but Judge Alito "to a lesser extent" than Judge Luttig. In addition, Judge Alito is much nicer and less grating than Judge Luttig in terms of personality -- which, in this age of televised confirmation hearings, are virtues that shouldn't be underestimated.

Article III Groupie would love to see Judge Alito get the nod. But as she has previously speculated, don't be surprised if Judge Alito, one of the Great Unwashed, is forced to play "the Edith Brown Clement role," distracting media attention and enemy fire away from the real nominee: Judge Luttig, a member of the Elect and UTR's #1 feeder judge. In fact, the suspiciously great ease with which the White House Counsel's office has allowed Judge Alito to emerge as the frontrunner suggests that poor Sam Alito is being turned into the "Edith Clement" for the "John Roberts" of Mike Luttig (a close friend and former groomsman of Chief Justice Roberts).

The migration of Luttigators from Alexandria to One First Street is positively nauseating in its inevitability. A3G suspects that, in the end, the same will be said of their boss. In nominating Harriet Miers, President Bush tried to make an unorthodox pick, and it blew up in his face. The second time around, he can be expected to go with Judge Luttig -- the most orthodox, obvious pick of them all.

A long time ago, A3G learned that life isn't fair. But why does it have to be so g***amn boring???

* Tom Goldstein is predicting that Judge Alito will be the nominee. Goldstein's skill as a Supreme Court prognosticator should not be underestimated; only 42 minutes into the Harriet Miers nomination, he correctly predicted that she wouldn't make it onto the high court.

A Harriet Miers Nomination Post-Mortem

The Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers is barely cold in the grave, but the speculation about the identity next nominee is already well underway. Article III Groupie will have her two cents to add. For now, however, a brief post-mortem of the nomination is in order.

Here are a few links worth checking out (gavel bangs: Howard Bashman):

1. Miers: The Only Exit Strategy, by Charles Krauthammer

In this now famous op-ed, Krauthammer laid out the exit strategy that was ultimately employed in Miers's withdrawal: invocation of the fig leaf of "irreconcilable differences over documents." As noted by Lyle Denniston, selection of this withdrawal strategy might preclude the nomination of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales:

Gonzalez's nomination would run into the same problem that the President cited in withdrawing Miers' name: his unwillingness to give senators access to internal White House legal papers. The attorney general was White House Counsel just ahead of Miers, and he had more tenure and more influence in the job than she did, and senators surely would demand access to materials showing Gonzalez's role in the Executive Mansion, just as they did with Miers.

2. Vote for Harriet!!! The dubious professional distinctions of Harriet Miers, by Mark Obbie

Obbie was the editor and publisher of the Texas Lawyer during Harriet Miers's tenure as president of the Texas State Bar. In his piece, he points out why Miers's leadership positions in the Dallas and Texas bars should not have been taken as signifying great professional achievement:

Guess who seeks election to [bar association leadership posts]? Not the busiest, in-demand lions of the bar. Instead, it's usually the second stringers, the runners-up in the lawyer game. Real lawyers, for the most part, snicker about "bar weenies"-much as they did about the goofs in high school who ran for class president. Does David Boies spend his $800-an-hour time going to committee meetings and wrangling over the ABA's next convention schedule? Hardly.

An obvious lesson from the John Roberts and Harriet Miers nominations: When it comes to the Supreme Court, you need to go with a real superstar, Mr. President. Mere competence is not enough.

3. Miers Withdrawal Spawns a New Word, by Nahal Toosi

The article contains the following discussion:

Robert Bork's failed nomination to the Supreme Court in 1987 spawned the verb "borked," defined loosely as getting rejected in an unseemly, even unfair, manner.

Now there is talk online about whether Harriet Miers' withdrawal of her nomination to the high court will give rise to the term "miered."

While liberals led to the opposition to Bork, it was conservatives who brought down Miers' nomination.

A contributor to The Reform Club, a right-leaning blog, wrote that to get "borked" was "to be unscrupulously torpedoed by an opponent," while to get "miered" was to be "unscrupulously torpedoed by an ally."

Another obvious lesson from the Miers nomination fiasco: President Bush, you can't take your base entirely for granted. They're willing to follow you pretty far -- but they won't follow you off the edge of a cliff.

4. After Miers, National Review staff editorial

The editors make a fair point -- one that A3G temporarily lost sight of when, in the excitement immediately following the withdrawal announcement, she issued a post entitled "Ding Dong, the Witch Is Dead!":

No conservative should be in a celebratory mood now that Harriet Miers has withdrawn her nomination. For one thing, reasonable conservatives who considered her unqualified for the Supreme Court conceded that she has had an accomplished career and that she has served the president loyally and, for the most part, well. Gloating would be unseemly. For another thing, the object of conservative agitation against Miers was to get a solid justice confirmed. So the conservative opponents of her nomination have not yet won a victory.

So, Ms. Miers, A3G would now like to apologize for her public rejoicing. A3G would also like to thank you for the service that you performed to President Bush and to the nation, in graciously withdrawing your name from SCOTUS consideration.

Looking to the post-Miers period, the editors offer these observations:

It follows that President Bush should pick the most qualified and confirmable conservative he can find -- male or female. Such a fight could be the way out of the president's current trough.

We do not for a moment believe that the president will pick someone unacceptable to conservatives out of spite. He did not pick Miers in that spirit; as we said on the day of her nomination, we thought it was a good-faith, though mistaken, choice. Bush and conservatives on both sides of the Miers debate should now let bygones be bygones, and stand together in the fight they will now almost certainly face.

Amen; Article 3 Groupie couldn't have put it better herself. This is an elegant and eloquent statement of where we find ourselves now.

A3G can't help noting, however, that urging President Bush to select "the most qualified and confirmable conservative he can find" is about as helpful as telling him to "pick somebody really good." Some of A3G's fellow conservative bloggers will disagree with her on this, but there's an undeniable tension between confirmability and conservatism -- a tension that President Bush (incorrectly) thought he could resolve by nominating Harriet Miers. It will be very interesting to see what happens next...

Heard on the Rialto: Some Post-Miers Rumor-Mongering

If you're looking for serious and thoughtful commentary on what will happen in the wake of Harriet Miers's withdrawal from Supreme Court consideration, check out this excellent post, by Lyle Denniston of SCOTUSblog. (Gavel bang: Howard Bashman.) If you're interested in learning about which women were previously eliminated as potential Supreme Court justices, en route to the ill-fated nomination of Harriet Miers -- information that could shed light on the identity of the next nominee -- read this column by John Fund. (Robe swish: David Frum.)

But if you're interested in completely unsubstantiated, utterly baseless rumors about who might be the next SCOTUS nominee, you've come to the right place! Here are a few of the more juicy rumors in circulation this morning:

1. At the White House, Karl Rove is meeting with President Bush, offering him this advice: "Mr. President, I have a great idea for whom you should nominate. He's one of the nation's best lawyers, with many years of dedicated government service under his belt. His integrity lies beyond question. His name is Patrick Fitzgerald..."

2. In Alexandria, Virginia, Judge J. Michael Luttig has asked his law clerks to conduct research into the world's leading experts in sex reassignment surgery. Judge Luttig was overheard making the following remarks to his clerks:

Once I get that sex change operation, I will be unstoppable as a Supreme Court nominee!!! This explains why, many years ago, I made the brilliant decision to go by my middle name. That choice will now allow me to be reincarnated after my surgery with ease -- as the Honorable Jennifer M. Luttig!!!

3. In Newark, New Jersey, Judge Samuel Alito has given his clerks a little genealogical research assignment: "Please find support for the following proposition: Alito is a common Hispanic surname."

4. In Houston, Texas, Judge Edith Jones is making an online donation to Planned Parenthood.

5. In Washington, D.C., Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is making an online donation to National Right to Life.

6. In Medina, Ohio, Judge Alice Batchelder is on the phone with 1-800-FLOWERS: "Hi, I'd like to arrange for delivery of a dozen roses to one Jo Ann Davidson..."

7. In Washington, D.C., Maureen Mahoney is drafting the following letter to the U.S. Government Printing Office, which publishes U.S. Reports; West Publishing, which publishes the Supreme Court Reporter and runs Westlaw; and Lexis/Nexis:

To Whom It May Concern:

Please be advised that you have erroneously listed me as counsel of record in Grutter v. Bollinger, No. 02-241. This case was actually handled by Maureen M. Mahoney, of Kaw Valley Center, Inc., 759 Vermont Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas.

Please correct this error as soon as possible. Thank you for your time and immediate attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Maureen Mahoney, Esq.

Latham & Watkins

8. Finally, in Austin, Texas, Judge Priscilla Owen is placing a telephone call to Justice Nathan Hecht: "Hey, Nathan -- got any plans for Saturday night?

If you have any legitimate, more substantiated rumors about the identity of who will be replacing Harriet Miers as President Bush's Supreme Court nominee, please email Article III Groupie. Muchas gracias!

Breaking News: "Ding Dong, the Witch Is Dead!"

No, this is not a joke. As so many of us had hoped, Harriet Ellan Miers, Bitch-Goddess of La Casa Blanca, has just withdrawn as a nominee to be an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. O happy day!

Miers's withdrawal letter -- it looks like Harriet Miers lacks personalized stationery -- can be accessed here (pdf). President Bush's statement, in which he explains that he "reluctantly accepted" Miers's resignation, is available here.

Earlier this week, Article III Groupie expressed doubt that Harriet E. Miers would withdraw as President Bush's SCOTUS nominee. But A3G's assessment was made before the latest Harriet Miers disasters, including the news that Miers delivered speeches in the 1990s in which she extolled the virtue of "self-determination" with respect to abortion and school prayer, questioned the utility and efficacy of "legislating religion or morality," and cited with approval such liberal feminist icons as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and, believe it or not, Barbra Streisand. At any rate, this is one situation in which A3G is happy to be wrong.

A3G is pleased as punch about Harriet Miers's withdrawal, not just as a solid conservative and a concerned citizen, but as a blogger. As you could probably tell from how her Miers-related blogging slowed to a trickle, A3G was sick and tired of whacking at the Harriet Miers pinata. After an initial spate of fun and mocking posts, blogging about HEM got very tired, very quickly. Now A3G can take all of those Harriet Miers-related emails from her readers -- for which she thanks you very much, by the way -- and banish them to the archives of her Gmail account.

A few questions that immediately spring to A3G's mind:

1. Will Harriet Miers continue to serve as White House Counsel, and will she be involved in the selection of the next nominee? (The concluding sentence of her withdrawal letter reads, "I am most grateful for the opportunity to have served your Administration and this country." This could be read as suggesting Miers's imminent departure from White House service.)

[Update: As helpfully noted by this comment, the AP reports that Miers will stay on as White House Counsel.]

2. Who will the next nominee be, and does that nominee have to be a woman?

3. How quickly will the White House name the next nominee?

4. How upset is Justice Sandra Day O'Connor right now? (A3G feels badly for SOC, who wants and needs to spend more time with her ailing husband, but who has committed to remain on the Court until the confirmation of her successor.)

5. Finally, why did Judge J. Michael Luttig bring donuts and fresh apple cider into chambers this morning?

Dear friends, these are interesting and exciting times for federal judicial groupies. Stay tuned!

Judge Farris to Vietnamese Gardener: "Chop Chop!"

In UTR Cribs, Article III Groupie dishes the dirt about the lavish homes of federal judges. Today's report involves a very lavish home -- and lots of dirt, both figuratively and literally.

Judge Jerome Farris, a senior judge on the Ninth Circuit (and that court's first African-American member), owns a truly amazing residence. It's an 8,000 square foot, $2.4 million house, located in the lovely Mount Baker neighborhood of Seattle.* The judicial mansion boasts remarkable views of Lake Washington.

These jaw-dropping views were enhanced in 2003, when Judge Farris instructed his gardener to chop down more than 120 trees that were obstructing the home's water views. And what was the problem with this landscape redesign, you ask? Well, the trees that were chopped down -- including some indigenous cherry trees, à la George Washington -- weren't on Judge Farris's property. They were in a public park...

Sure enough, litigation ensued between Judge Farris and the city of Seattle. Judge Farris settled the case in 2003, by agreeing to pay $500,000 to restore Colman Park. But now, as reported in this Seattle Times column by Danny Westneat (which a UTR reader kindly brought to A3G's attention), Judge Farris is dragging his gavel in terms of paying up.

Almost three years have passed since the settlement, but Judge Farris has paid less than half of the tab. As a result, the city has placed a lien on Judge Farris's luxurious house (which he still owns, although he no longer lives in it).

The delay in payment may be due to Judge Farris's effort to get his homeowner's insurance to foot the bill -- which has spawned even more litigation. Westneat's article offers this report on the judge's case against his insurer, Farmers Insurance:

In his lawsuit, [Judge Farris] says none of it was his fault. He had the "mistaken but reasonable belief" that he had the city's OK to trim trees. He says he told his Vietnamese gardener only to trim the trees, and a language mixup led the gardener to turn part of the park into a "disaster zone."

Uh-oh... This does not sound good. The moral of the story? Next time, Judge Farris, get your law clerks to do your landscaping!**

* How could Judge Farris -- who worked in private practice for only ten years or so, before becoming a state court judge -- afford a multimillion-dollar manse? Rumor has it that His Honor made a killing through outside investments, including extensive real estate holdings.

** This is, quite obviously, a joke; making one's law clerks perform groundskeeping and gardening would be improper. Of course, even though judges shouldn't ask law clerks to perform personal errands for them, many judges do impose upon their clerks in this manner. See, e.g., this "Justice Is Blind" post (first and fourth items).

Three Cheers for District Court Judges!

In emails to Article III Groupie and in comments to recent posts, several of you have expressed a desire for better coverage in these pages of federal judges who are not conservatives of mono-monikered fame (e.g., Scalia, Kozinski, Posner, Easterbrook, etc.). As it turns out, A3G recognizes the validity of this criticism, and she's happy to oblige. Going forward, she will make a conscious effort to expand the universe of judges that she covers.*

A3G will kick things off by reprinting some praise of Judge Edmund H. Sargus, Jr., a 1996 Clinton appointee to the Southern District of Ohio. This email comes from a celebrated trial lawyer and loyal UTR reader:

Just noticed in your old "hottie" list Judge Edmund Sargus (S.D. Ohio). Now there is somebody who ought to be on the court of appeals, at the very least. He is personable, affable, smart, and well-read; he listens to lawyers, and he knows how to run a contentious courtroom while making sure everybody gets heard. I was counsel in a big dollar/big ego class action last year, and came away with enormous respect for him.

Catch that rave -- Judge Sargus, pat yourself on the back for doing such a fine job on the bench!

And here are some very nice words about another district court judge and Democratic appointee,** Judge Myron H. Thompson of the Middle District of Alabama (who is, by the way, a former boss of current Stevens clerk Dan Lenerz):

Judge Myron Thompson (M.D. Ala.) is a great judge who was appointed by President Carter in 1980. Judge Thompson was only 33 at the time, and he became the first African-American judge in that district. He has handled a number of very notable cases, including the historic Wyatt case challenging the inhumane treatment of individuals held in Alabama's Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, which has had a tremendous impact on the treatment of people with mental illness in the United States.

Judge Thompson also decided Glassroth v. Moore, the Alabama "10 Commandments case." His decision in that case, ordering Chief Justice Roy Moore to remove the 10 Commandments monument from the Alabama State Judicial Building, earned him a huge amount of harsh criticism from the religious right, even though it was upheld more than once by the 11th Circuit.

WOW -- a federal judge by the age of 33? If it's possible, A3G feels even worse about herself than she did when she woke up this morning!

But before you conclude that life is a bowl of cherries for Judge Thompson, consider the following anecdote from this article about his visit last year to Yale, his alma mater (for both college and law school):

Only a year after he began serving on the bench, Thompson made a difficult ruling concerning the use of deadly force by the police. After a friend critiqued his decision as arbitrary, Thompson said he questioned whether he was making or interpreting law.

"After seeing the [appellate] panel of judges that was set to rule on the case, one of the older judges said to me, 'I saw the panel; get ready to be reversed.' At the time I was really upset. People think that because we are selected for life that we don't have feelings," Thompson said.

Gee, that's kinda true! It's something A3G should keep in mind when blogging about Article III celebrities. Just because federal judges have flowing robes and big gavels doesn't mean they don't get hurt when people say mean things about them.

Judge Thompson's story, however, has a happy ending:

Thompson was vindicated in the end when the case went before the U.S. Supreme Court, which used Thompson's language verbatim in its ruling. Thompson said he is humbled by the influence he has.

Awesome -- keep on truckin', Judge Thompson!

And now, a few words of "meta-blogging." In the pages of UTR, A3G devotes most of her attention to Supreme Court justices and a handful of glamorous circuit judges. But there's no denying that district court judges have much harder jobs than their appellate court counterparts. Their dockets are much larger; they face greater time pressures; and they have fewer resources than their colleagues upstairs.

Despite these obstacles, and with the help of their trusty law clerks, trial judges in the federal system do a superb job dispensing justice to the people of the United States. The excellent work that district judges perform, day in and day out, makes the American federal judiciary the great institution that it is today -- the envy of the entire free world.

A special message to all district court judges: even if she doesn't blog about you as often as circuit judges and SCOTUS justices, A3G still loves you very very much. YOU RULE!!!

* It's worth noting that this criticism of UTR is not a new one. Check out this post, from almost exactly a year ago, in which A3G reprinted this reader email:

You tend to write about the same small group of judges over, and over, and over. How about casting your net a bit wider? There are so many judges about whom I'd like to learn. Mad props otherwise, Devoted Fan

And here is part of what A3G wrote in her own defense:

As noted in UTR's mission statement, Underneath Their Robes is like People or US Weekly, but for the federal judiciary. Would anyone ever write in to People or US Weekly to complain that they spend too much time on the likes of Julia and Jude, and not enough time on Wallace Shawn and Lupe Ontiveros? With all due respect to Mr. Shawn and Ms. Ontiveros, both of whom A3G deeply admires as actors, clearly the answer is no.

As explained above, A3G will attempt to broaden her coverage in the weeks ahead. But please don't be surprised if she eventually reverts to her old ways after a few weeks (or hours).

** See? A3G is capable of blogging about judges who are neither Republican appointees nor circuit/Supreme Court judges. Please, dear readers -- give your blogress a round of applause!

Luttigator Dixton to The Onion: "Hey, Cut That Out!"

The White House Counsel's office is a popular perch for Supreme Court clerks who turn down six-figure bonus checks and decide to work in government.* There's never a dull moment in La Casa Blanca; White House lawyers work on a bizarre but intriguing mix of matters. As we learned from reviewing John G. Roberts's documents from his stint as Associate Counsel to the President, attorneys in the office cover everything from the profoundly important (e.g., affirmative action) to the laughably trivial (e.g., endorsement of china patterns).

Well, it appears that Associate Counsel Grant M. Dixton (OT 2000/AMK) has been working on the latter...

* Other common public-sector destinations for the Elect: the Solicitor General's Office; the Office of Legal Counsel; the Office of Legal Policy; and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.

A Judicial SIGHT-ation from Down Under: Nino and Steve's Excellent Adventure!

With all of their joint appearances, feisty debates, and dueling books, Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Stephen G. Breyer are fast becoming the One First Street version of the Kozinski-and-Reinhardt Traveling Debate Society. This past weekend, Justice Scalia and Justice Breyer made an appearance in Australia -- where, by the way, Underneath Their Robes has a small but devoted cult following. An Aussie correspondent offers this fantastic judicial sightation:

Here in Melbourne, Australia, we’ve just been treated to an overdose of federal judicial glamour in a two-day conference last weekend. Justices Scalia and Breyer joined their counterparts Justices Michael Kirby and Dyson Heydon of the High Court of Australia in addressing the high-powered but pretentiously-titled “Boston, Melbourne, Oxford Conversazione on Culture” on the theme of judicial activism. You’ll be glad to know that the Supremes completely upstaged their Australian hosts.

Justice Scalia was in fine form, and had the audience eating out of the palm of his hand as he addressed them on his particular brand of originalism. While I’m sure he covered territory that would be well known to American audiences, his speech was a breath of fresh air to an Australian audience used to the more mealy-mouthed style of judicial speech-making in this country.

His speech prompted bouts of uproarious laughter and sustained applause, and ranged in tone from very serious discussion of legal principle to mordant wit and biting sarcasm. His main theme was that the Constitution requires ‘government by the people, not government by judicial aristocracy,’ and thus that the attempt to replace democratic politics by ‘expert’ moral legislation from the bench was as much bound to fail as the attempt to replace politics by ‘expert’ administration in the first half of the 20th century.

Scalia’s speech was filled with witty aphorisms. On the purported desire to appoint only ‘moderate' judges, Scalia ironically asked: ‘What is a “moderate” judge? One who gives opinions half way between what the Constitution actually says and what they’d like it to say? Talking about “moderate” judges makes no sense, but talking about moderate politics does.’

On the importance of structural aspects of the Constitution, he said: ‘It’s easier to fill a mob behind a banner that says “Free Speech or Death!” than one that says “Bicameralism or a Fight!” But the latter is the more important!”. And on criticism, he said: ‘So, my opinions get criticised: but so what? I’ve got life tenure!!!’

Great, great stuff; what excellent attention to detail! And now, please pay special attention to this next paragraph:

I can also confirm that Justice Scalia appears to be a furtive reader of “Underneath Their Robes”. Before dinner on the Saturday night, a friend and I sought a photo op with Nino, and we mentioned to him that in some circles he is known as the Rock Star of One First Street -- to which he nodded and smiled knowingly!!! Now, if that’s not proof enough that he reads UTR, I don’t know what is!

Justice Breyer is obviously less used to photo ops, and seemed a little embarrassed when I approached him at the Sunday night dinner. When I saw him, I noticed that he was wearing the lapel pin of the French Legion of Honour, which seemed to me to be taking this whole “foreign law” thing a bit too far. His speech earlier in the day was a bit like a high school civics lecture, and he lacked the wit and levity of Scalia the day before. Obviously, the two of them don’t see eye to eye, and Breyer spent most of his speech staring daggers at Scalia!

Very interesting! Might the Scalia-Breyer relationship be less good-natured than the one between Judge Kozinski and Judge Reinhardt?

(Before we get all excited at the prospect of AS and SGB slapping each other silly, however, it's worth noting that Justice Breyer is probably not the bench-slapping type. In Jeffrey Toobin's fascinating profile of Justice Breyer, former SGB clerk Neal Katyal has the following to say about his former boss: "Lots of times his colleagues will throw barbs at him in opinions, but he’ll never say a bad word about them, in public or private.")

UTR's antipodean source continues:

Breyer described his constitutional outlook as one that paid attention to the purposes of the law under scrutiny and to the consequences of judicial decision-making, and he did a decent job of defending his outlook. Breyer claimed that no judge describes him- or herself as someone who applies their personal preferences when judging.

Scalia thought this was disingenuous, and responded with a joke: ‘A farmer hears a noise in the night and goes out to the chicken coop to investigate. He asks “who’s there?” and the answer comes back “no-one but us chickens,” and so the farmer goes back to bed. You’re like that farmer!’ Breyer was not amused!!

I would say, though, that Justice Breyer was more eloquent and persuasive in response to questions and in conversation over dinner than he was in his actual speech. At dinner, he also continued the French theme by weaving in a very good quotation from Camus’ “The Plague” in response to a question.

With best wishes, and with constant admiration for your blog,

[A University of Melbourne law student]

WOW! How great is that? A3G thanks the writer for this delightful account of how our Supreme Court justices are bringing the glory of the federal judiciary to every corner of the earth. Keep up the fine work, Your Honors; the world needs more Article III groupies!

Harriet Miers: Will She Withdraw?

The Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers continues to crash and burn. Here are selected developments from the past few days:

--the nomination has been engulfed by controversy over the White House's refusal, on executive privilege grounds, to turn over Harriet Miers-related documents to the Senate Judiciary Committee;

--the results of opinion polls about the nomination are not encouraging;

--the influential editorial page of the Wall Street Journal recently dubbed the Miers nomination a "political blunder of the first order" (which was actually charitable of them, considering that other bastions of conservative thought, such as the National Review and the Weekly Standard, have explicitly called for her withdrawal);

--George F. Will just issued another excellent (and blistering) column, shooting down some of the arguments that have been offered in defense of the Harriet Miers nomination;

--John Fund, in his own harsh column, reports that "the nominee has stumbled frequently in the tutorials in which government lawyers are grilling her in preparation for her November 7 hearings" (gavel bang: Todd Zywicki);

--a new website, WithdrawMiers.org, has been "established to urge the withdrawal of Harriet Miers from consideration as a nominee for Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court" (robe swish: Howard Bashman);

--a new non-profit organization of conservatives, Americans for Better Justice, has been formed, with the objective of "100,000 names on a petition to the president and a massive letter-writing campaign to secure the withdrawal of the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers" (gavel bang: Professor Zywicki);

--David Frum's own online petition for the withdrawal of the nomination continues to gain signatures; and

--the troubling qualifications questions persist.

Will Harriet Miers withdraw, in light of these and other depressing developments? Probably not. A well-placed UTR source on Capitol Hill estimates the chances of Miers withdrawing her name at "under 15 percent."

Sadly enough, this makes sense. When Justice O'Connor's seat first became vacant, before Chief Justice Rehnquist passed away, Harriet Miers actually (and wisely) declined to be considered for the spot. But having agreed to toss her hat in the ring the second time around, it might be hard for her to withdraw now -- at least without admitting that she was doing so due to criticism and under pressure.

And it gets worse. In a recent appearance on "This Week," New York Times columnist David Brooks observed that even if Harriet Miers were to go to President Bush and ask to be withdrawn, the president might not let her -- just as he reportedly refused to allow John Bolton to withdraw from consideration as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.

Even those who generally support President Bush, like A3G, know that he can sometimes be stubborn and petulant. If Harriet Miers expressed a desire for her nomination to be withdrawn, President Bush would be reluctant to accede to her request for his own political reasons: he would fear that withdrawal would make him and his administration look "weak." He would probably pressure her into changing her mind.

Of course, if Harriet Miers were to insist on withdrawal of her nomination, the president couldn't do much about that. But can we really expect Harriet Miers -- who views the president as "the most brilliant man she has ever known" -- to stand up to a man whom she idolizes, like a teenage girl looking up to a boy band leader?

"Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night!"

"He Ain't Heavy -- He's The Donald!"

Back in "Sister, Can You Spare a Dime?", Article III Groupie suggested that celebrity developer Donald Trump, in the event of a liquidity crisis, could always seek financial assistance from his well-heeled older sister, Judge Maryanne Trump Barry (3d Cir.). A3G's suggestion was in jest -- but perhaps she was on to something.

According to this article by Timothy L. O'Brien, based on O'Brien's forthcoming book, TrumpNation, "The Donald" has received dole-outs from "The Maryanne" in the past. O'Brien offers the following report:

By 1993, with his casinos in hock, most of his real estate holdings either forfeited or stagnant and his father slipping into the fog of Alzheimer's disease, Donald Trump, at the age of 47, had run out of money.... [H]e ordered Nick Ribis, the Trump Organization's president, to call his siblings and ask for a handout from their trusts. Donald needed about $10 million for his living and office expenses, but he had no collateral to provide his brother and sisters, all three of whom wanted a guarantee that he would repay them.

The Trump children's anticipated share of their father's fortune amounted to about $35 million each, and Donald's siblings demanded that he sign a promissory note pledging future distributions from his trust fund against the $10 million he wanted to borrow.

Donald got his loan, but about a year later he was almost broke again. When he went to the trough the second time, he asked his siblings for $20 million more. His brother Robert Trump, who briefly oversaw Donald's casinos before fleeing the pressure of working for him to take over their father's real estate operation, balked. Desperate to scrape some money together, Donald tasked Alan Marcus, one of his advisers, to contact his brother-in-law John Barry and see if he could intervene with Robert and his other siblings.

The late John J. Barry, a prominent New Jersey lawyer who represented Donald Trump in various matters, was married to The Maryanne. As one might have expected from a power broker of his stature, John Barry succeeded in getting The Donald the critical assistance that he needed:

Mr. Barry successfully lobbied other members of the Trump clan and that another handout was arranged, with Donald agreeing again that whatever he failed to pay back would be taken out of his share of their father's estate.

"We would have literally closed down," said another former member of the Trump Organization familiar with Donald's efforts to keep the company afloat. "The key would have been in the door and there would have been no more Donald Trump. The family saved him."

So how about that? According to one of UTR's Third Circuit sources, "Judge Barry is a judicial diva par excellence, renowned for her sharp mind and her equally sharp tongue." But perhaps The Maryanne should also be known for her generosity. When her bold and brash brother finds himself in a pinch, Judge Barry simply reaches into those deep pockets under her robe, to spot him some of the fortune that she inherited from their late father, Fred Trump. Without her help, Donald Trump would not be where he is today.

Judge Barry is not only generous towards her little brother; she's also discreet. When contacted by O'Brien, "Maryanne Trump Barry, a federal judge, said that she could not recollect any efforts to offer her brother financial help."

This should come as no surprise. You know what they say: What happens in Trump World, stays in Trump World!

A3G: "She Distorts, You Deride"

Not too long ago, Article III Groupie received this interesting and provocative email from a reader, raising concerns that have been raised by other readers of this blog as well:

Is your mission to provide unbiased news, gossip, and colorful commentary about the federal judiciary? If so, your partisan affilitation and loyalty to all things Republican may be getting in the way. Like Fox News, your blog is quickly becoming un-fair and un-balanced.

For example, given your judicial diva classification of [Priscilla] Owen and [Janice Rogers] Brown, two controversial judges who barely survived the confirmation process, I am genuinely offended by your treatment of other remarkably talented judicial divas who just so happen to be nominated by a Democrat (i.e., Judge Marsha Berzon -- a.k.a. "Darth Berzon"). Other left-leaning judges, if not made fun of, are just completely ignored by the blog.

Sometimes, I think your views taint your analysis, e.g., [Judge] Easterbrook. As a [high-powered political posts omitted to preserve anonymity], I assure you that if Frank Easterbrook were ever nominated to SCOTUS, it would immediately trigger a filibuster. In many ways, Bush's selection of Harriet Miers (sadly) emphasizes the importance of a scant paper trail for a nominee to survive the judicial selection process. Easterbrook, with tortured opinions like Hudnut, would be DOA. Why this is so hard to see I do not know.

I do love this blog. I just am frustrated by the bias that seems to color some of the stories. Sorry for the rant.

No apologies necessary! A3G appreciates getting feedback from her readers about what they like and don't like about her blog, and she enjoys engaging in UTR navel-gazing. She sent this reader the following response:

I have actually always been partial to Darth Vader and other "dark" characters in film and fiction; in some ways, I think it is far more fun to be "evil"!  When I refer to Judge Berzon as "Darth Berzon," I like to think that I am treating her in glamorous fashion.  I certainly don't dispute her brilliance; after all, she is one of the Elect. I have previously described Judge Berzon in my blog as one of the nation's top labor lawyers before she took the bench, a crafty legal genius, a future leader of the Ninth Circuit, etc.

Also, you have to remember that a blog is a blog.  Blogs are a new medium in which news and opinion essentially merge. The Fox News comparison is not a bad one, actually.  It might be problematic if you are biased when you're supposed to be objective, as some people claim about Fox News. But "bias" isn't really a problem for bloggers; people read blogs because they want opinion and insight.  Think of me as an op-ed writer who occasionally does my own reporting (like Frank Rich of the New York Times, or John Fund of the Wall Street Journal).  There is no expectation that the liberal Rich or the conservative Fund would be "objective" in their writing, simply because they sometimes pick up the phone and do their own reporting. Objectivity should not be expected from me simply because I occasionally add "news" to my "commentary."

So I guess my answer to your question is "no"; I am not here to provide "unbiased" news about the federal judiciary.  If people want "objective" news about federal judges, there are far better places for them to go: How Appealing, SCOTUSblog, and numerous mainstream news sources ( e.g., NYT, WaPo, etc.).  The "news" in my blog description basically refers to the mainstream media discussion that I link to in my posts; they might be viewed as "objective."  The second and third items in my blog description, "gossip" and "commentary," clearly disclaim reliability and objectivity.

As for my political slant, I wear my politics on my sleeve, frequently mentioning that I am conservative. Nobody would be fooled into thinking that I am "objective"; all of my readers know where I am coming from. If somebody wants to start up a judicial gossip blog devoted to liberal judges, they are more than welcome to do so. In the marketplace of ideas that is the blogosphere, nobody is precluded from setting up a stall next to mine.

As for UTR, I have worked my tail off over the past year and a half to build an audience for this blog and to develop a bully pulpit. If I want to spout conservative propaganda from that pulpit, I believe I'm entitled to do so!

At the end of the day, though, I have to say that I am not a very political animal. I enjoy talking more about people than about policies and principles; this is why I generally don't blog about what I call "substantive" issues. My main goal is to dish good gossip, not to advance a political agenda. My politics might color my gossip, causing me to praise conservative judges more than liberal ones; but my primary aims are not political in nature.

So, to all the liberals in UTR's readership, please don't be offended by Article 3 Groupie's conservative slant. Pushing a party platform is not A3G's goal. Although she truly is conservative, much of her conservatism is just a blogging "shtick." Consider these observations, in this interesting NYT piece about blogging by David Greenberg:

The best bloggers develop hobbyhorses, shticks and catchphrases that they put into wider circulation. Creating your own idiosyncratic set of villains to skewer and theories to promote -- while keeping readers interested - requires as much talent as sculpting a magazine feature or a taut op-ed piece.

A3G definitely follows Greenberg's recipe for blogging. She rides many hobbyhorses, such as Supreme Court clerks and judicial super-hotties. She has lots of shticks, such as her conservatism and her consumerism -- which, while certainly genuine, are exaggerated in her blog. And she's very proud of the numerous catchphrases that she has coined, which she has heard deployed even in the non-virtual world. UTR neologisms include the following terms: "the Elect"; "Luttigator," which even made it into the Washington Post; metonymic usage of "One First Street" for the Supreme Court; "judicial diva"; "bench-slap"; "Finishing School for the Elect"; etc.

And so, consistent with the blogging strategy outlined above, A3G has her own "idiosyncratic set of villains," including Darth Berzon. But before you start feeling sorry for She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named -- who is, as a member of the Elect and a life-tenured federal judge, an unlikely object for your pity -- think about how much more fun and cool it is to be depicted as evil. So many of the finest fictional characters have been villains: Satan in Paradise Lost, Shylock in the Merchant of Venice, and Darth Vader in the Star Wars films, to name just a few. What A3G wants to know is: Why should bad guys -- and bad girls -- have all the fun?

Chief Justice Roberts + The Pool = Shrinkage!

Sorry to get your hopes up! Article III Groupie actually does not have photos of Chief Justice John G. Roberts sunning himself, and his judicial hottie nether regions, in the manner of Jude Law. But A3G can offer you this interesting article, by Tony Mauro, concerning Chief Justice Roberts's decision to join the "cert pool" at One First Street. (Robe swish: Sentencing Law & Policy.)

Also via Professor Berman's excellent blog: this fascinating post, by Lyle Denniston of SCOTUSblog, suggesting that the pool could be to blame for "shrinkage" -- of the Supreme Court's docket, that is.

Also in the Legal Times and on Law.com: The Souter Myth, an informative look back at Justice Souter's confirmation proceedings; an "Inadmissible" item about the withdrawal of Timothy Flanigan's nomination to be Deputy Attorney General; and the news that Paul McNulty, the U.S. Attorney for the hard-charging Eastern District of Virginia, has been nominated for the DAG post in Flanigan's place.

Happy Saturday!