recent tracks:

DC

The movies are piling up:
Blood Diamond
Gia
Casino Royale
My Cousin Vinny
South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut

My my, I'll need to carve out some serious commentary time one of these days. Particularly because this evening S and I finished Season One of "The Wire," and I am so hooked that it will take time to sort out what I love about it. Unfortunately, the depth of the character development creates emotional attachments that are unhealthy given the show's setting. In other words, certain people die and I get sad.

One week ago (Friday night) I posted. Saturday S and I watched movies, hanging out with Jen in the evening. Sunday it was off to DC. Good time getting to know folks, finding out my co-board members for LR, etc.

Monday morning we strolled from the hotel (around 11th and E) to the Supreme Court. The weather was lovely and the walking followed suit. Had a lovely hour or so in the SC cafeteria before the Bowles arguments, which were a blast. The case in a nutshell: criminal defendant misses deadline for appeal, is granted extension. Judge tells defendant he has 17 days to file; the law says 14. He files on the 16th day.

Questions:
(1) Does the court even have jurisdiction to consider the appeal? (Does appellate jurisdiction terminate once the deadline for appeal passes?)
(2) If the deadline does not create a jurisdictional problem, does the judge's order granting the defendant 17 days apply, or does the 14 day rule apply? (The argument for the 14 day rule is fairly obvious; the argument for the 17 days is essentially an estoppel argument: the defendant reasonably relied on the judge's order, to his detriment, and justice requires that he be granted the 17 days accordingly.)

The argument was quite interesting, and the justices both pushed the defendant's counsel hard on the estoppel argument and pushed the government lawyer hard on the jurisdiction question. I left without a clear idea of a likely outcome, particularly given that Justice Alito seemed harder on the government lawyer (whose position one would anticipate he would favor).

After arguments, we toured the Supreme Court building, then were led behind the scenes into a fancy conference room with a fancy crystal chandelier (Czech, I believe the guide said), a big fireplace, garden view, and portraits of several Chief Justices. We were met there by Justice Alito, who answered our questions quite graciously. He was followed by one of his clerks, and after that we were released for lunch. Next on the agenda was Solicitor General Clement, who canceled at the last minute and provided us instead with Deputy Solicitor General Hungar, who provided some interesting insights into the Solicitor General's office. All that remained for the day was a nice dinner (trout parmesan, per Rachel Ray's recommendation) and an evening of socialization.

Tuesday morning we met with former Solicitor General Waxman, who provided perhaps the most interesting perspective, given his experiences in public, private, and political positions (while not as constrained by his current office as Justice Alito). That visit was followed by a trip to the National Archives (to visit the Constitution and Bill of Rights and such), and then the bus ride home.

All in all a satisfying if whirlwind trip.

Then back to the routine. Plenty to keep me busy, including Petey's adventure (getting six teeth pulled) on Thursday. I feel like I'm missing some bit of news or other mundane detail, but I'm not sure.

I'd like to end with a shoutout to N: HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!