August

Keith said that TTThio should not have used that term in describing Singapore's parliament, as it was more befitting for the United States Supreme Court. We were there bright and early at 9am this morning, standing in a steady drizzle, waiting for the first case before the new bench to commence (the actual court season only starts in October, this was an extraordinary hearing).

The case? Citizens United v Federal Elections Commission. Also known as the Hillary movie case. A buncha right-wingers made a movie last year about why Hillary Clinton was not fit to be president (which is really a moot point no?) and it fell foul of certain provisions barring corporate contributions to political campaigns under the McCain Feingold Act. And so like good Americans, these people decide to challenge the constitutionality of the statute, and it eventually worked its way up to the Supreme Court. Today's was a re-hearing that was ordered before the Court went into recess last summer. Don't ask me why a re-hearing was ordered I don't know the details.

Anyway, subject matter itself already has significant consequences for political campaigning, balanced against First Amendment rights to free speech, and what made the case all the more riveting (and well-publicized) was the fact that it would be the first time Elena Kagan, Obama's pick for Solicitor General and former Dean of Harvard Law, would be arguing before the bench. The first woman to hold that office, arguing for the first time before a panel that included the third female Supreme Court justice, also presiding over her first ever hearing in that capacity.

But wait it gets better. For the petitioner, Theodore B Olsen, former Solicitor General and perhaps best known (and loathed?) for winning 2000's Bush v Gore, and most recently - and surprisingly - for his attempts to overturn California's Prop 8. As amicus curiae in support of the appellant (Citizens United), Floyd Abrams, perhaps best known - to us anyway - for New York Times v Sullivan.

And as amicus curiae in support of the respondent - and on behalf on Sen John McCain - Seth P Waxman, former Solicitor General under President Clinton. Talk about the number of great minds in one courtroom.

But flash back to 9am in the morning. We get there thinking we were early, and to our dismay, see a long winding line, and are told it is unlikely we'll get in to catch the full arguments (they only let the first 50 in for that). I suppose Keith was right in saying that was a sign of how Americans are so much more civic-minded than Singaporeans, although it may be a case of apples and oranges.

Anyway, and luckily for us, we were allowed to go in and sit right at the back, for what was to have been a disappointingly quick 5 minute observation, but stretched to 15. Hey, I'll take what I can get.

So we got into the courtroom (which is surprisingly bigger than I thought it would be), and oral arguments were well on the way, with Kagan arguing before the notorious nine. There they were, Alito, Ginsburg, Kennedy, Stevens, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Breyer and Sotomayor (in that order), perched on the high bench overlooking the packed courtroom. Scalia was expressing disbelief at one of her submissions (woo big surprise there) and Roberts, Stevens and Kennedy subsequently engaged in active questioning. Stevens sounds surprisingly sprightly for his age. Ruth looked rather regal, Alito opened his trap once to ask a question of little consequence, and Sotomayor just sat there, leaned over slightly to look at her colleagues as they were speaking, and didn't say a word while I was there - but according to news reports she had jumped into questioning within 20 minutes of oral argument. Clarence Thomas just sat there like a grumpy ol' bear. A placeholder if there ever was one.

Haha I wasn't really paying attention to the arguments (and even if I was I sure as hell wouldn't want to recite them) but it was nevertheless a great experience, just to see these people who have been so talked about. It's like the law school student's version of going to the VMAs or something.

SPEAKING OF. 2 things and then I gtg.

(1) Today in Securities Regulation class the professors asked my classroom of about 50 who thought that the pay of bankers should be restricted, to say, not more than 1 million dollars. Not one, not one person, put up their hand. One of the Profs (both work for the SEC) went, 'woah, you guys are all Republicans huh'. And I thought to myself, 'nope, we're just self-interested'. I mean, if bankers' pay is reduced, how long before lawyers are affected too? Ultimately everyone is looking out for themselves.
(2) I may actually be at the VMAs on Sunday! Haha. Not in Radio City, but hopefully, possibly, somewhere around trying to catch a glimpse of celebrities on the Red Carpet. Leaving for the Big Apple tomorrow in the afternoon, and I'm actually really excited even though I've already been there a couple times before. Zhengx got me a ticket for Wicked! WICKED!!

Haha life is good.