Sam, your robe is waiting . . .

TRUTH / JUSTICE:

And so, it came to pass, that on the 31st day of January, in the year-of-our-lord (or other appropriate deity), in the District of Columbia, a significant event in American jurisprudence has come and gone with all but the smallest of notice.

Granted, there are MANY things to occupy our attention this day. We have lost a great woman, who was an icon to some (myself, included), and so we wish you godspeed Coretta Scott King, and thank you for your tireless dedication to improving race relations in our society. May we all strive to continue your legacy.

(Ok, so I'm being just a little over the top here, but hey, show some respect for the dead).

Where was I? Oh yes, things to occupy our attention this day. George W. Bush stands this evening and offers us his FIFTH State of the Union address. Now, I will plainly admit to being no fan of President Bush, and have so very little good to say about his administration. But for now, not having heard the actual speech, I will save what I can only expect will be a extremely violent eruption of words and criticism for the Executive-in-Chief until later. What I will mention is this: NPR and other news sources have mentioned that the speech tonight, without counting breaks for applause, will last 38 minutes. Now, I realize that NO ONE (including me) yearns to return to the days of William Jefferson Clinton and the 90 plus minute speeches. (Well, ok, maybe I do miss them once in a while, but still, 90 minutes? )

All I'm going to say at this point is this: your average hour long television drama lasts 42 minutes of actual broadcast footage. Is it too much to ask that the President spend AT LEAST that much time presenting his ideas for the country? Just a thought . . .

And, we note with continuing concern, the plight of ABC News co-Anchor Bob Woodruff, who continues to struggle with wounds he received while reporting on the state of chaos in Iraq.

But somewhat diminished in all that chatter was the beginning of Samuel Alito's term on the United States Supreme Court. I will avoid lavishing overwhelming praise on departing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who rightly is being heralded as one of the great minds and moderating influences on the Court during the birth of the information age. (Oops, there I go, when I said I wouldn't . . . )

But, despite the rabble rousing from some of my fellow liberal brethren, I am not so awfully afraid of Justice Alito. While many heard hemming and hawing during the confirmation hearings, I was largely struck by Judge Alito's patience with dealing with committee members who were either (a) completely unschooled in the way that appellate decisions are formed, and the intellectual rigors that are required for truly good jurisprudence; (b) just plain less intelligent than he is; or (c) just plain unintelligent.

True, Justice Alito is probably most likely going to be as conservative oriented in his opinions as Justice Scalia. True, many of his opinions seem to favor the power of the government over the power of the individual. But, having reviewed many of his opinions, including the oft-cited but rarely correctly analyzed decision in Doe v. Groody, a.k.a. the "Kid Strip Search" case, I find that the most consistent predictor of outcome is the quality of the lawyering. Judge, now Justice Alito, it seems to me takes a VERY narrow view of the question before him, and if a lawyer, either at the trial level or the appellate level, has NOT carefully crafted his or her argument and presented for review a clearly articulated ground for specific remedy, well, that's just too bad.

As to whether Judges should look beyond the articulated grounds in an appeal to the facts of a case to see that true justice should be done (in other words, should a lawyer's carelessness take away an individual's right to justice), well, that's a debate for another day (when I've got the mental stamina to consider it).

For now, anyway, I say hello Justice Alito. Let us now see how you REALLY think . . .

Later . . . .