Mobilise this Blog

Become a Fan on Facebook

Contributors

July 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Newsvine Top News

HBX


IceRocket

« Kilpatrick's Arraignment | Main | Morning Wrap »

March 25, 2008

Mukasey's Moment

As a former federal judge, Attorney General Michael Mukasey must have grown to appreciate terseness in the lawyers who appeared before him. Mukasey certainly took that sentiment to heart Tuesday when he appeared before the Supreme Court for the first time. His answers to justices' questions were brief, to the point, and seemed to hit the right notes.

Mukasey followed in the footsteps of some but not all of his predecessors in arguing at least one case before the nation's highest court during his or her tenure. And following tradition, he was offered a not-too-taxing case to argue. In United States v. Ressam, it was his job to convince the Court that a law requiring a 10-year minimum sentence for anyone who "carries an explosive" during commission of a felony does not necessarily require that the explosives relate to the crime.

Promising four quick reasons to back up his argument, Mukasey was able to recite three before being interrupted by a question. Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justice Antonin Scalia hit him with far-fetched hypotheticals, but Mukasey handled them comfortably, and did not fall into the trap of telling the justices what they already know — that the hypos were different from his case. "It is perfectly lawful," Mukasey said, for Congress to impose a 10-year sentence whether or not the explosives found on the defendant related to the crime he or she committed. "It passed a very broad statute."

A small dash of humor spiced up the proceedings — Mukasey's voice tends toward a monotone — when he was asked whether the department could promulgate policy guidelines if it appeared the law was being abused. "I think I'd be ideally suited to do that," he responded drily.

Sixteen minutes into his allotted 30, Mukasey looked up and down the row of justices before him and, hearing no further questions, asked to reserve rebuttal time. Almost as soon as he began, Mukasey's main argument was over. He answered the rebuttal questions quickly as well, conceding that while the law was valid, "It's not a model of elegant construction."

Word from the department is that unlike some predecessors who have borrowed the morning coat that is customary for government lawyers to wear before the Court, Mukasey rented his. At the counsel table with him were his counselor Kathryn Haun, a former law clerk to Justice Anthony Kennedy, and from the solicitor general's office, criminal law expert Michael Dreeben and assistant to the SG Toby Heytens.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451d94869e200e55188ff788834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Mukasey's Moment:

Comments

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Advertisements



Featured Job Listings

  • lawjobs.com

    TOP JOBS

Law.com Newswire

  • An Affiliate of the Law.com Network
    From the Law.com Newswire

    Sign up to receive Legal Blog Watch by email
    View a Sample

Legal Times on Flickr

Blog powered by TypePad

My Yahoo!

  • Add to My Yahoo!