« Agriculture Department chemist successfully fights guilt-by-association | Main | Marine court martialed for saying "mmmm-mmmm-mmmm" »

January 20, 2010

Chief Justice Roberts and the art of judicial writing

The Supreme Court's original jurisdiction case South Carolina v. North Carolina will never, ever be considered a blockbuster. Or even very interesting. Contrast it, in particular, with the Citizens United campaign finance reform case, whose long-awaited decision could well be the one handed down in a special court session convened for Thursday.

But let's pause, for one moment, to appreciate an aspect of the South Carolina v. North Carolina decision handed down Wednesday. That is, the fine, crisp, near-conversational writing style of Chief Justice John Roberts.

Setting aside the jurisprudence, the, you know, point of any decision, Suits & Sentences continues to be a fan of Chief Justice Roberts' writing. It's clear, plainspoken and effective; sometimes, a little extra touch is all it takes.

Consider this modest flourish from Roberts' partial dissent issued Wednesday.

"The result is literally unprecedented: Even though equitable apportionment actions are a significant part of our original docket, this Court has never before granted intervention in such a case to an entity other than a State, the United States, or an Indian tribe. Never."

See that? See how Roberts drives home the point with the reiteration of the word 'never,' hammered in with a potent, one-word sentence. At another point, Roberts runs out an explication and then adds:

"And all this for what?"

This is almost casual, easy on the ear -- and it thereby helps pull the reader along. Nicely done, sir.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c64169e20120a7f403ee970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Chief Justice Roberts and the art of judicial writing:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Lawrence Hurley

Can you explain what "literally unprecedented" means?

Mike Doyle

Which brings up another point regarding use of language: Literally, every time someone uses the word literally, it is incorrect.

Joe C

It's not necessarily incorrect - perhaps CJ Roberts wanted to distinguish his use of 'unprecedented' as meaning just that, that such a scenario had never occurred until that point, as opposed to the meaning given by colloquial or popular use.

Given his Honour's seemingly casual take on language, such a clarification might be quite useful ...

kay sieverding

What I don't understand is that my case District of Colorado 02-cv-1950 got dismissed on the premise that I was a totally incomprehensible writer, so incomprehensible and such gibberish that the defense didn't even need to file motions for more definite statement, but former judge Nottingham wasn't required to file a memorandum or opinion to supplement his dismissal of my claims and wasn't required to state any facts, other than his opinion that I am a bad writer, or find any facts, other than his opinion that I am a bad writer. See D of Colorado 02-cv1950 document 455

I do get excited and emotional and sometimes I make typos but I have all sorts of document evidence and caselaw and statutes and someone on the ABA law blog said I was a good writer.

The comments to this entry are closed.

ABOUT THIS BLOG

mike

"Suits & Sentences" is a legal affairs blog written by Michael Doyle, a reporter for McClatchy's Washington Bureau. He was a Knight Journalism Fellow at Yale Law School, where he earned a Master of Studies in Law; he also earned a Masters in Government from The Johns Hopkins University with a thesis on the Freedom of Information Act. He teaches journalism as an adjunct instructor at The George Washington University's School of Media and Public Affairs.

Send a suggestion or news tip. Read Mike's stories at news.mcclatchydc.com.

Follow Mike on Twitter: @MichaelDoyle10

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

THIS MONTH

    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