Shorter Reggie: I Will Remember Your Interest in Public Service the Next Time Someone Really Needs It

by emptywheel

As I was reading the Amicus Brief from Robert Bork and friends today, I was thinking to myself, "Jeebus! They sure pulled this together quickly, with 12 fancy lawyers agreeing on a brief within 72 hours. You think maybe they had this in the works ahead of time?"

Well, apparently, Judge Walton is thinking the same kind of thing. Check out the footnote in his order allowing Bork and friends to submit their brief.

It is an impressive show of public service when twelve prominent and distinguished current and former law professors of well-respected schools are able to amass their collective wisdom in the course of only several days to provide their legal expertise to the Court on behalf of a criminal defendant. The Court trusts that this is a reflection of these eminent academics' willingness in the future to step to the plate and provide like assistance in cases involving any of the numerous litigants, both in this Court and throughout the courts of our nation, who lack the financial means to fully and properly articulate the merits of their legal positions even in instances where failure to do so could result in monetary penalties, incarceration, or worse. The Court will certainly not hesitate to call for such assistance from these luminaries, as necessary in the interests of justice and equity, whenever similar questions arise in the cases that come before it.

Ouch! You think maybe he didn't appreciate the heavy-handed intervention into his case? You think maybe he didn't appreciate having 12 fancy lawyers suggest he can't make his own decision in this matter?

I'm reminded of Judge Walton's face when Ted Wells insisted on reading the letters from Wolfie et al before the sentencing. He was staring up at the ceiling with his lips pursed, a look of disgust that Team Libby insisted on carrying out their big show regardless of any effect it might have on Walton. Walton was just a prop, it seemed, in Ted Wells' circus.

And from the look of things, Walton isn't any happier about this latest stunt. I'm not so sure that the Bork brief is as easy to ignore as Wolfowitz' letter. But Team Libby sure seems prepared to piss off Walton to get what they want out of him.

Comments

[Cranky Observer]

> I'm not so sure that the Bork brief is as
> easy to ignore as Wolfowitz' letter.

My understanding is the Wolfowitz letter contains a description of Libby working tirelessly to prevent the outing of a CIA agent in an earlier job? If so, can the judge cite that as _confirmation_ of his decision that bail is not appropriate?

Cranky

[Canuck Stuck in Muck]

Go, Reggie, go! Bork, just go!

[William Ockham]

Wow. I remember reading somewhere (FDL? Christy Hardin Smith?) that lawyers put their snark in the footnotes. Judge Walton certainly does.

That is an impressive smackdown.

[freepatriot]

so you're saying that scooter has the best paid STOOOPID lawyers in the world ???

But Team Libby sure seems prepared to piss off Walton to get what they want out of him.

I TOLD you scooter was playing the "Incompetent Council" angle

now, all scooter has to say is "Look how bad my attorney pissed you off, your honor" and he's made his case

I could be a lawyer, cept for the part about appearing before a Court and all ...

[albert fall]

The Bork piece is an interesting piece of legal work. The Scooter legal team is creating their own "precedent" to refer to. I am certain Scooter's defense team will "cite" this distinguished group--which, as Judge Walton so aptly notes, sprung up so quickly and so conveniently--as support for their positions.

More value for Sunday morning PR talking point spouters than legal value, I expect.

[Frank Probst]

Reggie seems less than amused. Bork was an especially nice touch. The Irony Fairy strikes again!

[Dismayed]

Walton knows a vast right-wing conspiracy when he sees one. Note to all other 'conservatives' This is what integrity looks like.

[Spirit]

Would Messeur like some snark with his jail sentence?

[pontificator]

Wow -- that is some footnote. He is so right. Walton is now my personal hero.

[TomJ]

Do you think that Team Libby wants to provoke an angry reaction from the Judge, so they can use that as a sign of bias? Would explain a lot if it could work.

[Swopa]

I think TomJ nails the secondary motivation here. The primary motivation is to play to the media & make it easier for Dubya to give a pardon, but if they can taunt Walton into losing his cool (and thus creating a grounds for appeal) that's a handy bonus.

[mighty mouse]

OT, but maybe not so much--Cheney needs a new batter for his pacemaker. And, as somebody who does writing workshops in a prison, I love Walton's footnote. Yes, more justice for all. Please. Although I'm not sure my guys would want to be represented by Bork et al.

[Former Fed]

The arrogance of this group is overwhelming. Thank goodness that Judge Walton has this case and not Silberman or someone like him.

[sponson]

Congratulations emptywheel for being the critical last straw in the resignation of Peter Pace. You won't take the credit, but we're handing it out to you. Thank you.

[Swopa]

The arrogance of this group is overwhelming.

Someone in previous comments/threads may have pointed this out, but the message Walton appears to be taking (accurately) from the support letters and this brief is that Libby is a man of enormous privilege and influence who will feel no shame or guilt for his actions unless he is sent to prison for a substantial period of time.

Thereby making "general deterrence," as Walton put it in his sentence -- the need to make an example of Scooter for other govt. officials -- all the more imperative.

[Rick]

Is Judge Reggie Walton this generation's Judge John Siricca?

I certainly hope so. Once Scooter is in prison, his loyalty and tough fascade may start to crumble, if the past is prologue. And the RWingers know it. They can't let it happen or the House of Cards may tumble.

For America's sake, let it be so.

[Frank Probst]

Now that I've read the brief, I can say that I don't think Walton is going to buy this. He swatted this argument off when Team Libby made it, and I just can't see him taking it more seriously now that Nixon's hatchet man is the one trying to argue it. Yes, I think this brief gives Walton some cover if he decides to keep Libby out of jail, but Walton's had more than enough cover already, and he hasn't seemed all that interested in using it. I also think that his footnote was more than just pure snark--I expect all of these people to be hauled in for pro bono work over the next few years.

[pwrlght]

Swopa - Thereby making "general deterrence," as Walton put it in his sentence -- the need to make an example of Scooter for other govt. officials -- all the more imperative.

Unfortunately Scooter and his friends won't learn anything. Scooter's a victim don't you see. Fitzgerald was out to get him and there is a left-wing conspiracy. So prison will likely only reinforce his beliefs vs. using the time to reflect on choices made. Remember he is a Republican and it seems lately to be a Republican means facts don't matter.

[nolo]

DAMN -- you beat me to it!

but i do love this one,
obviously EW -- not sure
which of us had it first,
but here is my take, including
an image of the full footnote,
and judge walton's signature:

a gaggle (that's an even dozen, in
non-legal parlance!) of law professors
just got paid a pile to have asked
to weigh-in on scooter libby's pending
motion for bail, while his appeals are
handled by the courts. . .

and, of course -- the aim is to suggest
that it is a "close question" as to whether
judge walton's ruling -- sustaining patrick
fitzgerald's authority under the independent
counsel statutes, was correct. . .

forget the "all the grand-standing big
money can buy academics love" facets
to this motion -- and simply focus on that clearly-
well-grounded, solid and street-wise judge -- reggie walton.

he accepts their amicus papers, but drops a very
clever -- and worldly -- footnote, to his order. . .

i am in awe of walton. and i am disgusted that
these professors want to make scalia's
dissent (i.e. not binding law) the basis
for the assertion of a "close question". . .

arguing for the change of existing
law is not the same as presenting a close,
or conflicting set of cases, under unsettled
law. . . scalia's dissent in morrison has
no effect whatsover as law. nor does this
largely spurrious amicus motion, drawn with all
the resources of the r.n.c./scooter
libby defense fund could buy legal accumen
mustered by these wise-old-graybeards.

here endeth my rant. . .

oh yeah -- the motion's caption:

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AS AMICI CURIAE AND BRIEF OF LAW PROFESSORS VIKRAM AMAR, RANDY E. BARNETT, ROBERT H. BORK, ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, VIET D. DINH, DOUGLAS W. KMIEC, GARY S. LAWSON, EARL M. MALTZ, THOMAS W. MERRILL, ROBERT F. NAGEL, RICHARD D. PARKER, AND ROBERT J. PUSHAW AS AMICI CURIAE IN CONNECTION WITH DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR BAIL PENDING APPEAL

[nolo]

let me also say that judge walton
does seem more than a little non-
plussed that the whole basis for
the amicus brief is a DISSENT -- a
dissent! -- written by antonin scalia.

how on earth does that make it
a "close question" OF LAW!?

scalia is obviously very smart,
but as a dissenter, his opinion,
plus $3.98, will get you a vente
at starbucks -- just like mine. . .

opinion, that is. it is not law;
it is therefore manifestly not close.

a bunch of professors notwithstanding,
i think all this does is hurriedly open
the doors to the appellate process. . .

just my starbucks worth. . .

[freepatriot]

so, can we take bets on scooter's demeanor when he gets hauled away in handcuffs

or would that be in bad taste ???

personally, I'm betting scooter handles it better than paris hilton did

but not much better ...

[Sojourner]

Frank Probst -- "I also think that his footnote was more than just pure snark--I expect all of these people to be hauled in for pro bono work over the next few years."

I think Nolo started heading in the right way. Would these people do something like this pro bono? I suspect not... I wonder who paid them?

Heroes appear from many venues... The Pat Fitzgeralds, the Reggie Waltons, the Emptywheels. We don't have to believe as they do, nor do they have to believe as we do -- but they will do their level best to do what is right and true, regardless.

On the other hand, we have people such as the authors of this brief who are suddenly hot and bothered about some legal issue that should have been addressed long ago (if, in fact, it really is an issue), or those who wrote letters to support good ole Scooter after things don't go how they think they should -- and they think they are doing what is right and true, except that they have lost a sense of what matters or is truly important.

This brief is a strong example, in my non-lawyer opinion, of just how much the law is up for sale to the highest bidder in this country. Maybe the bid is not in money, so much, but in power, or self-perceived power.

There is always abuse of institutions, it seems, and someone will always try to stretch the rules to fit them. If Bush and Cheney and Rove and all their friends succeed in their attempts to subvert our Constitution, I suspect that no one will ever believe in the rule of law again. Total chaos will prevail.

I hope and pray that one more hero can come forward and just blow the whistle in such a way that this madness can end...

Hats off to the Reggies, and Fitzes, and Marcys of this world!

[AZ Matt]

If these guys were sooo concerned about this case in the first place why did they wait for the bail phase?

Judge Walton to the Big 12: "Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaa!"

[Woodhall Hollow]

LOL! Thanks for the Friday evening laugh, Marcy. A two-fer, 2 in a row!

Sojourner brings up an interesting point. Wouldn't the appropriate time to attack Fitz's legal status have been before the trial started? Oh, maybe they were so full of themselves that they thought they could handle him and his little rag-tag gaggle of fellow public servants.

Reggie, Fitz and Marcy. A Gooper, a Dem and unknown. Who woulda thunk it?

Now I can go pour myself a glass of wine.

[JSG]

Maybe Scooter can get the cell next to Paris Hilton.

What a great week for "rule of law" this has been.