Categories
News

Supreme Court Shakespeare

A self-described “nerd debate kid” her entire life, Dahlia Lithwick\’s fascination with court-related reporting began when she stumbled into the Microsoft anti-trust trial and discovered, as she puts it: “This is theater. This is Shakespeare.”

Alas, poor Scalia: Local writer Dahlia Lithwick says she makes reporting on the Supreme Court interesting by casting it as Shakespearean drama.

A self-described “nerd debate kid” her entire life, Dahlia Lithwick’s fascination with court-related reporting began when she stumbled into the Microsoft anti-trust trial and discovered, as she puts it: “This is theater. This is Shakespeare.” Her subsequent Supreme Court writing has been tailored accordingly: a series of fun, irreverent pieces that portray the justices not just as arbiters of the law, but as personalities. Lithwick was recently the keynote speaker at the Community Chalkboard dedication, so we caught up with her to get her take on the wall’s success (and talk a little Supreme Court, of course).—Will Goldsmith

C-VILLE: How is the “Community Chalkboard” working out?
Dahlia Lithwick: I never expected both the quality of the speech and the people engaging with the blackboard to be pitched as high as it ultimately [has been]. So far, the part of me that was a little cautious is comforted by the extent to which people have understood that this is a place to talk to each other.

What are the most interesting Supreme Court rulings coming up?
The big decisions coming out in the next month are Hamdan, the enemy combatant Guantanamo case, and the Texas redistricting case. My dire prediction is that the Roberts court will be known for its hands-off approach. That’s the possible big, big, big shift. The Rehnquist court was conservative, but it was also the most meddling freakin’ court ever.

How do you make legal writing approachable?
It’s our obligation as a polity to engage with the court, to understand that these are people, and they have good days and bad days. There is something fundamentally undemocratic about treating the court as some magical, quasi-religious entity. Allowing the court to insulate itself and self-mystify is dangerous, ultimately—that’s the serious kernel at the bottom of my jokes.
As a pragmatic matter, it won’t demystify until they roll cameras in there. Then I’ll be out of a job.

Who have been your favorite personalities on the Supreme Court?
I look at them the way other people look at skating with the stars. Justice Scalia is the only one larger-than-life—when he retires, I’ll have to retire too. He’s the only one who gets that this is Shakespeare.
I miss Sandra Day O’Connor terrifically. She was a force on that court. I’m a big fan of Stephen Breyer, only because he is so goofy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *