Oral Argument @ Sixth Circuit

Living in Cincinnati, on Wednesday I surveilled the Sixth Circuit playing field, the wolfs’ lair, the cathedral, entrance to hell, depending on your point of view; and key judges, a day earlier.

For you out-of-towners, and even long-time denizens, take a compass or a Garmin! The federal building sits east-west, with a long, long hall in the middle of the building with no windows showing Fifth Street pigeons and the facing Federal Reserve Building, on most floors, including six, between the two courtrooms on six. “Am I going east or west? Now let’s see, I came in on Walnut Street, ….” “East is Mt. Adams, right?” “West is Fountain Square.”

Keep your parking ticket (underground garage on Fountain Square) because if you pay cash it must be done on Fountain Square before you get your car later.

And of course put all change, metallic objects, etc. in Gucci bag for scanning, and have at least your driver’s license handy for flashing.

The day of your oral argument you have to first check in at the clerk’s office on floor five, and for security reasons can only get to that office by the east elevator, not the west one. It opens at 8 am.

I sat in on oral arguments in Sixth West where Judge McKeague, the most-recent [GWB] appointee, of Lansing, was sitting with Sutton (Columbus) and xxx. Then I checked in at the Sixth Circuit Law Library on three for some quiet time.

“Do you know who will be [November 29th] the Chairman of my panel of Siler, [London, Ky.] Gibbons & Mckeague?”

[looking at her computer] “Gibbons [Memphis]. Do you want to know who wrote the opinion?”

That takes the pressure off! If the opinion's been written the oral argument is window-dressing! A little time to focus and maybe show off with a tap dance or magic trick or two. Maybe that joke that Jack Murray told me about the “French-post” and the doctor. Or opine on the fate of Michigan football coaching [for McKeague].

But in any event show the strongest exhibit, etc. Certainly, in the 15 minutes allowed for each side, not time for much more anyway.

Draw them into revealing themselves! That’s the ticket. Maybe stammer like [Treasury’s/Harvard’s] Larry Summers and then, once on the talking track keep-talking-like-he-does-without-allowing-anyone-to-talk-until-the-three-paragraph dissertation (quick breath) is-completed. The judge wanting to ask a question will be so exasperated that in asking his/her question he/she will blurt revealing, telling emotion as well.

On this “day-before” oral arguments I was pleased with Judge McKeague’s questions. No ivory-tower guy. He will be fair and seeks to learn on any topic; he might even be attracted to the very interesting inferential aspects of my case. It’s a cathedral after all!