Brother Breyer

I have a lot of sisters, and I want what's best for them. If I had to marry one of them off (and people still were into loveless marriages of convenience), there would be no question, I'd want Justice Breyer for my new brother-in-law.

I watched part of the Breyer-Scalia debate the other day on C-SPAN, which is pretty tame compared to the erotic, erie-doctrine baths that some of my co-bloggers are all about, and decided he was the man. It might just be that anyone looks like a good match when they're put on a stage next to Scalia, it might be this story suggesting what a great guy he is, or maybe it's just exchanges like this:

"Souter persists. "Unless we allow whistle-blowers to bring a private right of action, this whole statute is a dead letter." Thomas replies that in Birmingham "we are very conscientious about the administration of our programs." " 'Trust me' is not an answer," snaps Ginsburg, "when you are telling a sixth-grader she can't play on a team."

In perhaps the single greatest moment of the 2005 term, Justice Stephen Breyer then interrupts Thomas to inquire: "Can I ask you a legal question?"

He goes on to offer a vintage Breyeresque three-part hypothetical, devoting at least five minutes to getting Thomas to concede that he must inevitably lose this case. To which Thomas finally responds with, "Justice Breyer, on the face of the statute, I just can't get there. I apologize."

Calm on the surface but laced with a thinly veiled contempt; exchanges like this have been the routine at my parent's holiday dinners for years. Breyer is practically family already.