Monday, November 23, 2009

Washington

I arrived in DC safe and sound, albeit almost half an hour late and a few blocks from where I expected. Amanda came and met me, and we started with lunch at a Chinese restaurant (I had travelled on a Chinatown bus). Our first tourist destination was the Supreme Court (it was closed last time I was in DC)! The docent (docent is not a term with which I was familiar, but it came up a couple of times on my trip: apparently it is a largely American term) gave a talk, which consisted of answers to people's questions. She was obviously very knowledgeable, and turned pretty ordinary questions ("what was the Supreme Court's biggest case?" - there's not really a way to measure that) into good answers (Marbury vs Madison, which established the concept of judicial review, which has been profoundly influential as more countries have adopted written constitutions in the two centuries since then: the court gets many international judicial visitors, and that's the one they talk about).

Looking around - and spending the weekend with a law student (now that's something I should be used to, but it's been a while) - brought to mind a couple of questions about Australian constitutional law to which I felt I should, but don't, know the answers. Anyone who feels they know is welcome to answer!

1) Does the High Court only rule on federal law? Obviously I'd include determing whether a matter is correctly dealt with by federal or state law as a matter of federal law, but what about purely state issues: are they left to the respective supreme courts?
2) Is original jurisdiction in the High Court common?

After the court, we went next door to the Library of Congress. It's an impressive building, with interesting quotes written on the wall. I particularly appreciated "books must follow science, and not science, books" as well as "books will speak plain when counsellors blanch" and "reading maketh a full man, conference, a ready man; writing, an exact man". Looking those up to check them, I discovered that all three are from Francis Bacon, so I've decided I should find and read some of his work.

After LoC, we wandered through the National Mall, past some sculptures. We continued into a part of the city (Amanda was the guide, so I'm not really sure which party of the city, although it was reasonably inner - 7th Street, I think). We had tapas for dinner, which was delicious.

In the evening we headed back to Amanda's place, where I met her flatmate Jess. I think the two of them would fit quite well into the South 4 group of which I am so fond (even though they don't write to me... hint hint!). I felt very at home there.

This has only been a short post, but I think it will be better for me if I get some sleep: I have had less than usual lately, and I'm starting to notice. I'm not sure if it's at all related, but I have a cold sore :-( .

5 comments:

  1. My goodness you're a well rounded person Matt! (in all but physical dimensions ;)
    Jac.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Huh, I didn't realize that docent was an American word. In all fairness, I would venture to say that a lot of Americans don't know the word, either--just us museum-going nerds.

    And, how funny that those quotes were all from Bacon.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Until January 2004 I thought I would probably study law: I made the right choice, but an analytical mind can also be applied in areas other than science!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Don't be so sure of yourself, Matthew. It's times like this having a degree in American social history comes in handy:
    1. Scott v Standford
    2. Roe vs Wade
    3. Brown vs Board of Education.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree those had enormous social influence. I still think that MvM was more influential overall, because its enormous influence on judicial practices allowed those cases to exist at all.

    ReplyDelete