Unanimous Supreme Court Victory

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of a government’s right to accept permanent monuments of their choosing in public parks.  

“This decision represents a resounding victory for government speech,” said Jay Sekulow, ACLJ Chief Counsel who presented oral arguments before the Supreme Court on behalf of Pleasant Grove City, UT.  “The decision gives government the right to speak for itself and the ability to communicate on behalf of its citizens.  It’s a significant decision that clears the way for government to express its views and its history through the selection of monuments – including religious monuments and displays.  This decision also puts a bookend on the litigation surrounding the display of the Ten Commandments that’s been taking place for years across the country.  The critical question before the Court was, “Can a city decide which permanent, unattended monuments, if any, to install on city property?”  Without dissent, the Court said “Yes.”  We’re delighted that the Court upheld the important distinction between government speech and private speech.” 

The high court concluded that the government has the right to speak for itself without violating the Constitution.  “The Free Speech Clause restricts government regulation of private speech; it does not regulate government speech . . . A government entity has the right to ‘speak for itself’ . . . . it is not easy to imagine how government could function if it lacked this freedom . . .  A government entity may exercise this same freedom to express its views when it receives assistance from private sources for the purpose of delivering a government-controlled message.”

 The Court’s opinion is located here. 

The ACLJ’s written arguments, its opening and reply briefs, are posted online at www.aclj.org.  To read ACLJ's Summary of the opinion, click here. 

In The Courts

The Supreme Court granted the ACLJ's Petition for Writ of Certiorari on March 31, 2008 - clearing the way for the high court to hear this case in the fall of 2008. ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow will present oral arguments before the high court on behalf of Pleasant Grove City, Utah. This case centers on a crucial distinction between government speech and private speech. A three-judge federal appeals court panel ruled in favor of a group called Summum to erect its own monument of "Seven Aphorisms" in a city park in Pleasant Grove, the site of a long-standing display of the Ten Commandments donated to the city decades ago. The full appeals court split 6-6 and decided not to rehear the case. The ACLJ asked the high court to take the case and overturn the lower court decision. The flawed ruling said private parties have a First Amendment right to put up the monuments of their choosing in a city park, unless the city takes away all other donated monuments - a ruling that runs counter to well-established precedent that the government has to be neutral toward private speech, but it does not have to be neutral in its own speech. As the ACLJ petition states: "In short, accepting a Statue of Liberty does not compel a government to accept a Statue of Tyranny." If left unchecked, the Tenth Circuit ruling would ultimately force local governments to remove long-standing and well established patriotic, religious and historical displays. Oral arguments will take place in the fall of 2008. The case is Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (No. 07-665).

Reprinted courtesy of the ACLJ from http://www.aclj.org/Cases/default.aspx?Section=120.

Press Release for Dr. Sekulow's Supreme Court Case

ACLJ Urges Supreme Court to Protect Nation's Heritage Displayed in America's Cities in First Amendment Case

November 12, 2008

(Washington, DC) – In oral arguments before the Supreme Court, Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), today urged the Supreme Court to preserve sound precedent involving the well-established distinction between government speech and private speech in a case that could force cities to either dismantle a host of monuments, memorials, and other displays, including long-standing patriotic and historical displays, or else let all comers install privately owned monuments or displays, regardless of content.

“We’re hopeful that the Supreme Court will reject a twisted view of the First Amendment that could create havoc in America over how local, state and federal governments choose to memorialize significant events,” said Jay Sekulow, ACLJ Chief Counsel who presented oral arguments before the Supreme Court on behalf of Pleasant Grove City, UT.  “The basic question is whether a city gets to decide which permanent, unattended monuments, if any, to install on city property.  The answer is ‘Yes.’  The fact is that government speech means the government can control its message.  For example, accepting a Statue of Liberty does not compel a government to accept a Statue of Tyranny.  We’re hopeful the high court will uphold this important distinction between government speech and private speech.”

The ACLJ is asking the high court to overturn a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit that ordered Pleasant Grove City, UT to accept and display a monument from a self-described church called Summum because the city displays a Ten Commandments monument donated by the Fraternal Order of Eagles.

The ACLJ contends that the Tenth Circuit made a serious error confusing government speech with private speech.  In its briefs, the ACLJ argues that “a city’s selection of which items to display in a park – like its selection of decorations for government buildings – is government speech, and no private entity can claim a ‘Me too!’ right of access for its own preferred displays.”

Numerous friend-of- the-court (“amicus”) briefs have been filed supporting the ACLJ’s position, including briefs from the United States government, fourteen states, nine cities (including New York City), veterans groups (including the American Legion and the VFW), and various religious liberty groups (including both Christian and Jewish organizations).

The case argued today is Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (No. 07-665) and a decision by the high court will come before the end of the term.

The ACLJ’s written arguments have been filed with the high court.

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses on constitutional law and is based in Washington, D.C.

ACLJ: Supreme Court Considers Key First Amendment 'Monument' Case this Term; November Arguments Scheduled

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) is preparing to deliver oral arguments on November 12, 2008 before the Supreme Court of the United States in a key First Amendment speech case that could affect local governments across the country.  In Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (No. 07-665), the ACLJ represents Pleasant Grove City, Utah in an appeal of a decision that would have forced cities to either to dismantle a host of monuments, memorials, and other displays, including long-standing patriotic and historical displays, or else let all comers install privately owned monuments or displays, regardless of content.

The issue began when a lawsuit was filed by a group called Summum, a self-described church founded in 1975 in Salt Lake City.  Summum sued Pleasant Grove City in federal court, claiming that because the city had erected in a city park a donated Ten Commandments monument, the First Amendment compelled the city to accept and display Summum’s proposed “Seven Aphorisms of Summum” monument as well.  A federal district court declined to order the city to erect the Summum monument, but the decision was reversed by a three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit.  The ACLJ sought review by the full twelve federal appeals court judges of the Tenth Circuit, but the court split 6-6, leaving the panel decision in place.

“The Supreme Court is faced with what we believe is an easy choice:  preserve sound precedent involving the well-established distinction between government speech and private speech – or permit a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to create havoc in cities and localities across America,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, who will present oral arguments to the high court on behalf of Pleasant Grove.  “We’re hopeful the high court will correct a troubling decision that ultimately would force local governments to remove long-standing and well established patriotic, religious and historical displays.”

The ACLJ’s opening brief is available here.

The ACLJ's reply brief is available here.

The ACLJ contends that the Tenth Circuit “made several crucial errors in constitutional analysis.” The First Amendment, the ACLJ explains, “does not require that a government park be turned into a cluttered junkyard of monuments contributed by all comers.”

“In short,” the ACLJ’s opening brief argues, “accepting a Statue of Liberty does not compel a government to accept a Statue of Tyranny.”

The ACLJ contends that the rationale of the appeals court’s decision “threatens to wreak havoc upon governments at every level in their ability to control the permanent physical occupation of government land.” The brief notes that “a host of federal, state, and local government bodies would be, under the Tenth Circuit’s logic, sitting targets for demands that they cede piece after piece of government land to forced occupation, by any group, with whatever monuments that group wishes to have installed, be it Summum’s Seven Aphorisms, PETA’s suffering circus elephant, or Rev. Fred Phelps’s denunciation of homosexual persons.”

The case has generated widespread interest from a variety of organizations.  Fifteen friend-of- the-court (“amicus”) briefs have been filed supporting the ACLJ’s position, including briefs from the United States government, fourteen states, nine cities (including New York City), veterans groups (including the American Legion and the VFW), and various religious liberty groups (including both Christian and Jewish organizations). Even strict separationist groups that typically oppose the ACLJ’s position in religion cases, like the American Humanist Association, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and People for the American Way, filed briefs “in support of neither party” which basically agreed with the ACLJ on the First Amendment free speech questions at issue in this case.  Only two amicus briefs were filed in support of Summum.

Oral arguments in Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (No. 07-665) are scheduled for November 12, 2008 and will be presented by ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow.

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) focuses on constitutional law and is based in Washington, D.C.

Reprinted courtesy of the ACLJ from http://www.aclj.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=3087.

Kelly Blessing

Kelly Blessing is a rising 3L and newly minted surfer girl from Indiana. (She recently bought a condo right on the beach.)

So why did you come to Regent Law School?

Well, I’m from Indiana. Six years ago, I heard that Regent had a Christian law school. I just knew that if I went anywhere this is where I was going to go.

It’s been God’s grace the whole time through so far. My dad passed away after my first final – and I still had to take a few more. His grace was sufficient for me.

With other internship options, why did you choose ACLJ?

Last summer I worked at Legal Aid and it was a wonderful experience…prior to working there I had felt led to explore the Supreme Court. I took a class with Jay Sekulow and enjoyed it – I then realized how much God had put this connection into place. I’m playing a part in a great purpose I’ve yet to fully understand.

What’s rewarding about your work at ACLJ?

Well, for the last few weeks I’ve been working on civil rights issues in different states… with all the research I do I can lose focus of the bigger picture sometimes. But I realize that I’m getting to work on every single part of a case, and the work I’m doing is helping the lives of real people.

What parts of the Supreme Court case have you worked on so far?

I’ve read through the briefs and lower courts’ opinion. My work has been dealing more with the opinion of the 10th circuit court…dissecting it, answering questions within the dissenting opinion...a lot of Google research.

Talk to me about the relationship Regent and the ACLJ have:

Previously I worked for a Christian attorney….when my mom saw her a couple of weeks ago and told her that I’m spending the summer working on a Supreme Court case she was impressed. Nowhere else can you go and have a connection with an organization that routinely argues before the Supreme Court. The opportunities with [John] Ashcroft and Dr. Sekulow….wow.

What sort of music do you listen to in your big head phones all day?

Shawn McDonald, Bethany Dylan, Evan Wickham, David Crowder, soft-worship music to help me focus.

Tell me what you find intriguing about the culture of Va Beach.

I totally live in the beach atmosphere – I love the surfer mentality. When I leave work it’s like I go home to a vacation.

What are your plans post-graduation?

I plan on staying here. Just bought a place and my boyfriend opened up a firm with his twin brother. I’d like to apply for Legal Aid, work and then go out on my own. And work my own schedule.

What do you have for lunch?

I usually bring some kind of lean cuisine that I can throw in the microwave, something unhealthy and a Diet Coke.

What would tell a prospective student thinking about Regent Law School?

First of all the support here is incredible. In class you’re competing….but not really. Your friendships are based on Christ, and you’re actually going to have real friendships here.

Don’t worry too much about tier rankings. I know we’ve been number one in so many competitions…we come in first place beating great schools, top tier schools…and now people are starting to recognize us.

You can come to school here and still find a job in your hometown and find something different that other law schools don’t have.

Leave us with a parting quote.

"Experience has taught me that the Shepherd is far more willing to show His sheep the path than the sheep are to follow. He is endlessly merciful, patient, tender, and loving. If we, His stupid and wayward sheep, really want to be led, we will without fail be led. Of that I am sure." ~ Elisabeth Elliot

Pleasant Grove City v. Summum Legal Brief

It’s a case that’s likely to change the legal landscape in America, and the American Center for Law and Justice is at the forefront of this landmark legal battle.  ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow will present oral arguments before the Supreme Court on a critical First Amendment case involving the Ten Commandments and other displays.
 
There’s so much at stake with this Supreme Court case – our history – our heritage is on the line.  The ACLJ must get the high court to overturn a disturbing decision – a ruling that could force cities and states to make a troubling choice:  remove existing displays – including long-standing patriotic or historic displays – or permit any group to display any monument in public places.
 
Now, stand with the ACLJ and Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow who is preparing for oral arguments at the Supreme Court in November.  Complete the form here to get a free copy of the ACLJ brief that’s been filed at the Supreme Court – the actual legal arguments presented to the Justices.

Please click here to print a copy. 

Please click here to print a copy with spaces for multiple signatures.

Reprinted courtesy of the ACLJ from https://www.aclj.org/Petition/Default.aspx?sc=3369&ac=1.

Joshua Bachman

Joshua Bachman, a joint Law and Government student, is in his second summer as an ACLJ clerk. He rocks a decade-old pair of boat shoes and most days an over-sized pair of head phones in the office.

With other internship options, why did you chose ACLJ?

You do work that means something, that’s being used to directly affect what’s going on. It’s amazing what sort of cases come up under the umbrella of a 1st Amendment non-profit.

What’s rewarding about your work at ACLJ?

Well, working on a Supreme Court case period --- hardly any attorneys will have that chance, and here we are just law student clerks getting the exposure.

Also, the work we all do is part of the large picture. A memo is submitted and your legal argument shows up in the final draft– a paragraph you wrote or the outline of an argument that you created. The stuff we’re doing is directly influencing judges’ opinions – it’s very satisfying.

What parts of the Supreme Court case have you worked on so far?

Editing a lot. Also, my main project is a memo dealing with different Supreme Court justices’ views on government speech. The memo will help to prepare for oral arguments.

What is the importance of this case in your opinion?

Government speech.

A ruling in our favor will remove a potent way to attack Ten Commandments, or memorials that may have religious connotations – a cross at a cemetery for example. If we win, it will be narrowed to the establishment clause. Now it’s sort of open, you put up a statue of liberty and you have to put up a statue of tyranny.

Also important is letting the people make the call. In theory, the government is accountable to the people; so, if the government is making the call, people can in theory vote it out. People get more leverage.

How is your work with the ACLJ shaping your education?

It’s invaluable practical experience. I’m learning how to pick out the important stuff in a case; what sort of secondary resources to use; the value of other resources.

I’m also learning to hone the argument. It’s not just a tour de force; legal work requires you to cut to the chase. If I were doing this for a professor, there would be a little more flowery show, but an attorney wants me to keep it simple; to tell him what is important; not grammatical flourishes and so on.

What are the challenges of this specific case?

The government speech thing requires a bunch of inferring because it’s a vague, unexplored area that hasn’t been addresses that much. A lot of cases I reviewed don’t even use the term “government speech.”

So, it’s not just wham-bam, put together a bunch of stunning points that make your case; most of it is from inference.

Talk to me about the relationship Regent and the ACLJ have:

The relationship the ACLJ and Regent have gives students an opportunity that few if any other schools have.

It’s a premier firm where you can get professional clerk experience that’s paid. The depth and diversity of projects are great, they take us seriously and allow us serious and meaningful research, and it’s convenient to where we study.

What sort of music do you listen to in your big head phones all day?

I generally listen to classical music - more accurately, orchestral music, as I enjoy Baroque, Classical, Romantic and a little Modern, as well. Currently I am listening to Edward Elgar's Pomp and Circumstance Marches. Also at work I like "punk rock" if I need to switch things up. Good Charlotte and Green Day are the standards.

Tell me what you find intriguing about the culture of Va Beach.

Straight up intriguing thing about Virginia Beach: two things. 1) the major city park is officially named "Mt. Trashmore." 2) It's a city and a county, or a county-city, or a city-county – can be confusing when completing forms.

Legal writer you've found to be most clear and concise:

This is such a cliché answer, but probably Justice Scalia. However, I really like the old school judges and Justices who would weave in Shakespeare, mythology, etc in reasoning to their decision (don't know if this would be considered "concise" or "clear," though).

What are your plans post-graduation?

Take up residence in a sufficient-sized trash can and read conservative political literature. For real, I'd like to clerk for a judge so as to get a better handle on applying judicial reasoning to various areas of law.

Ultimately, I'd like to teach at the university level and be an all-around viable member of society. Something like Atticus Finch, except I wouldn't name my daughter "Scout" and would want a part time teaching position at the local university.

Christina Hulett

Christina Hulett is a rising 2L from the Chicagoland area. We’re glad Christina is here with us working for ACLJ.

So how would you compare Virginia Beach with Chicago?

The weather is definitely better here. The sub zero temps in Chicago are worse than the snow.

Virginia Beach is more laid back. You see it in the airport the most …they don’t yell at you in the airport here! They’re so nice.

What did you do before starting law school?

I went to Valparaiso in Indiana, studied history, and ended up going to seminary while being a children’s pastor.

Why did you choose Regent Law School, and how’s it been going for you so far?

Why law? I can’t really explain it; I just know this is what I’m supposed to be doing.
Regent is the only law school I considered. My pastor had come to a conference that was hosted at the Founder’s Inn [conference center and hotel adjoining Regent University.] He suggested I come out. So I flew out for a preview weekend, and the idea that there was a law school integrated with Christian principles sold me.

What’s rewarding about your work at ACLJ?

I get to stand up for other people’s religious freedom. We need people to stand up for it and fight for it otherwise it gets taken away.

What to you usually have for lunch?

It varies. My favorite restaurant happens to be Azar’s – Mediterranean.

What parts of the Supreme Court case have you worked on so far?

I haven’t yet worked on the Summum case. I did get to read the briefs. I’ve enjoyed the other projects I’m working on. Right now I’m working on a case involving zoning laws in Tennessee. As a result of a change in zoning laws, a local religious organization there is now not able to build a home on property that they’ve purchased.

How is your work with ACLJ shaping your education?

ACLJ is a wonderful way to put book learning into practice...I should now hopefully have a one-up on constitutional law before I take it next semester!

Favorite author:

A.W. Tozer, C.S. Lewis, Ravi Zacharias.

Music: I listen to a lot of classical music – Coldplay and Jack Johnson, too.

What are your plans post-graduation?

I’m open to practicing law in different areas. I’ve enjoyed every class I’ve had, and each has opened up a possibility of what I can do. I know God sent me here and I know He’ll show me.

Anything you would want prospective students to know about Regent Law and the ACLJ in general?

There is an extremely strong sense of community here. People go above and beyond to try to help each other succeed. Regent excels at teaching the law as a traditional law school is supposed to do; but beyond that they genuinely care about their students. Plus your faith is affirmed here.

I hear that life at other law schools is extremely competitive, and people are more willing to try to get ahead at to the detriment of somebody else.

Favorite professor?

Prof. Madison is my favorite. Why? Because he uses props to illustrate his lectures. Coming from children’s ministry I really appreciate it. I think it’s great. I didn’t have any class where I had a bad experience with a professor.

Leave us with a quote.

“Life is never fair, and perhaps it is a good thing for most of us that it is not.”
- Oscar Wilde

Tim Hennigan

Tim Hennigan is a rising 2L from Richmond, Va. He dabbles with the cello, plays five string bass, likes to vacation (if and when he has the time) in Sandbridge – it’s close to the Regent Law School campus. He has a wife and four-month old daughter.

So why did you come to Regent Law School?

My wife is a ‘06 Regent Law grad. We’re from the Richmond area.
I started my undergrad in Richmond and finished at ODU (Old Dominion University). I worked in business before law school, and was looking for a Christian law school. I wanted to learn the law from people who are active in improving the legal system. And Regent was the place.

What’s your wife up to now?

My wife, Scottie, is an attorney, but now stays home with our daughter Lucy – she’s four months old.

With other internship options, why did you choose ACLJ?

I joke that what I like to do is fight for truth, justice and the American way. Since Superman’s was taken, I think ACLJ is the next best option in that regard.

What’s rewarding about your work at ACLJ?

In general, it’s great because it reinforces that I do enjoy law and what I’ve invested a ridiculous amount of hours in doing. I really enjoy it. As far as work goes, it’s exciting to be working on stuff that matters and be working with people who really see a need for change. They see the areas where it’s important and appropriate for Christians to get involved in the legal community and to have a hand in the process. The quality of legal minds I get to interact with on a daily basis is incredible.

What parts of the Supreme Court case have you worked on so far?

We’ll, I’ve been working mostly on other projects….but I have worked on this case on the periphery doing grammatical and blue booking corrections (The blue book is the bible of legal citation: properly citing cases, articles, references, etc.) I had a small role in submitting suggestions and improvements in regards to this case.

Other cases?

I worked on a case where a community college professor was grading a student down because she refused to embrace his philosophical worldview on religion. On the one hand it was a freedom of speech case…..but it was also religious freedom case. She was being penalized because she was refusing to part ways with her faith.

I went to Virginia Commonwealth University and then to ODU. Having gone to state-funded schools I’m familiar with their view of religion. At times they feel like it just doesn’t belong in the dialogue.

Tell me about the relationship Regent and the ACLJ have.

It’s a tremendous opportunity for students to be exposed to an attorney who actively argues before the Supreme Court and is one of the top attorneys in the country (Dr. Jay Sekulow). We’re a few doors down from this man…we can’t help but learn immensely from him. Whatever the public view of Regent University, we have amazing students – at the end of the day we have great students and staff. It’s a great symbiosis.

What sort of music do you listen to?

I don’t even know anymore. I listen to offbeat, Indie (I hate that word) – Jeremy Enigk – anything he does I’ll listen to. There’s no passion, love in popular music – no desire to create something wonderful, unique, good - it’s cookie cutter. It amazes me that Modest Mouse got popular…they’re unique. It’s better than it was in high school – the Backstreet Boys were popular then.

Tell me what you find intriguing about the culture of Virginia Beach.

Coming from Richmond it’s a much more laid back environment. You see a lot of flip flops. People have a comfortable and relaxed attitude which we dig. Our church has a community focus – it’s a community in and of itself. We have people that we really like to hang out with.

What are your plans post-graduation?

Fighting for truth justice and the American way wherever I may be.

What do you have for lunch?

Sandwiches and Chik-fil-a sweet tea. I jones for the tea.

What would tell a prospective student thinking about Regent Law School?

If you really want to use your law degree in regards to the Lord, you’re going to learn better how to do that from our staff of professors who look at law as a calling. They don’t just teach so they can get published. And it shows. If you want to learn from professors who see you as an ignorant lump in the sea, who might humiliate you as an example – that’s your call. It’s a much better and caring environment here, but it’s not dumbed down. Our bar passage rate speaks for itself – if you graduate Regent and can’t find a job, it might not be all your fault…but if you can’t at least get an interview, it’s really your fault.

Favorite professors?

Tuskey. How do I explain the glory that is Tuskey? I think he’s the right balance of refusing to dumb down the law school experience even an ounce, and is even willing to come across harshly at times, but still after two semesters of civil procedure, he’s not doing it for fame and glory, but because he loves the Lord with all his heart and cares about us being good Christian attorneys. He’s unwilling to compromise in cutting corners to get where he wants to be.

Leave us with a parting quote.

(NOTE: Tim wants the reader to know that for the purposes of a dramatic closing he’s offering a tongue-in-cheek spot. He really is a humble guy.)

“I’m just like anyone else; all I do is what I can. With me that just happens to be a lot.”

Jonathan Bracewell

Jonathan Bracewell is from Corydon, IA, a town of 1700 people. He’s a rising 2L, an Army officer (“Second Lt. Bracewell” is how he’s known in those quarters), and a big fan of Relient K. We had a great time talking to him.


What did you do before coming to Regent?

I went to Iowa State in Ames, IA, where I was in Army ROTC for four years.

The Army ruled my life. I think it really prepared me well for law school – the whole time management thing.

How have you been doing so far?

My first year at Regent was an intense time of growth on all levels. Sarah, my wife, has been terrific. She’s been really supportive and understanding about the demands law school places on people. She’s been really kind.

Why did you choose Regent?

Mostly because of the ACLJ. I was a huge fan long before I had heard of Regent. I read a book by David Limbaugh called “Persecution” where he talks about a whole bunch of court cases where Christians had been under persecution...it’s great how the ACLJ will step in and take up the fight on behalf of Christians in these cases.

So your ACLJ internship is a dream come true?

Absolutely.

What’s rewarding about your work at ACLJ?

The best thing is that it’s not an “assignment”! Our writings have a purpose to them other than just getting graded - there’s really a purpose behind what I’m doing.

What parts of the Supreme Court case have you worked on so far?

I spend a lot of time looking at the various municipal city policies regarding art displays. It’s interesting. We haven’t studied much on this in class, so it’s really, really new looking into how the government structure is organized.

What is the importance of this case in your opinion?

Unless the 10th Circuit is reversed, every time you see some kind of memorial to somebody in public, someone is going to have the inherent right to place a monument opposing that figure right next to it….e.g., war protesting memorials being placed right next to the actual memorials. Coming from the Army this hits close to home.

How is your work with the ACLJ shaping your education?

I’m learning a lot about constitutional law. The nuanced terminology is all very new. Even in casual conversations we [the interns] still talk con. law. I’m learning all sorts of terminology from older clerks. It’s like a primer for the constitutional law course I’ll be taking in the fall.

Tell us what you find intriguing about the culture of Va Beach.

The traffic. There’s no such thing as a traffic jam in Ames. There just isn’t. The widest street will have two lanes in each direction, not five. [Interviewer’s note: coming from New York City, it’s really not that bad.]

Legal writer you've found to most clear and concise:

[Justice] Alito has really impressed me lately. I recently read a case where I was more impressed with his dissent than Scalia’s….the clarity of the statement of his position…it was almost like he pointed out the elephant in the room. The majority opinion hid the elephant…but when I read Alito the error was obvious. It was mind-blowing.

What are your plans post-graduation?

Back to the Army. Hopefully I’ll serve as a JAG officer. (It would also be really fun to drive a tank. I’ve heard they’re comfy.) Afterwards, I’d like to find myself on a [judge’s] bench. That’s where I’d really like to be.

What do you usually have for lunch?

Leftovers from the fridge that Sarah, my wife heats up and brings over. We have lunch together on the picnic tables outside Robertson Hall.

Do you listen to music?

All the time. Lots of Relient K, Skillet, lots of old school stuff like DC Talk and Newsboys… and good old Petra. [Interviewer’s note: Petra is indeed old, old school.]

Anything you want prospective students to know about Regent Law and the ACLJ in general?

Take time to get to know your classmates on a spiritual level not just a professional level. I’ve had the opportunity and it’s been fantastic. It’s helped me keep in mind what’s important. And I think that’s key to being successful.

Leave us with a quote.

Scalia said brains are like muscles. You can buy them to work for you. But character is never for sale.