As a reader and commenter at Simple Justice, Joel Rosenberg, better known as Jdog, brought many things, amongst which was the regular use of the word “orthogonally” to describe his often curious take an the relative worth of a tangential view.  It appears that the spirit of Jdog flowed through University of Michigan law professor Richard Friedman yesterday, as he argued in Briscoe v, Virginia.

MR. FRIEDMAN: I think that issue is entirely orthogonal to the issue here because the Commonwealth is acknowledging –
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: I’m sorry. Entirely what?
MR. FRIEDMAN: Orthogonal. Right angle. Unrelated. Irrelevant.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Oh.
JUSTICE SCALIA: What was that adjective? I liked that.
MR. FRIEDMAN: Orthogonal.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Orthogonal.
MR. FRIEDMAN: Right, right.
JUSTICE SCALIA: Orthogonal, ooh.
(Laughter.)
JUSTICE KENNEDY: I knew this case presented us a problem.
(Laughter.)
MR. FRIEDMAN: I should have — I probably should have said –
JUSTICE SCALIA: I think we should use that in the opinion.
(Laughter.)
MR. FRIEDMAN: I thought — I thought I had seen it before.
JUSTICE SCALIA: Or the dissent.
(Laughter.)
MR. FRIEDMAN: That is a bit of professorship creeping in, I suppose.

Professorship?  Feh. More likely the running theme of lawprofs unable to give credit where it’s due.

Eugene Volokh, while applauding a word he has long admired, raises the downside of this lighthearted exchange surrounding the use of a word that was unfamiliar to the justices:

[A]s the lawyer in the story … described learned, to his cost. (It sounds like the Justices weren’t much upset with the lawyer, and they did figure out what the word means; but it was a distraction from the lawyer’s point, and took up time that could have been used for substantive argument.)

Did it distract from his point? Sure, though the point that the argument he was challenging was tangential was hardly a difficult to follow.  Did it eat up time?  Obviously, though not much. Did it break the tension, allow Friedman to relax as he moved forward and create an endearing moment that will enhance Friedman’s likability and hence credibility to all wings of the court.  You bet. 

And Friedman will go home with a story about his oral argument before the Supreme Court that he will enjoy telling for the rest of his life.  The case won’t be won or lost in those few seconds, but that experience will last forever.  You can’t buy something like this.  The only bad news is that orthogonal has now been used.  Of course, Slackoisie is still available.