Today in Supreme Court History: July 29, 1942

7/29/1942: Supreme Court hears oral argument in Ex Parte Quirin.

The Stone Court (1942)

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

Times-Picayune Publishing Corp. v. Schulingkamp, 419 U.S. 1301 (decided July 29, 1974): Powell stays trial judge’s prior restraint order prohibiting publication of pretrial testimony; order was to stay in effect until the end of the trial, the purpose being to prevent jury being swayed by what they read in the papers. Powell’s opinion briefly reviews Court decisions weighing the right to a public trial (First and Sixth Amendments) versus the right to an impartial jury (Sixth). Defendant, age 17 at the time and black, was accused of raping and murdering a white nurse, and Powell notes that some of the reporting was “irresponsible”. However he noted no “imminent threat” to a fair trial. (Defendant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment; while in prison he was put on trial again for armed robbery and sentenced to 99 years. See 329 So.2d 728.)

[Dan Schiavetta]

today’s movie review: Amadeus, 1984

Many of us know the frustration of working hard for a long time for a goal, only at the last minute someone else waltzes in and snatches it instead, without hardly trying, and without even caring whether he gets it or not. In the law field this has happened to me in recent years, where I lost my business to already-well-off firms, even though in some cases they didn’t know what they were doing, or didn’t even seem to care about whether they got the account or not. I know this because I was still on the e-service list for those cases and saw them screw up, or (in one case) almost get hit with a preclusion order due to failure to produce witnesses I had prepped and was ready to present when the case was taken from me eight months before. I felt like the Marsha Mason character in The Goodbye Girl: it doesn’t matter if I do a better job, or if I need the job more, or if I will work harder at it, or if I make a better pitch for getting it, and it doesn’t matter if everyone knows all this: I’m not going to get the job. Perhaps some of you have been in the same situation.

In this movie we see the added element that the person who gets the job is actually good at it, in fact preternaturally excellent. It is told through the eyes of Salieri, a hard-working composer who is helpless to watch as Mozart, goofy and immature, takes over the Vienna music scene with music whose brilliance Salieri is all too aware of. “Amadeus” means “loved by God” and Mozart certainly seems to be that. That he is not insolent but good-hearted, and is oblivious to how he embarrasses Salieri (in the scene where he improvises and improves Salieri’s new composition in front of the prince who commissioned it), makes it worse.

No, it’s not historically accurate (let’s get that out of the way), but it’s a terrific movie, which makes room for a lot of characters, just to give one example Patrick Hines (from 1776, as the sycophantic Kapellmeister), each of whom is given space to delineate their roles. Then of course there is the adorable Elizabeth Berridge as Mozart’s wife (and her cleavage). I was impressed with the depiction of how one had to sell oneself to princes to get jobs, the subtle jostling for prominence once one was in the room. It is accurate as to the classical music scene of those days. It’s also made clear that Salieri, while mediocre, is a competent musician. He can hear music in his head just by looking at the score. (In my brief time as a music major, not coming from a musical family, I unwittingly insulted my comp teacher by saying that this assignment I turned in, “when you actually hear it . . .” )

The scene were F. Murray Abraham (Salieri), in hiding, realizes that the jerk grabbing Berridge’s boobs is Mozart! Or the late scene where Salieri, going to a Mozart opera in a “cheap” venue, sees how Mozart was still haunted by the ghost of his father (the father-son dynamic, early on, is accurate.) The movie is currently being analyzed scene by scene by Leo Avant in a detailed series on youtube (though his digressions in trying to be funny are irritating).

One more note . . . A few years ago this was on TV. Mozart (Tom Hulce) is talking to his wife, who is waking up in bed, stretching, yawning, obviously after a night of sex. This brought back such fond memories of when I was that age — a naked white woman in her early 20’s waking up in bed, yawning, sexy moans — I squeaked out “Mm!” I just couldn’t stop saying “Mm! Mm! Mm!” Finally my wife realized what was going on and changed the channel.

[SRG]

Simon Callow, who played Schikaneder in the film, played Mozart himself in the original production at the National Theatre, with Paul Scofield as Salieri - which production I was lucky enough to see.

When I was in NY in 1984, my visiting GF and I went off to the open-air theatre in Central Park to see the play "The Golem". The part of the anti-Semitic cardinal was played by Joseph Wiseman (who was the eponymous "Dr No"), the golem was played by Randy Quaid, who did not blink the entire time he was on stage, and playing the part of the rabbi was an unknown actor. When I spoke to my mother on the phone afterwards I said, "keep an eye out for this chap, he's amazing". It was, of course F Murray Abraham. (I suspect that had the production been a few years later, FMA would have played the cardinal.)

[Dan Schiavetta]

Thanks.

Abraham’s performance is so amazing it was worth an extra large Oscar. Also good was Tom Hulce who shows just enough hints of depth. Outwardly the two characters are friends, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen a more complicated relationship depicted on film.

[David Nieporent]

Many of us know the frustration of working hard for a long time for a goal, only at the last minute someone else waltzes in

ISWYDT.

[Syd Henderson]

One of the Best Picture winners that actually was the Best Picture of the Year (and would be of many years). I liked you pointing out that Salieri is indeed competent (which is why he is the court musician). I wanted to actually see a performance of the Baroque opera by Salieri. Although it wouldn’t match Mozart’s operas, nobody else I’ve seen matches him (at opera). Salieri’s music made a minor comeback after the movie, i.e., some people started playing it again. It's pleasant, and the movie's criticisms are also pretty accurate.

A lot of Mozart’s financial problems came from his gambling and being a spendthrift. His wife made a pretty good living after his death managing his music. She seems to have been pretty smart.

[SRG]

It's been pointed out that Mozart was not impoverished but was merely living a proto-yuppie over-extended lifestyle. And his modest funeral was due to anti-sumptuary laws.

[Dilan Esper]

One of the greatest films of all time. Undergirded by Abraham's performance, which makes the whole thing work. Salieri has to be a good enough composer that he knows exactly how good Mozart is (and how lucky he is to be able to do it with a terrible work ethic) but also a mediocre enough composer to be completely frustrated by what he sees. And then just great scene after great scene follow.

It also has a lot of personal meaning for me in that it was the first "adult" movie (I don't mean x-rated, but rather a movie for grown-ups) that I actually fully understood and processed when I saw it as a kid.

[SRG]

As far as Salieri appreciating how much better Mozart was than he, the curse was worse. He seemed to be the only person who did appreciate it! No-one else had that musical perception, which meant that the praise and esteem he received from the Vienna court, etc. was worthless.

[Dan Schiavetta]

That is true. His angry prayer to the crucifix: “Why did you do this to me??”

[Syd Henderson]

Josh could have waited a couple of days, because the Court decided "Ex parte Richard Quirin; Ex parte Herbert Hans Haupt; Ex parte Edward John Kerling; Ex parte Ernest Peter Burger; Ex parte Heinrich Harm Heinck; Ex parte Werner Thiel; Ex parte Hermann Otto Neubauer; United States ex rel. Quirin v. Cox, Brig. Gen., U.S.A., Provost Marshal of the Military District of Washington, and 6 other cases." on July 31. Dasch and Burger turned the other six in and got prison sentences (which were commuted eventually by Truman) and the other six were executed after a military trial.

I'm guessing the Court was called back in session since this was such an urgent case?

[Dan Schiavetta]

Josh’s July 31 post will be about Anthony Kennedy retiring in 2018.

We will both be reposting from last year.

Here is mine:

Ex Parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1 (decided July 31, 1942): allows Nazi saboteurs to argue their habeas petition before the Court, but upholds Presidential order that they be tried by a special military tribunal; admits that all federal courts are functioning normally but defers to Presidential authority in time of “grave public danger” and holds that the tribunal had power to try anyone regardless of citizenship or military status (eight Germans were deposited by submarines off Florida and Long Island with cash and explosives; it was known that the Hitler regime was training saboteurs but J. Edgar Hoover was inept at finding them, preferring to order dragnets on immigrant populations; the plot came to the FBI’s attention only because the leader, a former U.S. Army soldier, decided to turn them in before anything happened; he was one of the two who was not subsequently executed, but was deported to Germany in 1948 and tried for the rest of his life to get back into the United States).

[Dan Schiavetta]

Juicy fruit!