Bench Memos

Sometimes Judges Need Editors

James Taranto of OpinionJournal, in his Best of the Web column today (see the final item) comments on an amusing article that appeared in Legal Times regarding the silent feud that rages beneath the placid surface of the Supreme Court about when to add an “s” after the apostrophe when forming a possessive of a noun that ends in “s.”  I’m with the author, attorney Jonathan Starble: count me in the camp of Justice Souter on this one, not Justice Thomas.

I’ve been editing Supreme Court opinions for years, just for my students (because I can’t stand either the cost or the editing of commercial casebooks), and for most of that time I have been silently correcting the justices who get this wrong.  The late Chief Justice Rehnquist was one of the worst offenders, believing wrongly that the possessive of the proper noun “Congress” takes an apostrophe with no “s” added.

Taranto reports an incoherent Wall Street Journal stylebook rule about whether a syllable is accented or not.  Where that idea came from is anybody’s guess.  If you want an authority, try Strunk and White’s Elements of Style, where this is literally the first rule in the book: “Form the possessive singular of nouns by adding ’s.  Follow this rule whatever the final consonant.”  A very, very few exceptions are admitted.  And the sainted H.W. Fowler concurs, in his 1926 A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (avoid all subsequent editions and “American” usage guides), insisting on the “s” except “[i]n verse, & in poetic or reverential contexts.”

As a teacher, I take a somewhat softer but commonsensical line: if you would say it when speaking, spell it when writing.  Does anyone think that voicing the syllables “Congress” is capable of expressing a possessive sense?  Of course not.  What everyone says is “Congresses,” so we need to add the extra “s” that we utter when speaking.

As Starble’s article makes clear, the trouble on the Supreme Court is that every justice runs a self-governing editor’s shop, the result being nonstandardization.  No one is willing to tell any of the justices that they commit solecisms.  Now there’s a real job for the new chief justice!

Matthew J. Franck — Matthew J. Franck is the Director of the William E. and Carol G. Simon Center on Religion and the Constitution at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, New Jersey.

Most Popular


Americans Are Royally Confused about Monarchy

Conventional wisdom regarding America’s relationship with royalty goes something like this: Americans have no time for monarchy as a political concept but can’t get enough of the British royal family. The American media’s round-the-clock coverage of the recent royal wedding certainly seems ample evidence of ... Read More

The Trump Rationale

Why exactly did nearly half the country vote for Donald Trump? Why also did the arguments of Never Trump Republicans and conservatives have marginal effect on voters? Despite vehement denunciations of the Trump candidacy from many pundits on the right and in the media, Trump nonetheless got about the same ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Collapse of the Collusion Narrative

It is now clear that Russian attempts at interference in the 2016 election, though somewhat outrageous, were ineffectual, unconnected with any particular party, a small effort given what a country of Russia’s resources and taste for political skullduggery and chicanery is capable of, and minor compared with the ... Read More
White House

Why the Left Won’t Call Anyone ‘Animals’

If you want to understand the moral sickness at the heart of leftism, read the first paragraph of the most recent column by Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne: It’s never right to call other human beings ‘animals.’ It’s not something we should even have to debate. No matter how debased the behavior ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Trump’s Superpower

President Trump has a magic power. No, it isn’t the ability to engage in four-dimensional chess, or even to mystically connect with the “common man.” It’s simply this: He can make Democrats defend anything. Democrats have increasingly defined themselves by opposing anything Trump does. Trump, unlike ... Read More