The International Businessman
Page 26
Chapter 24
“Well, gentlemen—where do we all stand?” Chief Justice Revdel asked of his two esteemed colleagues in their private meeting room.
“Counselor Megders made some creative arguments, but SISA’s got to stay,” Justice Haufensehn stated flatly. “The people are tired of these drug peddlers riding around brazenly in their fancy suits and little by little buying off policemen. It’s all because the drug peddlers are emboldened, thinking they won’t be prosecuted. We’ve got to show them they’re wrong, or pretty soon the people are going to get out the tar and feathers for us. They are going to see us as subverting the will of the people.”
“You sound like a politician—not a judge, not even a lawyer,” Revdel said. “This isn’t about practicalities. This is about the law!”
“I’m with Haufensehn,” Justice Beckle said meekly, looking down immediately after he said so.
Revdel, a rather large man, turned to his right. “You too? Why? Or dare I ask?”
“Precisely because of the reasons Justice Haufensehn gave. Chief Justice, we’ve got to recognize that the people are fed up. They want to see drug peddlers in chains, not tap-dancing in front of polite society in fancy costumes.”
“Well, I’ll be. It seems you two are both incredibly more informed about what ‘the people’ want than I am. Would either of you care to state the means by which you have arrived at such certain knowledge with regards to such matters?” Revdel asked, with a tone that contained nearly an equal amount of sarcasm and genuine curiosity.
“Sorry, Chief Justice Revdel, my mind’s made up on this one,” Haufensehn said.
“Mine too,” was the immediate reply from Beckle.
“Well, this does beat all! You know, I have half a mind—or maybe a full mind—to petition the Supreme Court itself to conduct a full-fledged ethics examination into you two! Reasonable men can disagree on this matter, sure. But I’ve been on the bench with each of you for over a decade, and never before have I seen such rapid certainty with regards to a constitutional matter. Let’s not forget that we’re not students in a philosophy class debate. At the end of the day, our decisions have consequences. The defendant who gave rise to this case is a shopkeeper without any prior criminal record who could be looking at decades in prison!
“Do you realize a robber would receive less punishment?! And don’t kid yourselves into thinking that the Supreme Court will have to bear that moral responsibility alone. While they probably will hear an appeal to our decision if there is an appeal, there is no guarantee they will. Justice Haufensehn, would you be able to look David Stephenson in the eye and tell him he deserves decades in prison for selling a banned substance from his store? A substance so-called gentlemen use to party with, yet one that is nonetheless supposedly a poison?!”
“He knew the risks, and he took them,” was Haufensehn’s cold reply. “And if you request an ethics inquiry, I’ll do the same . . . into you, Chief Justice, for attempting to intimidate your colleagues into siding with you. You overstep the bounds of your station. My reasons for agreeing with the Republic will be fully expatiated upon in the majority opinion,” Haufensehn said with a cold stare.
“You mean . . . .”
“Yes,” Beckle said. “Justice Haufensehn and I had a brief conversation before you came into the meeting room, and that is the decision we reached. It quickly became clear to me that he supports SISA for the same reasons I do.”
Haufensehn looked like a prison guard who suddenly realizes he’s on the inside of a cell looking out at two former prisoners now dangling the keys in front of him. He barely restrained the impulse to shake his head vigorously like a wet dog in order to see if that cleared his confused mind.
As the saying goes, there is power in numbers, and Revdel quickly folded on the ethics inquiry issue.
“Very well, I look forward to reading your expatiation, and I will write a dissent that posterity will not soon forget!” Revdel fulminated and then left the room like a traveling storm.