Alan Dershowitz at his best

Shortly after I graduated from University I somehow wrangled an hour interview with Alan Dershowitz for an article I was writing.  The meeting was arranged to take place at his apartment in Manhattan, and I prepared what I figured to be about an hour and a half worth of questions just in case I was given a little extra time.

In retrospect, I should have been prepared for the incredibly agile mind I was about to encounter and for what short work he would make of my questions, because within 20 minutes he had answered every last one of them in perfectly crafted paragraphs.

When he'd finished answering the last question he seemed to sense that I was out of ammo so he politely offered me a cold drink to help cover the lapse. 

While he puttered around in the kitchen I desperately cast about for something - anything - intelligent to ask the man to fill up a respectable amount of the remaining time alloted to me.  But the more I tried to think the less  coherent my thinking became.  He had  done such a seamless job of dealing with my questions that I could not think of a single follow-up to ask.

When he came back into the room carrying two sweating glasses of water I glanced up at his boyish face and a question suddenly occurred to me:

"You know", I began.  "You were the youngest full professor of Law in the history of Harvard.  You've amassed an incredible record and reputation within the law community... but it occurs to me that you are still a relatively young man."

I was pleased to see in his eyes that he wasn't sure where I was going with this... so I pressed on.

"What I'm trying to say", I continued, "is that when an attorney has achieved what most would consider a respectable lifetime's worth of successes in less than half a lifetime... what does he shoot for next?  Where do you go from here?  Would you want to be a judge?"

He actually blanched when he heard the question and put his glass down on the coffee table before responding

"Let me ask you something", he began... clearly weighing his words.  "Are you a baseball fan?"

When I nodded he continued, "Well then, if you had an hour to kill with Micky Mantle, would you ask him if he wanted to be an umpire?"

I must have looked crestfallen, because he immediately smiled and changed the topic to his recent (at the time) book; 'Chutzpah'.  He talked easily about many of his experiences that had inspired the book... and having noted the kippah on my head, he even touched on his views on Jewish law and justice.

When the hour was up he graciously inscribed a copy of the book we'd been discussing, handed it to me and walked me outside before saying a cordial good-bye.

On the subway ride back to my apartment I couldn't shake the sense that I had just encountered one of the most active and able minds I was ever likely to meet in my life.  Having seen that imposing intellect at work in the living room, I could well imagine how terrifying it would be to face it in the courtroom. 

Over the years I have watched with interest as Mr. Dershowitz has weighed in on Israel.  I haven't agreed with everything he's said or written.  For instance I think he was dead wrong to praise Aaron Barak, former president of the Israeli Supreme Court as a great jurist, and even more off base to compliment Israel's terribly flawed legal system. 

However he has been a staunch defender of Israel's right to self defense and secure borders, and has never hesitated to punch holes in the fallacious arguments with which the international community delights in skewering the Jewish State.  Yet the one thing he doesn't seem to do often enough is, ironically, the kind of thing you would expect from a brilliant attorney; cite the relevant law.

It is one thing to point out the hypocrisy and flaws in someone else's position... but quite another to point out the case law that demonstrates the legality of one's own position. 

So you can imagine I nearly jumped for joy when I read his latest piece in FrontPage Magazine that began with a clear citation of the relevant laws under which Israel has been acting.  I highly recommend that you go and read every last word.  It isn't that he lays out what Israel should do (he doesn't), but rather that he defines the legal status of being under military attack... and then puts the burden of proof squarely on Israel's detractors to prove that Israel's responses have been disproportionate and illegal under those laws.

Reading the article, I was transported back to that long-ago subway ride home from Alan Dershowitz's apartment, and for the second time in my life felt deep relief that such a great mind is on our side and not sitting at the opposing counsel's table.