As Justice David Souter prepares to step down and speculation swirls about his replacement on the Supreme Court, I was reminded of a film I first viewed back when I was a teenager.

I had been flipping channels and happened upon the beginning of a film. I missed the title, but the cast listed Walter Matthau. Having recently seen Grumpy Old Men (I was a teenager at the time) and enjoyed it, I stopped on this channel and watched the film.

The film is about Ruth Loomis (played by Jill Clayburgh) who is appointed the first female Supreme Court justice. Being a Conservative, she clashes with old Liberal lion Dan Snow (Walter Matthau).

I didn't know the title and Matthau's IMDB page lists over a hundred credits. I knew the films had to have been released in the late seventies or early eighties. After about an hour of searching, I found the title. First Monday in October.

The screenplay was adapted by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee from their play of the same name. Released in 1981, it was originally scheduled for October (like the title) but instead was moved up to August to capitalize on the serendipitous appointment of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.


view the trailer here


The film beings with Justice Snow mountaineering while Chief Justice Crawford (Barnard Hughes) tries desperately to contact him. Justice Stanley Moorehead has died and Crawford needs Snow to return to Washington for the funeral.

Back in Washington, Snow is chatting with his new lay clerk Mason Woods (James Stephens) and Woods shows him a recent ruling by Orange County judge Ruth Loomis which annoys Snow. While he admits it is extremely well written, he disagrees entirely. Snow believes that Loomis is so prudish with her beliefs that he dismissively names her "the Mother Superior of Orange County".

At this point, it should appear patently obvious that Loomis is going to be the next Justice.

The first case the two clash about is the legality of a pornographic film entitled The Naked Nymphomaniac. As an aside, if the Supreme Court justices really do have a screening room where they all gather and watch pornographic films together...being a Supreme Court justice has some serious perks.

Snow is the kind of cranky Justice remarks about a ringing phone he refuses to answer: "A telephone has no constitutional right to be answered."

Loomis is the kind of Conservative who refers to The Naked Nymphomaniac as "celluloid poison". Of that same film, Snow claims "So its crap. What if it is crap? That's not the point. Crap's got the right to be crap."

Clearly, the sparks will fly.

But they kind of don't. Which is nice. The film doesn't become a standard romance but instead has the two characters learn to appreciate and respect each other. They each even get the other to open their eyes and minds a little. The ending leaves open the possibility that they could become romantic, but nothing is underlined and it could just be the beginning of a great partnership of mutually respectful co-workers.

The dialogue has some painful episodes. Occasionally, the characters don't speak like actual human beings but instead as characters in a play...which makes sense as the film is based on a play.

Undergoing her Senate confirmation hearing, Loomis speaks of her lack of children.

The F.B.I. is wrong in reporting to you that I have no children. Ideas are my children, and I have hundreds of them.

Yeah. That is the kind of line that is supposed to sound deep, but is actually painfully dumb. Try using that logic on someone who is unable to have children and see where it takes you.

"Sure, you can't physically have children, but you can have the idea of children. Let those ideas be your children!"

Prepare to be punched at that moment.

The characters clash on the issue of whether or not to hear a case about a large corporation called Omnitech. The company's owner supposedly bought up all the patents to a potential new engine and buried them. The minority stockholders want an accounting for these actions.

Loomis and the other Conservative justices have no desire to hear the case feeling that it could negatively impact big business. Snow, spearheading the Liberal side of the court, wants to hear the case...for similar reasons.

What is the engine? It is the film's MacGuffin. Largely irrelevant but useful in bringing our two protagonists together.

The original stage play featured Henry Fonda and Jane Alexander in the roles of Snow and Loomis. While I would wager that it is almost impossible to best Matthau when playing curmudgeonly, seeing Fonda give it a go must have been something.

Loomis' arguments against pornography ("Doesn't your celluloid poison offend all human dignity and decency and beauty?") are sadly still the same basic arguments made today. I guess in the last 26 years, Conservatives haven't been able to come up with a better argument than "I don't like it it's evil and it ought to be illegal!".

The character of Justice Snow was supposedly modeled on William O. Douglas. Douglas was the longest-serving justice in the history of the Supreme Court and was appointed by FDR. Douglas was a strong advocate of First Amendment rights as is the character of Justice Snow.

As noted, the film can be kind of stagey at times and some of the dialogue can induce groans. While I have never had the pleasure of seeing the inner workings of the Supreme Court, I feel confident that this film is a fantasy version of that hallowed institution. That being said, it is entertaining and fun. It probably isn't the most accurate film, but then Hollywood isn't really known for accuracy so I guess we will all have to take what we can get.