Op/Ed: James J. Kilpatrick

The Court of Peeves, Crotchets & Irks resumes its summer assizes with a motion from Mrs. Hattie B. Polk of Waynesboro, N.C. She asks the court to settle an argument over "more importantly" and "most importantly."

More than 40 years have passed since Justice William O. Douglas wrote the Supreme Court's opinion in Brady v. Maryland , but its value as a check against overzealous prosecutors remains undiminished. We had a reminder of this protection in a little-noticed order from the court a week ago.

The Court of Peeves, Crotchets & Irks opens its summer assizes with a petition from Dianne Kampinen of Chicago. She moves for an injunction against people who say "frankly," and especially and particularly against those who puff it up to " quite frankly."

When word came on Monday morning that the Supreme Court had reversed the 6th Circuit in the two big wetlands cases, some of us critics of federal imperialism were ecstatic. Callooh, Callay, O frabjous day! We fairly chortled in our joy. Justice Antonin Scalia had slain the invidious Corps of Engineers!

If you aspire, dear reader, to write really good prose, first hone your skills by writing verse -- that is to say, by writing verse that scans and rhymes.

Fifty-two years have passed since the Supreme Court decided Brown v. Board of Education , but the constitutional issues presented by that historic case will not go away. Last week the Supreme Court agreed to return to them in cases involving the public schools of Washington state and Kentucky. Here we go again.

The Internet brings a note from John Schedel of Buffalo, N.Y. The word "shall," he suggests, "is a prime candidate for linguistic euthanasia. The distinction between 'shall' and its close cousin 'will' is neither widely nor completely understood. In addition, the use of 'shall' is rare, and it is often seen as affected ..."