Could the Supreme Court err? Vincent Bugliosi’s “No Island of Sanity...” examines the possibility. Despite some
self-congratulatory prose, Bugliosi provides an answer to the aforementioned question. Seemingly an off-message diatribe in Part One, frustration and anger clearly motivated Bugliosi’s writing. However, the book becomes more effectively direct in Part Two. Presenting a thesis that society has strayed from its proper course, the author rails at sports, use of the term, “hero” and diversion from traditional gender roles. Within his discourse, Bugliosi claims the admirable ability of avoiding pre-prejudice clouding what he sees, noticing the truth others miss. He decries that others see what they expect. The book focuses on legal and
political pre-prejudice as distinguishable wrongs. Bugliosi links the O.J. Simpson case with the Jones vs. Clinton lawsuit by claiming both instances involved wrong decisions reached through the ignoring of legal mistakes. The author continues his argument, stating specifically that
President Clinton’s attorney used the wrong defense for his client. Lawyer Robert Bennett relied on the separation of power concept, arguing that if Paula Jones’ case went to trial during Clinton’s presidency, the Executive branch of government (the President) would be influenced by the Judicial branch (the Supreme Court), resulting in interference with presidential duties. In Bugliosi’s view, a claim of the trial being harmful to the public interest if scheduled during Clinton’s term stood as stronger grounds for a postponement. Repeatedly, the author asks if the welfare of all American citizens outweighs the welfare of just one American. It seems that Bugliosi repeats the separation of power versus the public interest debate a bit too often, perhaps attempting to emphasize his viewpoint. These passages might have undergone more adroit editing, providing a concise, better flowing treatise. However overstated, Bugliosi’s viewpoint cannot be misinterpreted. Obviously, a careful researcher, the author substantiates his opinion with various examples clearly applicable to the case’s concepts. Reference is made to specific statutes. Possible reasons are given behind the “liberal media’s” instigation and support of attacks on President Clinton. Two prominent, well-respected newspapers receive special attention and ire for their alleged role in the persecution of the President. Bugliosi explains some of the intricacies of the legal process. His impassioned argument for postponement of the Jones trial powerfully indicts some major American institutions. “No Island of Sanity” shows an intersecting of law, politics and personalities, providing lessons, meaningful today as they were in 1998.