Making the rounds today, a SCOTUS amicus brief filed by Ilya Shapiro (and no one else, Your Honors) at the Cato Institute, on behalf of Cato and satirist P.J. O'Rourke.
The issue in the case is "[c]an a state government criminalize political statements that are less than 100% truthful," and the brief not only lists a bunch of statements by politicians over the years that do not meet the standard for "truthiness," but cheekily is filled with arguments and footnotes that illustrate its point. We won't detail them here, since others have already labeled this the "Best Amicus Brief Ever" (another example of exaggeration?), and the brief is a short, enjoyable read. Don't drink coffee while you read it, unless you want to go buy a new keyboard.
But we will say this: until now, the purported pinnacle for SCOTUS briefs has been the so-called Brandeis Brief, or a brief that goes outside the record to rely on non-legal data to make its point. From now on, however, the gold standard shall be referred to as an "Ilya Brief." So say we all.