Why's it called a brief if it's so long?

My life has been taken over. I am no longer in control. The Brief has the power now.

My client is San Diego County. I'm arguing--against the weight of my moral convictions, but flowing with the current of constitutional jurisprudence--that requiring welfare aid applicants to consent to an intrusive search of their homes as a condition of receiving assistance is totally, completely, 100% okay under the Fourth Amendment. Of course, the word "intrusive" will appear nowhere in my brief. Neither will the word "violation." And I'll avoid "search" like the motherfucking plague. Unless it's to say something like, "The unintrusive home visit is not a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and under no balancing test should it be held a violation of the applicant's rights."

Headings! Who was the insane person who decided that brief headings should be and four lines long and in complete sentences and generally much more like the first sentence of a paragraph than anything resembling a layperson's understanding of headings?

ACCESS TO IMMIGRATION HEARINGS DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE EXCEPTION TO HOUCHINS CREATED BY RICHMOND NEWSPAPERS AND ITS PROGENY BECAUSE THE JUDICIAL SCRUTINY APPLIED TO CRIMINAL TRIALS IS INAPPLICABLE TO EXECUTIVE PROCEEDINGS, PARTICULARLY THOSE INVOLVING SENSITIVE JUDGMENTS AT THE CORE OF EXECUTIVE POWER.

I am not even kidding.

I did not write that heading, in case you were confused.

The case that is the basis for the competition, and my brief, is Sanchez v. County of San Diego, 464 F.3d 916 (9th Cir. 2006), rehearing en banc denied 483 F.3d 965 (9th Cir. 2007). That is probably not bluebooked correctly. I do not care.

I've got some clever arguments in my pocket, and my partner is quite good, and I am enjoying this, sort of. But, ahh, I long for the days of having time to actually read for actual class! The hearsay rules are just passing me by. No bother. For another 13 days, I submit my will to the will of The Brief, and on we go.