Born in Bucharest, Kozinski fled communist Romania with his family, settling in West Hollywood. His keen intellect led him to the libertarian instincts that now flummox liberals and conservatives alike. And he developed a certain flair that would become his trademark as a jurist: As a contestant on The Dating Game in the 1970s, he won over his bachelorette with “good afternoon, flower of my heart.”
After graduating from UCLA Law School, clerking for Judge Anthony Kennedy and Chief Justice Warren Burger, and holding a string of prestigious government positions, Kozinski became the nation’s youngest federal circuit judge in 1985. Over the next 20 years, he gained a reputation as an idiosyncratic court jester, winning both praise and opprobrium, and became an undisputed star of the federal judiciary — and, according to a 2004 Internet poll, the No. 1 Male Superhottie of the federal bench.
Kozinski’s opinions in cases such as Kojayan (which vacated drug convictions for prosecutorial misconduct and excoriated the prosecutor by name) and Ramirez- Lopez (wherein Kozinski’s dissent caused the government to drop its charges after the conviction was affirmed on appeal) established him as a principled defender of individual liberties. Yet he is also a stickler for procedural rules and jurisprudential consistency, annoying his good friend and colleague Judge Stephen Reinhardt (one of the most liberal judges in the country) to no end.
At other times, Kozinski simply enforces legal common sense: When the 9th Circuit denied Ted Kaczynski (aka the Unabomber) the right to represent himself because he vehemently objected to his lawyers’ decision to portray him as mentally deranged, Kozinski wrote a sharp dissent. Although Kaczynski insisted that he was willing to proceed to trial post haste, the court found his motion to be made for purposes of delay. “Is this 1984, or what?” Kozinski retorted, arguing that worse even than facing the death penalty is “being treated by our legal system as less than human, a thing to be manipulated, supposedly for one’s own good.”
Kozinski reached perhaps the pinnacle of his “crossover” appeal in his 2002 opinion in Mattel v. MCA Records — or what has become known as “the Barbie case.” “If this were a sci-fi melodrama, it might be called Speech-Zilla meets Trademark Kong,” began the judge-cum-art critic. After methodically — but entertainingly — slogging through a broad swath of trademark law, Kozinski found that the song “Barbie Girl” (the top 40 hit from a decade ago) did not harm Mattel’s interest in the doll the song parodied. “The parties are advised to chill,” he concluded, hearkening to his 1998 opinion in another intellectual property case, where he described the video game “Duke Nukem” to be “immensely popular (and very cool).”
The readability of Kozinski’s opinions only enhance the power of his defense of private property — his views on the Kelo takings case notwithstanding — free speech, and freedom from state coercion, as well as the power of his originalist take on the Constitution and formalist approach to statutory interpretation.