Susannah Breslin writes at www.trueslant.com/susannahbreslin/2010/03/29/an-obscenity-trial-is-slated-to-be-tried-in-washington-dc/

Last week, a Washington, DC judge, Richard J. Leon, announced that the upcoming obscenity trial of pornographer John Stagliano would start on July 7.

That the trial will take place in The Most Important Place in the Universe and that the trial may reveal the Obama administration’s until-now-enigmatic stance on obscenity suggest that the case of United States v. Buttman may be The Most Important Obscenity Trial of the Century.

Because Stagliano was indicted nearly two years ago on various obscenity-related counts involving an eye-popping selection of cinematic homages to self-pleasuring — “Milk Nymphos,” “Storm Squirters 2,” and “Fetish Fantatic 5″ — one might expect that this would become a messy trial, to say the very least.

And, if you are under the impression that nobody goes to the Big House anymore for trafficking in obscenity, you would be wrong. (See: Max Hardcore, aka prisoner no. 44902-112 at FCI La Tuna in Anthony, Texas. “Until the ridiculous Miller test of obscenity is thrown onto the trash heap of judicial history,” Hardcore wrote in one jailhouse missive, “I’m afraid just about any controversial artist could be convicted of it.”)

Of course, one may approach this pending case with various questions regarding the legal definition of obscenity in the 21st century, whether or not jurors will be required to sit through the entirety of “Storm Squirters 2,” which has been described as “a porn-flavored Slip ‘n’ Slide,” and the merits of spending tax payer money on a trial that would not exist had members of the US government not bought a bunch of porn in DC.

When a porn trial goes down in, say, Arizona, Florida, or California, no one really cares. (Unless, of course, the judge is a porn collector himself.) On the other hand, you start talking about the First Amendment rights of the man without which we would not have “Face Dance Obsession,” “Life Is Butt a Dream,” and “How to Enlarge Your Penis,” and what you have is a national conversation. But who should cover it?

The New York Times: Once upon a time, Frank Rich wrote a story about the porn industry for the Magazine, making him the obvious choice here, although he totally lied about how big the jizz biz is [Ed Note: no Rich, was fed a bunch of hokum and unsubstantiated claims which he swallowed hook, line, and sucker], so I’m going to have to preemptively fire him. How awesome would it be to see David Carr cover the porn beat? Totally awesome.

The Washington Post: Probably, they’re going to have to put all the Post reporters who want to cover this thing in a cage and let them MMA each other to the death to pick a winner, but my vote is for dark horse, “torture thrillist,” and “torture-enthusiast” Marc Thiessen. Call me crazy! Don’t tell me a former Bush speechwriter wouldn’t liven up the proceedings. Because he would.

Salon.com: Without a doubt, Glenn Greenwald. There is not a lot to not love about this guy: screechy, histrionic, and dedicated to defending pornography that he has never even seen, he is porn to the max. Also, I am pretty sure that he and Thiessen would get into a big, screaming catfight in the hallway, which would be exciting. My money’s on GG FTW.

The LA Times: Does the Times even exist anymore? Apparently, yes. In any case, someone named Molly Hennessy-Fiske over there has been working the porn beat and doing some decent coverage of the debate over whether or not woodsmen are going to be forced to wear raincoats (if you know what I mean, and I think you do) while performing in Porn Valley sex scenes. Look! She went to Harvard. I love her already. Let’s be BFFs, Molls.

Politico: I’m not going to lie. I don’t really read Politico. Except for when their memos get posted on Gawker. Those memos are a hoot! Anyway, I’m going with Ben Smith, because he looks cute, or at least that drawing of him looks cute. So, him.

Reason: Reason is all up in this case. Stagliano is their hero. The Libertarian stance on porn seems to amount to “anything goes!” which can lead to trouble, but, hey, they’re not porn stars, so who cares! Anyway, I pick Drew Carey.

Ace of Spades HQ: Where else can you find such an exciting mashup of American crude and rabid political gab? Nowhere, that’s where. Ace of Spades was born to surreptitiously live blog this trial from the courtroom on his CrackBerry. A girl can dream.

The Atlantic: Meh. I guess they could send Andrew Sullivan, but I feel like he would just be pouty, and write 10-word posts about it, and then be mad that all the porn was hetero but for the occasional G/G (<–that’s “porno speak” for a girl-on-girl scene, people) scene. So, there’s that. The New Yorker: Boy! What a toss up! Susan Orlean could do it fresh off her chicken expose, or they could bring back Susan Faludi for “Waiting for Wood: Part Deux,” or I guess Jeffrey Toobin is some kind of perv, which would maybe make him, like, a “natural fit.” Hard to say. The Daily Beast: Meghan McCain, obvi. Today: Meredith Vieira, Al Roker, and Natalie Morales set up shop on the courthouse steps. The day the verdict gets read, they bring back those drunk midget Ewoks that gray-raped Roker’s leg. Hilarity ensues. The end. Where do I fit in? No idea. Sigh. NB: Writers who are barred from covering the proceedings: Paul Theroux, Martin Amis, David Foster Wallace (RIP).