Posted 12:46 PM by magnu231
Best. Deposition. Ever.

Check this out. Youtube is brilliant. Joe Jamail, a wealthy Texas law school alum, and prominent donor to the UTexas football team almost gets in a fight with an elderly man during a deposition. One of the best clips I've ever seen in my life. I had no idea that seemingly boring cases were infused with so much vigor and fraught with so much interest. This almost makes me reconsider my career choices (or would make me reconsider if I had made any, although of course I haven't even begun to consider them). What fun!

1 comments

Posted 1:15 AM by Jason
I should be studying for Wednesday's PR exam, but

I just discovered that Ken Jennings has a blog.  Thanks a lot Ivan.  I know you did this on purpose, so just as soon as I finish reading every post I intend to scour the law school's honor code and maybe the ABA Model Rules for some way to bring you to justice.  

1 comments

Posted 7:25 PM by Jason
Summer Reading

I've just finished reading Jeffrey Hart's The Making of the American Conservative Mind: National Review and Its Times.  I've had the book since December but didn't get around to reading it until the past few weeks.  My take, in (very) short: very good, definitely worth reading.  Hart is thorough in his examination of the past 50 years, and his inside perspective, having been a senior editor (among other things) is invaluable. Do yourself a favor and pick it up, but be warned: reading this book will make your "Things to Read" list longer, not shorter.  

Incidentally, the book was published by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute.  I've been an ISI member for a couple of years now, and their Intercollegiate Review (a semiannual journal) is always a good read.  They are in the midst of some sort of membership drive right now, hence this short plug.  Membership is free for students and academics.  When I joined new members received one of their "A Student's Guide to (fill in the blank)" books, a short overview and introduction to a subject area, free.  I chose "A Student's Guide to Political Philosophy," by Harvey Mansfield, which was (and is) good, but for those of you already in or about to enter law school, the new "A Student's Guide to the Study of Law" by Notre Dame Law Prof. Gerald Bradley would be the natural choice.  
Like I said, all gain, no pain, it is FREE.  

0 comments

Posted 6:18 PM by Jason
All Judicial Review, All the Time!

An ABA committee calls for judicial review of Presidential signing statements?  

"Now, U.S. News has learned, an American Bar Association task force is set to suggest even stronger action. In a report to be released Monday, the task force will recommend that Congress pass legislation providing for some sort of judicial review of the signing statements. Some task force members want to simply give Congress the right to sue over the signing statements; other task force members will not characterize what sort of judicial review might ultimately emerge."

So some in Congress are contemplating a bill that would confer standing to sue on themselves.  Leaving aside political question implications and the complexity of standing doctrine mentioned in the article for the time being, what makes them think that the President would sign their bill?  

Of course I think that conflicts of this sort between Congress and the Executive should be resolved by, well, Congress and the Executive.  It isn't surprising that the ABA would call for more judicial review in general, since it would amount to more work for their members, but if those pushing for this somehow succeed, I wonder how long it will be until they regret it.  

I guess we can just add this to the list of reasons why I will most likely not join the ABA.  

7/24 UPDATE:  Ed Whelan takes on the committee report over at Bench Memos.

2 comments

Posted 12:01 PM by magnu231
Sad but Not Suprising

I found this article posted on drudge to be interesting but rather depressing. Racism (despite what some might think) is virulent in Europe, and anti-semitism is making an unfortunate comeback. But despite this, it's still shocking and frightening when a political leader is revealed as anti-semitic as Spain's leader is. Granted, the article I've linked to might be seen as reading too much into certain events. But it's still a dispiriting affirmation of the decline of Europe.

0 comments

Posted 6:07 PM by Jason
Two Guys, a Girl, and an Email Exchange

The Spring 2006 UMN Law alumni magazine Perspectives features a discussion of Presidential powers (in particular the NSA wiretapping program) in wartime.  The participants are Professors Dale Carpenter, Heidi Kitrosser (my con law prof), and Michael Paulsen.  

0 comments

Posted 4:59 PM by Jason
And now for something completely different...

UMN Law Prof. Jim Chen (also Associate Dean for Academic Affairs) has started a blog called Jurisdynamics (ht Ivan at JSW).  I've written briefly about Chen before here.  

Topics he's touched on so far: movies, farm bills, gun control, biological swagger, sluttiness, and linguistics.  And yes, I probably inadequately described half of those, but too bad, the point is that you should check it out.  

0 comments

Posted 8:38 AM by magnu231
Israel

So, the Israel situation is getting pretty ridiculous. I really don't know what to think about it. I'm pretty much behind Israel in this fight, but this is getting quite complicated. I think the main thing is, that Israel has the right to attack Lebanon, especially Hizbollah bases in Lebanon, if Lebanon is consciously shielding people who are attacking Israel. But again, it's tough to know what to think. Things are escalating pretty quickly over there. Maybe Israel will be able to calm things down again by putting the fear of God back in some of the surrounding countries. We know organizations like the Hizbollah are hard to convince, but at least perhaps some leaders can be convinced to stop shielding the groups. Then again, maybe these actions just upset people so much that those who hate Israel have even more cannon fodder.

Update: James Lileks, one of my favorite humorists, has some thoughts on the matter, especially on some of the coverage of the whole affair. (It's near the bottom, after the somewhat too complete description of his weekend.) Good stuff.

1 comments

Posted 10:13 AM by magnu231
Good Post

Here's a nice post on the ABA's stranglehold on accreditation from the volokh conspiracy. As an aspiring lawyer, my self interest tells me to support the ABA, considering that in some sense, I'm one of the "haves". But in another sense, competition actually is good for the public in general, in most professions. ABA accreditation should not be a prereq. for taking the bar in my opinion. If somebody goes to law school and passes the bar, they should be able to practice. If it's a crappy law school, firms will definitely take that into consideration. If the person wants to practice on their own, they'll have to charge much less, thus supplying more legal services to people with a lack of resources. It makes sense to me.

0 comments

Posted 4:02 PM by Jason
Unbelievable

A 17-year old from South Saint Paul signed up for the Minnesota Army National Guard (with his parents' consent), but then did not show up on his ship out date.  Not news in and of itself.  What's interesting is why.  Via the Star-Tribune:

"When Valle saw a video about the rigors of basic training, he decided he had made the wrong decision. 'I didn't want to do it anymore," he said recently. "They yell in your face and you take orders.'"

What's more:

"When Valle failed a 40-question [entrance] test, he got a tutor to help him pass the second time, Olson said."

0 comments

Posted 2:23 PM by Jason
Kirsanow on ABA Standard 211(a)

I posted a while back on the ABA's new Standard 211(a), the one that seems to compel law schools to enact racial preferences to maintain their accreditation.  I had not read anything new in a while, but today Peter Kirsanow, a member of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, has some comments on the changes on NRO.  

0 comments

Posted 10:29 AM by magnu231
Sports and Government

After the end of the World Cup, the future of soccer in America once again looks bright (though we've been hearing about the "bright future" of soccer in America for some time now). However, this can't be helping matters. Apparently, Massachusetts is trying to pass legislation to ban "headers" and mandate helmets for soccer players. And no this isn't a joke. And yes it applies to everyone in Massachusetts, not just children under 5. You know big government has gotten way out of hand when it's banning practices essential to a sport because it might cause some damage. Guess what? If the high school/college players are getting headaches and concussions from their sport, they can simply QUIT. Nobody's forcing anybody to play soccer. I played hockey, and got several injuries (mostly to my ego). If the injuries had concerned me that much, I would have stopped playing the game, not lobbied government to make sure that no injury would ever happen to me or anybody else. It seems to me that this is just the ridiculous continuation of seatbelt, motorcycle helmet, and to some extent even smoking laws. If a person knows the risks inherent in their activities, and doesn't mind risking injury or even death, they should be allowed to continue without interference from the government. Of course, this brings up the whole question of whether we should be forced to subsidize that risk, and pay for the risky behavior of others through government programs. But that's another question and another rant. So just sit and contemplate with me for a second. Massachusetts is trying to ban "heading" and forcing soccer players to wear helmets. What is this world coming to?

0 comments

Posted 1:00 PM by magnu231
This Post is Title-less...Like the Cubbies

I'm either too busy or too lazy to track down the links to all these happenings, but you're smart people. Find them yourselves. Seriously. Do I have to do everything? Despite the fact that this is supposed to be a legal blog, I figured it wouldn't hurt to branch out into the sporting realm, just this once. Two stories caught my eye.

Zidane headbutts some dude. Sure it was classless. Sure it may have cost his team the game, though Barthez was going to have to invest in a job lot of bricks and morter to keep any goals out. Seriously, worst goalie ever. I was on a hockey team where the goalie was very poor at shootouts. I was able to go five hole every time. In fact, he was the only goalie I was really ever able to score on with any consistency (read: more than once). But congratulations Ben Parker. I thought giving up goals to me was bad. But Barthez was much, much worse. And back to the point, I second Dr. Z's thought's on the matter (again I"m not linking to it, but it's at cnnsi.com). I'm happy to see some toughness on the field. The diving and whinging and crying and the frequent stretcher calls can get a bit ridiculous. It was somewhat nice to see a guy stand up for himself. (And no this isn't a anti-world cup rant. I liked almost every aspect of the world cup, except for the wussiness of the participants.)

A blogger fools WCCO by pretending to be former Twins nobody Dan Serafini. I actually heard the interview, and I had no idea. It's awesome that WCCO has so little fact checking that they just run with some guy from a blog with the name Serafini in the title. Maybe that's why you're losing the Twins, huh, Sid? By the way, the story's on deadspin.com

0 comments

Posted 12:17 PM by magnu231
America: Exclusive Home of Racial Tension

One of my favorite hockey blogs, off wing opinion, had a link to a story by the Guardian (or at least the guardian blog) on the at least distasteful, and possibly racist new PSP ads. There's nothing new in the story, and everyone's seen the pictures. But here's my favorite quote from the post:

Importantly perhaps, the ads are for the European release of the white PSP and are appearing on billboards in Amsterdam rather than in the US where racial tension remains a fraught issue.

Because Amersterdam has no racial tension. And neither does Europe. In fact, the US has the exclusive pattent on it. Oh, and in other news, Le Pen in France and a bunch of neo-nazis in Germany have been bemoaning the "impurity" of their world cup teams, and in the Germans' case, actually threatening some of the black players on their country's team. But anyway, the point is, that unfortunately, I see ads like this proliferating in the next few years. If one is sufficiently edgy/offensive, instead of being ignored, their ads will be widely disseminated and discussed all over the web, with people who are upset by them not upset enough to boycott, and people who aren't intrigued by the product being advertised. I see this as a harbinger of things to come.

1 comments

Posted 10:44 AM by magnu231
Here's the Deal

I know this is an old story, but this is a great court document. I would not be even remotely able to write up something like this while attempting to keep even a semi-serious tone, but this guy pulls it off. So, there's yet another reason I won't make a good attorney. I wouldn't be able to take some of the cases seriously. Upon seeing facts like these, I would immediately burst into uproarious laughter right in front of my angered client. And, in court I would be unable to contain my inadvised snickers at each new bit of testimoney. Seriously, how could you?

0 comments

Posted 2:02 PM by magnu231
Back Sporadically

I'm in Michigan right now, working on conservative legal stuff. (I'd get specific, but then I'd have to kill you. And then myself, for letting the world know the minutiae that now consumes me.) Anyway, I just wanted to comment that on a day that Vlad Putin's under a bit of scrutiny for smooching a young boy's stomach (I suppose that's a new way to campaign), and a MAD KILLER WITH A BUZZSAW WENT TO WORK IN A SUBWAY, MORE AT 11, the strangest story concerned Cindy Sheehan, who apparently would rather live under Hugo Chavez than the newly sextugunarian Pres. Bush. But I won't even comment on that (because she's a loonie, and I won't waste my time). What I do want to comment on is the fact that Ken Lay died. I don't understand the deal with Ken Lay. People have yelled and screamed about this man, calling him a monster, economic terrorist, and the like. I'm not defending what he did. He was not a good man. He was a swindler, a cheat, and he stole from a bunch of people, and he deserved to go to jail, probably for the rest of his life. But am I wrong in considering that your common every day rapist/drug dealer/murderer has done and will do much more harm in this world? Those criminals steal lives, not money. I don't know. It's not like I would have wanted to free the man, but in a world that contains Ahminajiad, Bin Laden, Kim Jong Il, and the entire Italian Soccer Team, I'm not sure how Lay makes the "monster" list, or makes it out of the "swindler who deserves hard time" category.

2 comments

Posted 1:42 AM by Jason
Someone cue the Dolby.

After a restful extended weekend, solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations, just as John Adams would have wanted, it's time to get back to business.  

And by business I mean SCIENCE!  

First, on the serious side of the coin, we have Richard S. Lindzen (whose writings, incidentally, helped me get through college) taking Al Gore and his movie to school:

"So what, then, is one to make of this alleged debate? I would suggest at least three points.
First, nonscientists generally do not want to bother with understanding the science. Claims of consensus relieve policy types, environmental advocates and politicians of any need to do so. Such claims also serve to intimidate the public and even scientists--especially those outside the area of climate dynamics. Secondly, given that the question of human attribution largely cannot be resolved, its use in promoting visions of disaster constitutes nothing so much as a bait-and-switch scam. That is an inauspicious beginning to what Mr. Gore claims is not a political issue but a "moral" crusade.
Lastly, there is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition. An earlier attempt at this was accompanied by tragedy. Perhaps Marx was right. This time around we may have farce--if we're lucky."
And that's just the end.  Read the whole thing.  

Now, on the lighter side of the coin we turn to math.  Why math? Because individuals in the legal profession are notoriously mathophobic.  When I saw John Derbyshire's link to this article on mathematical references in The Simpsons, I had but one hope, and it was fulfilled.  Among all of the serious nerd-caliber references that I never would have caught:

"Gender issues in mathematics take center stage in "Girls just want to have sums," which aired on April 30. It lampoons the scandal that ensued in 2005 when Lawrence Summers, then president of Harvard University, suggested that women are innately inferior at mathematics.

In that Simpsons episode, Springfield Elementary School Principal Skinner is ousted after casually remarking that girls aren't much good at math. Skinner's female replacement divides the boys and girls into separate schools since, she says, girls can't learn math around "aggressive, obnoxious" boys.

Brainy 8-year-old Lisa Simpson is delighted until she attends the girls' math class. "How do numbers make you feel?" the teacher begins. "What does a plus sign smell like? Is the number 7 odd or just different?" Aghast, Lisa poses as a boy to attend the ghettolike boys' school, where real math is being taught."

For my part, I thought the whole Larry Sanders affair was stupid and over-hyped, but that's not what's interesting here.  It's not even the gender issue at all, it's the fact that what the article describes actually passes as math education these days, and not just in third grade.  In college I knew a fair number of people who took a course called "The Spirit of Mathematics" to satisfy their math requirement.  If I recall correctly, one of their assignments was a two-page paper on their favorite number.  

What is also interesting is what the article left out, which is that there was a light/music show and strange little groove-dance that overcame the girls as they pondered the aroma of addition.  Not significant, just funny.  


1 comments