Judicial Conspiracy

DC has its guns back! Bearing arms is an individual right! And, the prefatory clause (the part about the militia) is meaningless!! Scalia was let out of his cage today to write the final opinion of the Supreme Court for the year (yes it is June!!!). However, what does this mean for the political landscape.

Guns are legal and arguably, for the campaign, gunrights are officially a non-issue. On the other end of the spectra, gay marriage is legal in California. In the past month, two issues that have divided the nation particularly in the last 10 years have, for all intents and purposes, been removed form the political sphere. The right can point to the Supreme Court and claim at least a meager victory (the court overruled an outright ban but states are still allowed to regulate weapons possession). The left can point to the California Supreme Court and can also claim a meager victory (California is the most populous state in the union so their recognition is giant leap especially when paired with policies like that of NY where we recognize gay marriages from other states, but it is still only a state and there are at most 48 others that don't offer similar marriages). [f.y.i. 48 takes Massachusetts into account]

Since these issues have both achieved victories, there is no need to rally behind them or to speak of a major change in the law. And, both these decisions have or will prove uncontroversial for those except the extremists.

Are the courts conspiring to control the political scope of this election?
Is it coincidental that these two victories occurred simultaneously?
Finally, will either case lead to a trend? (Will other states follow in California's footsteps? and/or will someone make an issue of the gun-ban in Chicago?)

I'm just excited for my BEAR ARMS!!!!

Leaps and Bounds

Trying to accomplish anything in the law comes with one caveat. THE LAW IS SLOW. Today, the Supreme Court released a decision in the Exxon-Valdez case. For those not familiar with the facts... you were obviously not self aware in the 80s. TWENTY YEARS AGO some drunken sailor plowed into a rock in Alaska and spilled a lot of precious oil and hurt a bunch of seals. The decision today focused on one of those uniquely American court practices of punitive damages. That is, damages that have no real legal or factual basis (surprisingly Juries have no remorse giving money away from large companies even without any reasonable basis to do so). The court for many reasons (including the fact that many of the people affected have either died or moved away from the location affected) felt that $2.5 billion a top a relatively generous sum was too much.

Much of the legal argument part is boring. I just want to highlight that it took twenty years!!! Plus, I'm sure there is still a long way to go like distribution of the rest of the money, etc. Plus I think the otters are arguing for specific performance; they want Exxon to bring them fish instead of money. Any suggestions as to who their lawyer should be?

Confusation

Sorry, about the last 2 posts. I was trying to prove a point about facebook.

In this age of increasing privacy rights and paranoia about data, people need to really curb their exposure and earn their privacy. Google wants access to our medical records. NYC posts our mortgages online with a copy of our signature (seriously, go onto the ACRIS system). And, Facebook has set up a system whereby we can keep our friends informed of new developments in our lives (and I mean every minor detail). Heck, as mentioned before, some dude advertised his Social Security number to the whole world in order to prove a failed point about privacy.

None of these things are inherently bad (except that last one, man, he is in for one big lawsuit), but we must impose on ourselves a degree of restraint and not abuse our newfound positions of attention.

In a world of microcelebrity, where individuals have access to an inflated pulpit, the potential for abuse is large. Globalization and the internet are providing increased access to a greater amount of information than ever before; everyone has access to all information. This has created a degree of homogenization, since with access to all information, there is less unique information. Once again, this is not a bad development. This means we have to try all the harder to create or to find something new and original, with more emphasis on the creation part.

In property law, one learns first about acquisition by 'find.' In the beginning, there was so much for Earth's citizens that the focus of the law was almost exclusively on claiming the unclaimed. One next learns about acquisition by creation; one owns what he has created. This field is the future. I'm not saying that all that can be discovered has been discovered. What I am saying is that we must be challenged to find and create something new and we must be aware of the increasing difficulty of such an endeavor for the 'new.' We should not be risk averse to such a search, but we must be risk aware.

EVERY WEBSITE ON THE INTERNET

EVERY WEBSITE ON THE INTERNET

Awesome Post!!! Every article on the internet right now

THIS IS SO INTERESTING; IT IS THE MOST EXCITING ARTICLE ON THE INTERNET. IN FACT FROM NOW ON, I WILL BE POSTING EVERY SINGLE THING ON THE INTERNET IN MY FACEBOOK PROFILE BECAUSE GOD KNOWS I'M THE ONLY PERSON IN THE WORLD WHO READS CNN.COM, OR PRETTY MUCH ANY OTHER NEWS WEBSITE AND I JUST KNOW THAT PEOPLE LOVE HAVING THEIR NEWSFEEDS FULL OF NEWS ARTICLES BECAUSE EVERYONE KNOWS YOU LIVE UNDER A ROCK IN THE MIDDLE OF TIMBUKTU, NEBRASKA.

Go back to where you came from!

As a native New Yorker, I say to the subjects of this New York Times piece.... go back from whence ye came! Stop cheapening my city!! New York does not come with a gift basket of muffin tops and Versace jeans! It comes with rats and bed bugs in the subway.

Most people who have expensive items WORK FOR A LIVING (or at least come from old money, but thats a different discussion for a different type of aggravation).

And no, I do not think that most New Yorkers would decide to prioritize $500 clothing over food, because it's a nonissue (most would have a guy who has a guy who could get them what they need without the need to sacrifice or to pay retail). If you're having problems paying bills, try not living in one of the most expensive places in one of the most expensive cities in the world. I don't feel bad for your attempt at a falsely inflated extravagant lifestyle!

Finally, Duane Reade is not roughing it, and a $60,000 salary does not mean that one is starving oneself!!! Stop indulging yourself and stop being angry at mommy and daddy for not buying you that pony for your farmhouse in Nebraska!!!

"Starting Salaries but New York Tastes" ....ugh even the title makes me sick. I just know that it was not written by a New Yorker (its not sarcastic and loathsome enough)

RAPRAM!!!! David Bowie in ...well anything

One word, Labyrinth.

How the writers sold this concept to studio producers:
David Bowie dancing and singing in tight pants [dramatic pause] with muppets.

This movie needs no introducing, but I will give a 2 sentence refresher. Jennifer Connelly plays a babysitter who's child gets abducted by Mr. Bowie and taken to a magical land of singing muppets. I can't tell if such an experience would be traumatizing or simply life changing.

It is, at least, a felony under section 135 of the NY penal code. But, I'm sure after discovering both that most of the evidence exists only in a far off and mostly imaginary land and that Mr. Bowie is emperor of said land and thus falls under some type of sovereign immunity, no District Attorney would ever possibly want or hope to bring any charges (HA, there's my legal tie-in!)

Next Week, Klaus Nomi comes from outer space to save the human race.

For now: a trio among muppets, Bowie and a baby.

Happy Law Day!

Let's go out and beat the commies by celebrating law day!!!

Presidential Proclamation for Law Day 2008

Or look at the US Law codifying Law Day: 36 U.S.C. § 113

Forza Italia!

The outgoing Italian Government has posted the tax returns of every citizen online. It took the website 24 hours to crash, because everyone in Italy wanted to know how much their neighbors were paying in taxes.

The Italian IRS probably got the idea from that dude who posted his Social Security Number in several advertisements for his SSN security monitoring service. Unfortunately, they did not realize that the purpose of that advertisement was to promote security, not busybody-ness.

Next Week: Somalia posts how many grains of rice each citizen has eaten in the past couple of years (preview: its in the single digits!!!)

Update: The guy from the SSN security service had his identity stolen!!

BBC: Italy Posts Income Details on Web
Wonkette: Bitchy Outgoing Italian Government Posts Everyone's Tax Info Online

Newsmedia on Your Chest

Just a quick note:

CNN.com has a new feature whereupon certain news headlines have a T-shirt next to them. By clicking on said T-shirt you are given the option of purchasing that headline on a white, black, or gray T-shirt. I wonder if and hope that CNN is going to expand this option to all of their headlines and not a select few.

"Expired Food Sold at Low prices"
And for fun: cnnistheworstever.blogspot.com/

Backstreet's Back, Alright!!!

As the nation awaits news of whether or not the Backstreet Boys are going to reunite, law students across the students can get their BSB fix by reading the recently unsealed court documents from their lawsuit in the mid 1990s.

Not quite a reunion, but just as exciting for most people.

And yes that is BSB with Arthur the aardvark.

The Uniform Commercial Code and the End of the World

So I was studying Contracts today and looked up a definition of the UCC (Universal Commercial Code) on wikipedia. Aside from being a pain in the butt, the UCC is generally a benign academic exercise, i.e. it is very boring and deals with a mundane but definitely important part of the law.

However, on the wikipedia page I was drawn to the section explaining how the UCC was created by a cabal of bankers that is actually in control of all nations of the world. Yeah, the Constitutional Party of Pennsylvania, the Montana Separatist group, and various other American revolutionary movements think that the UCC is the means by which men in smoking rooms are enslaving the United States.

Go Ron Paul! Bring back the Gold Standard!

Most favorite political philosophy from the list of 'underground' organizations: There is no legitimate political authority above sheriff.

IPR Freedoms going too far

Radiohead released their last album for free online. This was very admirable, and I really respected them for being 'cool', making good music, and trying to change the legal future of music.

HOWEVER

Apparently the also licensed their music for a commercial for the NBA. A COMMERCIAL!!!!!! Too far, this is too far!!!

I'm extremely disappointed in them because this was not the act of some faceless corporation that licensed the property of a music group right from under them. This was Radiohead, the pinnacle of the artistic movement who proclaim various left-wing values, taking it upon themselves to give their music to the NBA (I mean had it been baseball or college basketball, that would have been ok).

But the NBA!!!! Shame!!! Shaaaaammmmmme!

Unfortunately not a Limerick

A judicial version of Thesaurus poetry from the great state of South Carolina

Wieters v. Bon-Secours-St. Francis Xavier Hospital, Inc:

The cognoscenti of health care nomology trust and rely upon Peer Review Statutes as the quiddity and hypostasis of the hospital/physician relationship. The quintessence and elixir of the peer review process is confidentiality.

See the opinion
or see it via Volokh Conspiracy

Thanks for the heads up (you know who you are!)

Boalt Hall, No More!

UC Berkeley has a law school that until recently was called "Boalt Hall School of Law." Boalt (according to wikipedia) was an engineer in the army who went to the University of Heidelberg, Germany to study mining, which is probably the reason why a law school in California is named after him. (Ok, he was also a lawyer and a judge, but thats all his wiki page says, and i'm too lazy to read his official obituary).

Unfortunately UC Berkeley is changing their name this year. After an exhaustive campaign, $25,000, and years of sitting in a room thinking of a new name, a public relations firm, who accepted that $25,000, renamed the school ....and I quote:

"UC Berkeley School of Law"

I have officially changed my goal in life to working for a firm, scratch that,... starting my own bueiness specializing in name-changing. Would someone please pay me $30,000 to rename things. I always wanted to rename the Empire State Building as "New York State Big Building." I always thought that "Georgetown University Law Center" was too complicated, I wonder if they'll pay me to rename it Georgetown University Law School. That oughtta be worth at least a couple of grand.

Oh well, maybe next time Berkeley will ask newly tenured Prof. John Yoo to write a memo about it. (Ok, nerdy/bad joke I know)

[Disclaimer: I have uploaded this picture that I found on the internet purely for its satirical value. I do not necessarily support its viewpoint, and I hope that my posting it is not viewed as support for any type of political message that may lie within it]
P.S. When you add things like that disclaimer, that's how you know you've finished your first year of law school...only 2 more to go!!!!

Property Textbooks

Everyone in Law school uses the same textbook for property (Dukeminier/Krier). Or, in this story, the exact same book:

http://www.tjsdoubleplay.com/blog/2008/04/we_read_property_once.html

Summary: boy loses his casebook, buys a used one off half.com, only to realize that he just bought his own book back from an unknown thief/not particularly moral finder/unwitting thief who goes to the same school as him.

Kozinski Watch

Someone in the comments section sent this golden nugget of a judicial opinion from Judge Kozinski! For the non-legals out there, he is the Chief Justice of the 9th Court of Appeals, which includes California. He is known for some of the most quotable and memorable opinions, like his dissenting opinion in the case of Vanna White v. Samsung [Scroll to the bottom to see Samsung's robotic version of White]. There used to be a picture of Judge Kozinski on Above the Law with his shirt off all Putin-style holding an assault rifle, but they have since taken it down, so I can't reprint it here.

Gilbrook v. City of Westminster, 177 F.3d 839, 863 (9th Cir. 1999):

Kozinski: "MCA filed a counterclaim for defamation based on the Mattel representative’s use of the words “bank robber,” “heist,” “crime” and “theft.” But all of these are variants of the invective most often hurled at accused infringers, namely “piracy.” No one hearing this accusation understands intellectual property owners to be saying that infringers are nautical cutthroats with eyepatches and peg legs who board galleons to plunder cargo. In context, all these terms are nonactionable “rhetorical hyperbole,” .

The parties are advised to chill. AFFIRMED."

[Editor's Note: In California, an order advising all parties to 'chill' is actually binding under the state constitution.... ok, it isn't, but it should be!!!]

Scalia-ism!!!!!

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003

South Carolina rezoned part of the beach so that Lucas could not build on his land. This is a Taking's Clause case (whether the government needs to compensate you for effectively taking your land). Scalia's opinion needs no introduction, but I am going to skip to footnote 28 for the purpose of expediency.

Here, he speaks of how a standard of requiring the legislature to cite a harm-preventing justification is a less than useful standard:

"Since such a justification can be formulated in practically every case, this amounts to a test of whether the legislature has a stupid staff." (emphasis added)

Next week: Scalia teaches us how to place asterisks in a judicial opinion in the shape of the middle finger being waived at hippies.


Update: Henry Blackmun Responds in the Dissent

"Today the Court launches a missile to kill a mouse" - translation: 'oh snap'

Case with a Limerick

Krell v. Henry, 2 K.B. 740 (King's Bench, 1903): guy rents a room to watch the king march in a parade, the king cancels, is he liable to pay the rent? no....however is he liable to a limerick? You better bet your crown jewels!


"Oh Say, Can You See?"

Said Henry to Krell, You can't sue
Though I've rented your room with a view
Now (Oh Damn! Dearie Me)
There's nothing to see
For they've cancelled the spectacle due

What you've got (Said Vaughan Williams L.J) [ed. note, this is the judge]
Is a license to watch, by day
What you both contemplated
Has now been frustrated
So there'd be nothing to pay

-George Marshall, 19 Sept 1986
Wow, not only is there a limerick, but it was written 83 years later the same year that "Rock Me Amadeus" by Falco topped the charts

FYI: The King in 1903 was Edward VII

Nasso v. Seagal

Continuing on the Seagal kick, ever wonder why Steven Seagal disappeared from movies for awhile? Not only was the mob after his Staten Island-born butt, but dude got sued!!

Nasso v. Seagal, 263 F. Supp. 2d 596 (E.D.N.Y. 2003)

Apparently, he started a production company in the late 80's with a fellow Staten Islander. Steven promised to act in, then didn't act in, 4 movies: "Blood on the Moon," "Genghis Khan," "Smash and Grab," and "Prince of Central Park". (Note: I think he didn't act in them, I'm too lazy to actually look them up; they were obviously memorable movies). In addition, Steven karate-chopped his way into debt with the IRS then borrowed money and refused to pay. Lemme tell you, reading that case he signed some stupid contracts, all of which he breached.

Anyway, he owed a bunch of money, lost his claims, and the court was not sympathetic to his low talking. Somewhere in the opinion is probably a section discussing who would win in a fight between him and Chuck Norris, but I think the court could not decide and sent that issue back to the lower court of Kick Ass county on remand. Sad Panda [sorry, I'm missing the picture of Steven and a panda but there's some type of error, stay tuned....correction: it's all Fixed!!!]. The End