IndyLaw Net

After all, why not? Read the Twelve Points, the definitive statement of conservative principles

2010-03-12T19:08:00.003-05:00

Read the Twelve Points at www.the12points.com. Mention that "IndyLaw Net" sent you, because I will find that funny.

The February 2007 Pass List

2007-05-04T09:43:00.000-04:00

I know that we have posted these in the past, so here is the "Pass List" for the February 2007 Indiana Bar Exam.

SBA urges students to oppose fee increase

2007-04-02T12:13:00.000-04:00

This message is directly from the SBA:

IUPUI is recommending a fee increase of approximately $250-$300 (per semester) starting next semester! IUPUI’s fee increase recommendation has been attached to this e-mail [links provided below]. More information on the fee can be found at http://www.iupui.edu/sli/review.html. This would be an additional fee above any fee raise the law school may institute.

The Student Bar Association has passed a resolution in complete opposition to these fees. This opposition resolution has also been attached to this e-mail explaining why students should vote "low priority" to every fee recommendation. This resolution will be sent, today, to the Deans of the Law School, IUPUI Chancellor Bantz, the Indiana University Student Trustee, the Undergraduate Student Government President, and the IUPUI newspaper (Sagamore).

We ask that all students (both non-graduating and graduating) complete the online survey at http://www.iupui.edu/sli/review.html. Tell IUPUI that law students believe these are "low priority fees." There will be computers set up today in the Student Organizations Office (Room 200) between 11:00 - 12:00 where you can take the survey, learn more about the fees, and sign a petition opposing the fees.

- IUPUI Student Fee Increase Proposal (.pdf)

- Opposition to IUPUI Student Life Initiative (.pdf)

Televise the Supreme Court?

2007-02-13T15:11:00.000-05:00

Senator Arlen Specter, along with two other Republicans and three Democrats, has introduced legislation "to require the court to televise its proceedings."

I think this is a terrible idea? What do you think?

In addition to my misgivings (which include the typical arguments against televising the proceedings), I am skeptical that any legislation could force the Supreme Court's hand on this matter. Such legislation would implicate the separation of powers and the court would be the final arbiter over any controversy.

Forum with incoming Dean Roberts

2007-02-01T16:25:00.000-05:00

"This is a neat place. It has the potential to be one of the elite institutions. With the proper resources, the school can be as good as it wants to be. One of my goals is to increase the resources."

This statement made by Gary Roberts in his opening remarks to those gathered at yesterday's forum set the theme for the entire forum--a theme Roberts is sure to focus on once he takes over the Dean position next year.

When asked about his budgetary priorities, Roberts emphasized that the budget is not under the unilateral control of the Dean and the budgetary process must engage the faculty, students, staff, and alumni. He did mention one area of particular budgetary concern:

"Scholarship money has got to be increased. The amount we give now is almost criminal."

He also said that we need to increase funding to the school's various programs and increase the number and pay of the faculty, but he was frank in saying that the school can only spend as much as its able to take in. To that end he plans on engaging a capital campaign drive, including the addition of endowed chairs and professorships.

In response to questions regarding the school's ranking and reputation, Roberts said the school should hire a full time public relations official as soon as the budget allows. He pointed out that this approach helped Tulane's national reputation. For example, he stated that Tulane's PR official would contact numerous members of the press across the nation when a particular legal matter made the news, informing them of Tulane faculty that could speak on the matter.

Roberts also stressed that he did not want to become isolated from the students: "This place belongs to you much more than it does to me." He says he'd like to teach a class, hopefully on sports law, and he plans to send a bi-weekly e-mail to the student body keeping them up-to-date on the law school's developments.

Finally, when asked by SBA President Matt Morgan about communication, Dean Roberts described how Tulane was dealing with the issue. He says that Tulane actually prohibited mass e-mailings--realizing the inefficiency of that method--and had created a message board page on the law school's intranet for important postings.

Roe v. Wade Decision = Lower Crime Rates?

2007-01-30T18:13:00.000-05:00

Over the break I had a chance to catch up on some reading. Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything by Steven D. Levitt, a University of Chicago Professor and repected young economist, was one of the books I chose. Levitt takes a unique approach by examining everyday life situations and breaking down the statistics. He explains, among a list of interesting topics, why a gun in the home is less dangerous than a pool in the backyard, how real estate agents might not always get you the best deal, why most drug dealers still live at home, and most interestingly, how crime rates in major cities actually shrunk throughout the '90s.

Concerning the crime rates in the '90s (please forgive me for my mediocre summarizing skills), the Roe v. Wade decision was responsible for shrinking the population in the inner cities, which in turn, resulted in a lower amount of children being exposed to the adverse conditions which tend to lead to a life of crime. He explores the numbers in depth and ends up making a convincing argument that the Roe v. Wade decision did eventually lead to a drop in the crime rate of major cities. Trust me, he does a much better job at making this argument.

As a law student, I found it amazing to think of the possibility of the unintended long term effects of judicial decisions. I know we focus on policy concerns in class, but almost 100% of the time we are only thinking in the box of the issue with which we are concerned. I would recommend this book for the simple reason that it demands it's readers to look at the bigger picture. I think some of us forget this from time to time.

Dean Roberts to hold open forum for students

2007-01-26T11:03:00.000-05:00

The forum will be in the Moot Court Room on February 1 from 4:30 5:20.

Check Out This Guy

2007-01-24T23:41:00.000-05:00

While the following links are utterly hilarious to me and probably the others that will read them, I have a hard time believing the Texas Bar Association will find this quite as funny after enough lawyers in Texas forward complaints to them. Make sure you explore his entire site to fully understand the mockery he is presenting. Please see below for some comedy relief:

http://www.dwiwins.com/

Texas Bar Association

Congrats

2007-01-22T09:51:00.000-05:00

Congratulations to the Super Bowl-bound Indianapolis Colts!

New Dean!

2007-01-19T18:11:00.000-05:00

Apologies for being sluggish on this news. For some reason I did not receive the e-mail announcement. But as many of you already know, IU Law has selected its new dean: Gary R. Roberts, the current Deputy Dean of Tulane University Law School.

According to the memo sent to the student body by Dean Klein, Dean Roberts will take over the helm on July 1 pending approval by the IU Board of Trustees. He will visit campus in February to meet with students.

Professor Roberts teaches sports law, antitrust, labor law, and business enterprises and was awarded a teaching award in 2001, as voted on by Tulane law students. He has numerous credentials in the area of sports law such as having served as the chairman of the Sports Lawyers Association and as chairman of the Association of American Law Schools' Sports Law Section.

Read his full biography here...

...

At an early glance, this seems to be an excellent selection for the new Dean. Professor Roberts' sports law connections make sense for Indianapolis (in fact, he is friends with the Bill Polian and the Mannings), and the IU-Indy law school was reportedly his top choice.

Collision Course

2007-01-05T22:21:00.000-05:00

Next week when President Bush announces changes to the U.S.'s course in Iraq, he is expected to call for a surge in the number of troops there. Meanwhile, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have called for phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq beginning in the next 4 to 6 weeks. The two sides appear to be set on a collision course.

But what power do Congressional Democrats have to pull troops out? One option is to halt funding, but this will most likely be viewed as politically untenable. Another option may be to employ the War Powers Resolution (P.L. 93-148, 1973). Under the WPR, in the absence of a Congressional declaration of war or statutory grant of authority for war, the President has 90 days (60 plus a 30 day extension) to conduct military operations before having to withdraw troops.

In the case of Iraq, Congress has already authorized the use of force. But if the WPR requires Congressional authorization for the use of military force, the implication is that Congress may later remove that authorization. However, this is a relatively untested legal issue.

If the Democrats do try to de-authorize the war in Iraq, President Bush would likely ignore them, claiming the WPR to be unconstitutional. This pits the President's Constitutional role as commander-in-chief against Congress' power to declare war. The Supreme Court has never heard a challenge to the WPR. One indication, however, of how the high court would act may be found in the 2000 D.C. Court of Appeals case Campbell v. Clinton.

In that case, the court refused to grant Tom Campbell, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives standing against President Bill Clinton, when Campbell claimed that Clinton violated the WPR in directing troops beyond 60 days in Yugoslavia. The court argued that Congress has ample outside of judicial remedy to halt hostilities--namely, stopping funding.

...

The conditions are ripe for this issue to come before the courts. I would appreciate any perspectives, disagreements, and/or corrections, any of you may have in regards to my brief analysis in this post.

New blog added

2006-12-17T17:59:00.000-05:00

Ellen S. Podgor (IU-Indy class of '76), a professor and associate dean at Stetson University College of Law, coauthors a blog on white collar crime. It features informative posts as well as an incredible number of useful links and resources on this particular legal subject. Check it out.

I have added it under the 'Legal Academics' section of ILN's blogroll. Once I have some free time over winter break, I will do a general overhaul of the blogroll to weed out defunct blogs and improve its organization.

Andrew Jackson and the Constitution

2006-12-11T00:49:00.000-05:00

IU Law's own Professor Gerard Magliocca has a new book out entitled, Andrew Jackson and the Constitution: The Rise and Fall of Generational Regimes. I've long had an interest in our nation's founders and early leaders, so this book sounds quite interesting. Here is part of the description of the book from The University Press of Kansas' website:

Magliocca reinterprets the legal landmarks of the Jacksonian era to demonstrate how the meaning of the Constitution evolves in a cyclical and predictable fashion. He highlights the ideological battles fought by Jacksonian Democrats against Federalists and Republicans over states’ rights, presidential authority, the scope of federal power, and other issues. By doing so he shows how presidential politics, Supreme Court decisions, and congressional maneuverings interweave, creating a recurrent pattern of constitutional change.

Magliocca builds on the view that major changes in American political and constitutional development occur generationally—in roughly thirty-year intervals—and move from dominant regime to the emergence of a counter-regime. Focusing on a period largely neglected in studies of such change, he offers a lucid introduction to the political and legal history of the antebellum era while tracing Jackson’s remarkable consolidation of power in the executive branch.

For those with an interest similar to mine, the book is available for preorder on Amazon.

Indiana

2006-12-11T00:47:00.000-05:00

The mighty state of Indiana [ it's a state of mind really ;-) ] became a state on this date in 1816. It was the 19th state admitted to the union. Check out this Wikipedia article for a refresher on the history of the Hoosier state.

School Website Problems

2006-12-06T23:08:00.000-05:00

I want to report that the night before finals it appears www.indylaw.indiana.edu is defunct. I have not been able to logon to get my exam number or to get the link to download the newest version of Secure Exam. If you put these trivial (albeit very important) tasks off until the night before, such as myself, you are not alone in your dispair.

I have no idea what is causing the problem, nor am I pointing a finger. I would just like this to serve as notice to my fellow panicking students.

New exam "guidelines"

2006-11-20T10:59:00.000-05:00

The following new exam guidelines were sent to the student body last week by Associate Dean Espada:

EXAM TESTING CONDITIONS: PROHIBITION ON MATERIALS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICES

In sitting for an exam, students are permitted to bring only pens, pencils, highlighters, computers (loaded with Securexam or other accepted exam related software) and other material specifically authorized by the relevant class professor.

Unless otherwise authorized by the relevant class professor, students may not take into an exam room other items, which include the following: backpacks, purses, briefcases, food or drink, beeping alarms, calculator watches, wristwatches with a picture taking feature, pagers, cellular phones, books, notes, scratch paper, Palm Pilots or other hand-held computers, any type of personal digital assistants or wireless e-mail devices, rulers, calculators, cameras, radios, tape recorders, lapboards/deskboards, or aid of any other kind...

I take two issues with these new exam taking rules. First, the student body was not consulted or notified in any way of possible rule changes. Second, to be blunt, the new rules treat the students like children. IU Law school's mission is to produce graduates worthy of practicing the law, but they cannot even trust us to carry backpacks into exam rooms?

Many Updates and Revisions to the "Black Thursday" Story

2006-11-15T16:57:00.000-05:00

The first update is that judging by this statement by Dominic Dorsey, the president of the IUPUI Black Student Union and someone who has been frequently quoted by the Indianapolis Star as a leader of this initiative (to sue IUPUI unless it meets certain demands by the deadlines that have been created for it), the word "Black Thursday" (which he also uses to refer to November 2, the day that "Through Our Eyes" was released and the suit against IUPUI was first threatened) is an informal nickname for the initiative. (I do not know why its supporters would choose a name that would make people think of a day of chaos or a stock market crash to describe their initiative or the day it began, but when people are taking their initiative public, they can call it whatever they want.)

Fortunately, this gives us a name to use to refer to this initiative, because it now appears that it is technically incorrect to identify it by the group that had seemed to have been promoting it: the Black Student Union. According to Dominic Dorsey's statement on the BSU web site, "As President of this great organization, I can assure you. The executive board of Black Student Union had no hand in the planning, execution or construction of Black Thursday or the proposal submitted to the Administration. I however did." In my post on Sunday, I credited the IUPUI Black Student Union with "Through Our Eyes" (which was posted on the BSU web site) and the law suit threat. Now, however, this does not seem to be completely true. This is the second update: the initiative was not created by the BSU executive board, but it can be identified by the name "Black Thursday."

The third update is that the meeting on Sunday, which was supposed to have determined whether the suit against IUPUI would go forward, did not. However, it did resulted in the creation of a second deadline for IUPUI to meet (5 PM today), which would have been enforced by demands for resignations.

The fourth update, and the most significant, is that the Indianapolis Star reports today that IUPUI Chancellor Charles Bantz has given his approval to a version of some of the "Black Thursday" demands, and has agreed to consider some of the others. "IUPUI Chancellor Charles Bantz today promised a new multicultural center and a full-time campus diversity officer in response to complaints from black students that they have been treated unfairly," the Star reported. He made a few other promises as well, which the Star article also reports.

Dominic Dorsey is also quoted: "Progress is being made, and at this point there is a level of communication between the administration and the students that has never existed before, so that we can definitely be proud of ... We don’t look at anything as a step back right now, and nothing is a failure."

Chancellor Bantz made the promises before 5 PM, so unless they were unsatisfactory to "Black Thursday" activists, he has met the deadline.

Dean Search Update

2006-11-14T20:48:00.000-05:00

In case some of you missed it, this is an update on the Law School Dean search posted to the Listserv by Angela Sanchez (Student Member of the Dean Search Committee):

Due to the hard work and dedication of the search committee, I am pleased
to report that five candidates for Dean will be visiting campus over the next
several weeks. It has been a process that began in the late spring with
meetings to organize ourselves and to develop an understanding of the
characteristics that a new dean should bring to the School. We then
created the job description and advertised it heavily. Nominations for the
position were encouraged and many contacts were made. Then we began a
process of sifting through the applications, and, more recently, of interviewing
the most promising candidates. This process has culminated in our decision
to invite five candidates to visit the law school, its faculty, staff, students,
alumni, and campus administration.

The five candidates, in alphabetical order, are all legal educators:

Jim Chen, Associate Dean and James L. Krusemark Professor of Law,
University of Minnesota Law School

Phillip Closius, Professor on Special Administrative Assignment
and former Dean, University of Toledo College of Law

Darby Dickerson, Vice President and Dean, Stetson University
College of Law

Gary Roberts, Deputy Dean and Sumter Davis Marks Professor
of Law, Tulane Law School

Jeffrey Thomas, Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs, Associate Dean
for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law, University of Missouri -
Kansas City

They will be visiting us on the following dates:

Arrival-Departure

Thomas: 11/13 morning - 11/14 evening

Chen: 11/15 evening - 11/17 afternoon

Dickerson: 11/19 afternoon - 11/21 late morning

Closius: 11/26 evening - 11/28 afternoon

Roberts: 11/28 evening - 11/30 afternoon

The search committee is delighted to be hosting these candidates and
we invite your participation in meeting them and helping them to
understand the School and its prospects better. Members of the search
committee have been assigned to escort the candidates and they will be
arranging individual sessions with members of the law school community
and presentations to the faculty.

I have attached resumes for the candidates with this e-mail. (Omitted)

Roger Schmenner
Chair, Search Committee

International Practitioner Panel

2006-11-14T18:15:00.000-05:00

One of IU Law-Indy's greatest strengths is in the field of international law, aided by relevant course offerings, study abroad programs, the LLM program, and various student groups. Bolstering that image, the International Law Society, the Hispanic Law Society, and the Committee on Diversity Initiatives hosted an International Practitioner Panel today from 5-6 P.M. today in Inlow Hall.

The panel included a diverse set of attorneys in Indianapolis practicing international law. Two of the panelists, Mr. Edward Delaney (Partner, Delaney & Delaney) and Mr. David Williams Russel (Partner, Harrison & Moberly) work in the field of international trade. Mr. Zack Dong (Partner, Baker and Daniels) focuses on international mergers & acquisitions as well intellectual property law. Finally, Angela Iza (Associate, Lewis & Kappes) and Sarah Moshe (Associate, Broyles, Kight & Ricafort) both work on immigration law.

After each panelist described their backgrounds the session opened up to questions. The panelists were asked various questions regarding tips for law students considering a career in international law. Mr. Delaney stressed the need to learn at least one other language and the other panelists universally agreed. Mr. Russel stressed the importance of basic lawyering skills, saying that before one may be a successful international practitioner, he or she must develop skills in reading and interpreting large statutes as well as sharp networking experience.

Finally, the panelists all agreed that flexibility is a key. Most of them did not specifically plan on becoming international practitioners when they were in law school and took indirect paths to the practice. Mr. Delaney did recommend taking at least a couple international law related courses to get a basic understanding of some of the issues involved and to help one decide whether it's field he or she would be interested in pursuing.

"A New Post" or "I can only guess, but..."

2006-11-12T15:29:00.000-05:00

Without actually speaking with the leaders of the IUPUI Black Student Union, I cannot say for certain whether I have found the explanation for a surprising fact reported by the Indianapolis Star in two of its three articles about the IUPUI Black Student Union's recent discrimination-related grievances and demands: "The demands included a campus center for black students and $78,000 for black student groups, which is about $10,000 more than the student government's budget for all campus clubs."

On November 2, which the IUPUI Black Student Union calls "Black Thursday," the BSU released "Through Our Eyes: The State of The Black Student at Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis." The document alleges that the IUPUI administration has behaved unfavorably toward black students in its course offerings, faculty hiring policies, "cultural competence," and communication (see the document for details), and that it has actually discriminated in distributing funds to student organizations. The BSU has also made several requests, and is meeting today (as of the time of this posting, I do not know the outcome of this meeting) to decide whether to sue IUPUI.

But according to the Indianapolis Star, which has now reported this fact more than once, one of the BSU requests is "$78,000 for black student groups," which the Star reports is $10,000 more than is currently allotted to all student organizations. Why would the BSU make such a request?

Well, as I said before, the only way to find out for certain is to ask the leaders of the BSU (and maybe I will, or maybe they will affirm or dispute this in the comments under this post). However, I did notice something in "Through Our Eyes" that might explain why they would have believed that this request was justified. On page 5, the document reads, "In addition, Black Greek Organizations under the National Pan Hellenic Council facilitate 18 weeks of programming during the course of an academic year on campus. The Black Student Union facilitates 12 programs during the course of an academic year, not including weekly study tables. By our calculations, this means that these two Black organizations alone facilitate over 130 days worth of programming here at IUPUI. There are about 160 days out of the academic year. In translation, Black student organizations do 81% of the student programming at IUPUI. This is more than any other student organization combined at IUPUI."

However, to divide the number of days in which these two (?) organizations are said to have facilitated programming (130) by the number of days in an academic year (160) would produce the percentage of days in which the organizations conducted programming (81.25%, if the organizations did hold events on 130 days and if there were 160 days available), not the percentage of all programs at IUPUI that were organized by them. For the statement quoted in the preceding paragraph to be true, no other student organization could have held events of their own on any of those 130 days, but must have held events on each of the remaining 30 days of the year.

There is, of course, more to the document than this, but this math error does seem to provide an explanation for the BSU request of $10,000 more than all IUPUI student organizations combined currently receive: because the BSU believes that the organizations that would receive the $78,000 conduct 81% of all student activities at IUPUI.

To read the rest of "Through Our Eyes," (which I would advise you to do) it is available on the IUPUI Black Student Union web site.

Changes to course schedule and requirements

2006-09-20T14:18:00.000-04:00

Professor Klein, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, sent a memo to the IU-Law student body yesterday detailing changes to the curriculum requirements and to the course schedule.

The most prominent of these changes apply to incoming 1L's next year: both Torts and Property requirements have been reduced to a 1 semester-long 4-credit course each. Each will be taught in the in Fall semester. Also, Constitutional Law has been made a mandatory course for 1L day students in the Spring.

These changes tend to bring the school in line with many of our peer institutions, few of whom require more than 1 semester of property or torts.

Other changes of note do impact current students. Morning classes will now begin at 8:30 a.m. rather than at 8:45, two new reserved blocks have been created for student meetings (Tuesdays at 12:40-2:10 and 4:25-6:00, and Thursdays at 12:40-2:10 and 4:25-5:30), and some courses have had their names changed to more precisely reflect the subject matter they cover.

For the complete memo, click here...

Radio-N8

2006-08-24T18:36:00.000-04:00

3L-evening student, Nathan Van Sell, has his own internet radio station called Radio-N8. He also has a website for the station in blog format: www.radio-n8.com

From the site you can listen to his station and read his thoughts on music and other topics. Make sure and check it out.

Legal Dictionary (guest post)

2006-08-22T11:20:00.000-04:00

[ed. note: below is a post written by my friend who is a 3L at Ohio St. law... this is his humorous take on the real meanings of terms we law students and lawyers encounter on a regular basis]

post by Daniel Ornelas

My friend Matt, a fellow 3L at Moritz Law, has a girlfriend who is entering her first year of law school here at Ohio State. Of course, Matt and I are giving her some pointers on how to "survive" what may well be one of the toughest and most trying academic exeperiences around.

A common saying amongst legal scholars is that going to law school is akin to "learning a foreign language." I happen to think this a fairly accurate description of the process of becoming a lawyer, excluding, of course, the inevitable general bitterness and alcoholism that also ingrain themselves during this time.So with an effort to illuminate the arcane language of law school, both for Julie and for all of you, I present an English-Legalese translator for your enlightenment.

Mandatory meeting

English: a meeting at which attendance is required
Legalese: a meeting where absolutely nothing of any practical use will be explained

Penumbra

English: a shadow
Legalese: something only a liberal can see

Brief

English: adj. short in duration or length
Legalese: n. a 25-30 page paper

On-call day

English: a period of time during which one may be asked to do something
Legalese: the last day of reading for that particular course

Case

English: the record of an adjudication between two or more parties in a court of law
Legalese: the record of some weird or incorrect application of law that will not appear on the exam (usage exeception: in constitutional law, the record of some weird or incorrect application of law that will appear on the exam)

Constitutional law

English: a class which explores the nature of the structure, interpretation and jurisprudence of the Constitution of the United States

Legalese: a class about the Commerce Clause

14th Amendment

English: provision of the Constitution guaranteeing citizens, among other things, the right to due process of law
Legalese: a magic wand waved by law professors to create rights out of thin air

Journal

English: a publication of scholarly works
Legalese: an 11th-century Medieval torture device that law students actively compete to join

Depends

English: contingent upon the circumstances; also, an adult diaper brand-name
Legalese: the correct answer to every question

Bar

English: a place to which one goes to get hammered and screwed
Legalese: a place to which one goes to get hammered and screwed

Republican

English: a follower of the conservative political party
Legalese: (archaic) a developmentally-disabled individual who must have gotten a freakishly high LSAT score to get into law school

Class

English: an academic meeting between professors and students
Legalese: a game of "hide-n-seek" between professors and students

Class participation

English: involvement of students engaging the professor as he lectures
Legalese: Yahoo! games and AIM

Welcome Back!

2006-08-21T11:59:00.000-04:00

Welcome back everybody to a new school season, and welcome back to ILN if you've missed us this summer.

As before, our goal is to provide you the IU Law-Indy community with the latest news relevant to the school as well as to discuss some of the latest legal issues evolving on a state and national level.

We'll also post tips and advice for new and current students from time to time. And finally, don't forget that you can access your webmail and certain other resources via the ILN portal.

We hope to add more content and features throughout the semester and we invite anyone with interest in writing content and/or acting as an editor for ILN to contact us, using the e-mail addresses located in the left sidebar.

Kennedy the Supreme Court's new swing vote

2006-07-18T17:01:00.000-04:00

For those familiar with the different personalities on the Supreme Court, it comes as no surprise that he is the court's new "swing vote" replacing Sandra Day O'Connor in that role. Check out this column from the Arizona Republic that describes Kennedy's role as well as analyzing the personalities of the other conservative justices.

Judge rules in favor of FBI on Congressional office raid

2006-07-17T17:40:00.000-04:00

First of all, I apologize for being away from this blog for the last couple weeks. A lot of legal news was made during that time, and in the coming days I'll touch on some of the highlights.

To begin with, U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan ruled against Rep. Jefferson and other Congressmen who had sought to suppress evidence collected by the FBI in their raid of Jefferson's congressional office. Hogan rejected the plaintiffs' separation of powers argument.

The case is being appealed, but do not look for Hogan's ruling to be overturned. Legal experts have widely repudiated such a liberal reading of the 'speech and debate' clause that could encompass the FBI's actions in this investigation.

Happy Independence Day!

2006-07-04T10:26:00.000-04:00

<<
The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies
In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
>>

What Not To Do

2006-07-03T17:55:00.000-04:00

Crime & Federalism posts a humorous email from a federal law clerk who had been denied a job at a private law firm.

WSJ: Don't Go To Law School

2006-06-24T09:37:00.000-04:00

The Wall Street Journal's Cameron Stracher has an interesting article titled, "Law School by Default; Want to Keep Your Options Open? Don't Train to be a Lawyer."

They're dropping like flies. Count 'em. Despite the swelling ranks of the new recruits, the steady growth in large corporate firms, and the length, breadth and expense of lawsuits, the legal profession is actually losing lawyers every day, a silent drain of talent to banking, business and premature retirement. Every year, I face a new class of eager law students, ready to take on the world, but after a couple of years of practice, many have lost their youthful glow. Perhaps it's time to rethink the whole "law school as default" mentality that infects so many otherwise sane young minds....

The legal profession is really two professions: the elite lawyers and everyone else. Most of the former start out at big law firms. Many of the latter never find gainful legal employment. Instead, they work at jobs that might be characterized as "quasi-legal": paralegals, clerks, administrators, doing work for which they probably never needed a J.D.

It's time those of us inside the profession did a better job of telling others outside the profession that most of us don't earn $160,000 a year, that we can't afford expensive suits, flashy cars, sexy apartments. We don't lunch with rock stars or produce movies. Every year I'm surprised by the number of my students who think a J.D. degree is a ticket to fame, fortune and the envy of one's peers--a sure ticket to the upper middle class. Even for the select few for whom it is, not many last long enough at their law firms to really enjoy it.

There's something wrong with a system that makes a whole lot of people pay a whole lot of money for jobs that are not worth it, or that have no future. If we wanted to be honest, we would inform students that law school doesn't keep their options open. Instead, we should say that if they work hard and do well, they can become lawyers.

(Hat tip: TaxProf Blog)

Expanding the debate on gay marriage

2006-06-14T13:05:00.000-04:00

Always a popular (read: contentious) issue on ILN, the debate on gay marriage has seen an inevitable expansion into issues of religious freedom and constitutional philosophy.

Religious freedom

The New York Times has a good write-up on how gay marriage implicates religious freedom, an extremely new area of law. This clash could potentially occur in two different directions. [hat-tip to Josh for the NYT link]

As one scholar in the article points out, legally sanctioning gay marriages in one jurisdiction could impact religious freedom relating to church-run summer camps, daycare centers, etc. Conversely, prohibiting gay marriage might clash with religious freedom when a church marries a gay couple and the state refuses to recognize that marriage while at the same time recognizing the heterosexual marriages performed by other churches. Legal conflicts in this realm could support a push for so-called "contract marriage."

Constitutional philosophy

While most Republicans support a gay marriage ban for moral reasons, many nevertheless oppose amending the U.S. Constitution to create such a ban, usually citing the conservative philosophy of limiting the power of the federal government.

Tom Ehrich, an Episcopal priest, relates an argument of constitutional philosophy in his column in The Herald Sun:

The Constitution doesn't exist to resolve religious disputes. It exists to provide a just and equitable environment of laws and rights in which citizens can address religious issues, along with equally thorny issues involving human rights, property rights and competing claims for power....

The Constitution doesn't exist to implement certain religious beliefs. The colonies had been down that road and it was disastrous. The Constitution exists to provide an environment in which all citizens are free to worship and to believe as they choose. It is difficult to imagine a situation more antithetical to the American way than faith by fiat....

Don't worry, say some observers. The "Marriage Protection Amendment" is just for election-year show, not serious deliberation. Such trifling with our common life is no less worrisome. It manages to trivialize marriage, human sexuality, legitimate methods for resolving disputes and the U.S. Congress all at one time. That seems a lot of damage just to make the point that one branch of Christians doesn't believe gays and lesbians should have the same rights as other citizens.

Trial judge throws out San Francisco's gun ban

2006-06-14T12:56:00.000-04:00

A San Francisco superior court judge has thrown out that city's handgun ban. The ban prohibited the possession of a handgun by any resident with the exception of police officers and professionals in security-related positions. It also forbade the manufacture, sale, or distribution of all guns and ammunition within the city.

Do not be fooled by any hype surrounding this case, however, as the judge did not rule on 2nd Amendment grounds but rather that the city ordinance intruded into an area reserved for California state law. Nevertheless, expect the judge's decision to be promptly appealed.

Readers may recall that this is not the first time that San Francisco has entered into a conflict regarding the scope of its legislative/executive power. The most prominent episode occurred when it attempted to marry gay couples, contrary to California law.

Campus-wide tobacco ban to start August 14

2006-06-05T15:37:00.000-04:00

The IUPUI Office of Student Life and Diversity has just issued this bulletin:

In a continued effort to promote health and reflect IUPUI's health/life sciences emphasis, a new campus wide Tobacco Free policy will take effect Aug. 14, 2006. The policy will ban the use and sale of all tobacco products on university-owned property and in university-owned, -leased or -operated vehicles.

For more information about the policy, visit http://www.tobaccofree.iupui.edu.

Bush to repeat gay marriage mistake

2006-06-02T16:18:00.000-04:00

Last term President Bush pushed an anti gay marriage amendment, despite the fact that the Senate was unlikely to support any such measure. In fact, the vote fell far short of the 67 votes necessary to pass and presently it is unclear whether or not there is even a normal majority of 50 votes in support of it.

Nevertheless, President Bush has decided to once again push the amendment this term.

Shame on him. While I do not begrudge him for sincerely opposing gay marriage, I do begrudge him for pushing this fruitless endeavor when there is so much else that Congress needs to get done. Just as was the case last term, this is an obvious political tactic to energize the "values" base of the party.

Further, even if there was a possibility that the Senate could pass the amendment, it is still unnecessary for opponents of gay marriage to pursue it. The National Journal's Jonathan Rauch argues such, saying that the Supreme Court--under its current composition--has no chance of legalizing gay marriage nationally, and the Defense of Marriage Act already allows states to refuse to ratify gay marriages from other states. DOMA has been upheld in every circuit court in which it has been challenged, including in the liberal 9th circuit.

Finally, Rauch poses an interesting question to pro-life, anti gay marriage Republicans:

Two questions for anti-gay-marriage, anti-abortion Republicans: If states can be allowed to go their own way in defining human life, why not allow them to go their own way in defining marriage? Where constitutional amendments are concerned, why is preventing gay couples from marrying so much more urgent than preventing unborn children from being killed?

[hat-tip to my friend Kristine for the Rauch article]

Update (6/7/06): Senate rejects the amendment; only 49 votes in favor... no surprise here

'Alabama revisits issue of federal vs. state power'

2006-05-31T17:22:00.000-04:00

This AP article states that four GOP candidates for the Alabama Supreme Court believe that state supreme courts should not be bound by Supreme Court precedent on matters of federal law.

One of the candidates, Justice Tom Parker, is running for Chief Justice, while the other three are competing in the GOP primary. Currently the Alabama high court is completely Republican.

In a newspaper opinion piece Parker wrote, "State supreme courts may decline to follow bad U.S. Supreme Court precedents because those decisions bind only the parties to the particular case."

Parker's opponent, the incumbant Alabama Chief Justice, has called this position "bizarre."

...

Not only would this position, if it comes into dominance in the Alabama high court, revisit an issue settled since the 1800s, it would also accomplish very little besides perhaps increasing the U.S. Supreme Court's caseload.

Can/will anyone defend this?

Indy 500

2006-05-29T14:35:00.000-04:00

The Indianapolis 500, in its 90th running, proved once again that it is the greatest spectacle in racing.

Besides the thrill of the race itself, the event was attended with the customary pomp and tradition. Numerous celebrities were there (not that I care about that), the Archbishop gave the invocation, the Purdue marching band played the Indiana state song "On the Banks of the Wabash," Jim Neighbors sang "Back Home Again in Indiana," Florence Henderson sang "God Bless America," a military trumpeter played "Taps," the Marion County sheriffs stood on their motorcycles, the balloons were released, Mary George said "Lady and Gentlemen start your engines!," F-16's flew over, etc. etc. etc.

For anyone who has gone to the race as long as myself--16 years now--this routine is ingrained in our memories. Though really there is nothing routine about it as every year I get goosebumps at hearing the sounds of the engines coming to life before the start of the race.

...

The race itself was great as well. A handful of drivers were competitive for the top spots, and there were many great storylines. Would the race see its first female winner in Dana Patrick? Would Michael Andretti, coming out of retirement to race with his son Marco, make a run for victory lane? Would Marco, only 19 years old, be able to compete, or perhaps even become the youngest winner in the race's history?

With 5 laps remaining, the race saw Michael Andretti in the top spot, Marco in 2nd, and Penske driver Sam Hornish in 3rd. These storylines could hardly have been better served. And with Hornish pulling out the second closest victory ever in Indy, the Greatest Spectacle in Racing was over once again.

[check out the Indy Star's excellent coverage of the race...]

...photo by Kelly Wilkinson / The Star

Separation of Powers and the FBI raid on Rep. Jefferson's office

2006-05-25T17:29:00.000-04:00

The latest Congressman to be investigated for taking a bribe, Rep. William Jefferson (D - Louisiana), had his congressional office raided by the FBI this weekend. Subsequently Congressional leaders--both Republican and Democratic--have come together criticizing the move as a violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine. The House Judiciary Committee has even started an official inquiry into the matter.

But is there any weight to their arguments? Most of the commentators suggest that there is not. The argument most likely would rest on the so-called 'Speech and Debate' clause:

The Senators and Representatives . . . shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place. (Art. I, s. 6, cl. 1)

My friend Chris, a prospective law student who wrote this must-read post on this matter, states the immediately apparent defect in using this clause, "Given that executing a search warrant involves neither an arrest nor questioning, it would seem to me that the Clause isn't applicable."

Chris also quotes pertinent case-law. Check it out.

If anyone would take a more liberal interpretation of the Speech & Debate clause, please share. Is Congress beginning a wild-goose chase?

'Advice for the incoming class of 2009'

2006-05-15T13:13:00.000-04:00

Along the lines of Josh's post, a student at the Ohio State University - Moritz law school sent me this list of advice for incoming 1L's, as submitted by graduating Moritz 3L's. Check it out...

Here are but a few examples from that list:

- "Do something you enjoy that’s not related to school for at least 20 minutes a day."

- "Ask upper classmen about professors before signing up for random classes."

- "If group studying doesn't work for you, DON'T join a study group...you'll do just as well (if not better) by studying on your own, and asking your fellow students and/or professor if you don't understand things. If group studying doesn't work for you, and you join a study group anyway, your grades could suffer..."

- "DO NOT listen to anyone around you about what classes are easy, what study strategies work, etc. It totally depends on who you are and what your abilities are. I made the mistake of listening to others my first year and my grades suffered. Just do what you think is best for you." ...

I Bid You Adieu

2006-05-13T00:29:00.000-04:00

I graduate tomorrow and in all likelihood this will be my last post here at IndyLaw Net. I'm tempted to wax poetic about my time in law school, or perhaps the history of this site. But instead I think I'll just link to a series of hilarious posts by Barely Legal: The Blog which do a far better job of summing up the law school experience than I could ever do.

Bad Reasons for Attending Law School
#1: "I don't plan on ever practicing law, but having a JD looks good, right?"
#2: "I have a worthless undergraduate degree"
#3: "I want to work in a genteel profession"
#4: "Law school is prestigious"
#5: "I got a good score on the LSAT"
#6: "My parents pressured me into it"
#7: "I want to make a difference in this world"
#8: "I want to make a lot of money"
#9: "I've been in the real world and I don't like my job"
#10: "I like to argue"

People You Meet in Law School
#1: The Desperate Girl
#2: The Old Guy
#3: The Philosopher
#4: The Hot Girl
#5: Jean Shorts Guy
#6: The Feminist Law Student
#7: The Frat Boy
#8: The Canary
#9: Agent Mulder
#10: The Federline
#11: Hypo Man
#12: The Ex-Cop
#13: Lucy
#14: Red
#15: The High School Smoker
#16: Capt. Law School
#17: The BFFs

Dean search committee selected

2006-04-21T13:45:00.000-04:00

Susanah Mead, IU-Indy's interim dean, has informed the students that Chancellor Bantz has selected the members of the Dean Search Committee, and that he hopes that it will have "final candidates" selected by the end of next semester.

The committee's members are:

- Roger Schmenner, Executive Associate Dean of the Kelley School of Business (Chair)
- Brent Dickson, Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court and 1968 graduate of the law school
- Lacy Johnson, Partner at Ice Miller and 1981 graduate of the law school
- Angela Sanchez, Current student
- Andy Klein, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor
- Paul Cox, Professor
- Dan Cole, Professor
- Fran Hardy, Professor
- Maria Lopez, Professor

...

I only have a few matters to add:

1. Dean Mead has explained to the Dean's Student Advisory Board the reason for the delay in selecting a committee: the law school and IUPUI were reluctant to conduct a dean search so soon after conducting one a few years ago for Dean Anthony Tarr.

2. The reason I didn't post earlier on the dean search is that I was given no access or information that could have shed any light on the topic. I am working to rectify the situation to gain greater access to pertinent information. I'll elaborate on my efforts to this regard, as progress is made.

3. Any contention that our law school is academically underneath IU and therefore should not be referred to as "the IUPUI School of Law" or similar name is somewhat hollow considering some of the recent decisions made in regards to the law school. IUPUI's Chancellor Bantz and its Vice Chancellor Plater have guided the rules concerning our tenure policy, ethics hearings, and now the dean search.

How not to conduct a deposition

2006-04-12T07:41:00.000-04:00

I figured that a brief reprieve from seriousness was in due order:

Video of deposition that gets out of hand... way out of hand...

[warning: this clip contains mildly bad language, severe machismo, extremely bad lawyering, and a near physical altercation. While I write this as a warning, I realize it will only induce additional people to view the link :-) ]

...

Of course, while funny, this video may also be quite instructive for any of us ever in a position to take a deposition in the future: don't do ANY of the things these lawyers did.

New SBA Executive Board installed

2006-04-06T11:28:00.000-04:00

On Tuesday night the new SBA Executive Board and representatives were installed, and I had the opportunity to discuss with the new President, Matthew Morgan, the direction he sees the SBA leadership taking next year.

"The group this year did a very good job fixing the internals, so the possibility for creating positive change for the student body next year is here now," said Morgan.

He then outlined a three-fold approach to next year's SBA agenda: continuing the quality programming of the past, ensuring better communication with and dissemination of information from the SBA and the law school to the students, and building a good foundation for the future.

Citing his experience as student body president at Purdue during his undergrad tenure, Morgan says he would like to emulate the transparency of that school's student government and administration. To this end, Morgan hopes to create a Student Bar Association website where the different student organizations could go to easily add their upcoming events and activities. Student could then go to this website and automatically add any of these events to their Microsoft Outlook with a simple click of the mouse.

This website, as he envisions it, could serve to reduce volume on the student listserv, promote more visibility of student group websites, and give students an easy forum to communicate their concerns with the SBA.

Regarding his eye towards the future, Morgan states that his "top priority" is to establish a rankings committee in the fall. The committee, initially comprised of just students, would perform comparison benchmarking with IU-Indy's peer schools (geographically, academically, etc.). Then in the spring, "we would have something to take to the administration" with the hope of adding faculty to the committee.

On a final note, Morgan says he would like to see increased participation in the SBA from the several student groups, with them working together for the common good of the school and the students.

Does Anyone Have Any Spare Office Space?

2006-04-03T14:58:00.000-04:00

If you're from central Indiana by now you've seen the pictures of the Regions Bank building (formally the INB and Union Planters Building) devastated by heavy storms Sunday night. Windows on at least 10 of the 37 floors were blown out by heavy winds. The Indianapolis Bar Association President, the Honorable Cynthia Ayers, sent out this email to IBA members.

************************
Regions Bank building damage causes need for office space

Due to weekend storm damage, the Regions Bank building downtown is closed today and for an indefinite period of time, affecting more than a dozen Indianapolis law firms, as well as the Indiana State Bar Association. If you have available office space the attorneys from these displaced law firms can use, please contact the Indianapolis Bar Association at iba@indybar.org or (317) 269-2000. The IBA will act as a clearinghouse for that information.

In addition, the IBA has office and work space available at its office at 107 N. Pennsylvania St., Suite 200. If you are in need of work space, please contact us at iba@indybar.org or (317) 269-2000.

Marion County courts also have informed the IBA that affected firms in the Regions Bank building will be accommodated by the courts due to the storm.

In true Hoosier fashion, we know our members will do their best to help their colleagues in need. Please watch for additional e-mail updates regarding the impact of the weekend storms. Thank you.

Rep. McKinney

2006-04-01T15:28:00.000-05:00

As you may know, on Wednesday, Capitol Police refused to allow Rep. McKinney to bypass a security checkpoint without passing through the metal detector. Why? Because the officer concerned disagrees with her political beliefs, is hostile to her race, and has an inclination (though of unknown origin and nature) to send women through metal detectors. It is for these reasons that Capitol Police picked a fight with the six-term member of Congress.

At the time, she wasn't carrying a lapel pin indicating that she, as a member of Congress, is not required to walk through the metal detector, but don't you think that Capitol Police should recognize the 535 members of Congress well enough to rely on memory to distinguish them from non-members who may try to enter the building?

Nice Recovery

2006-04-01T15:19:00.000-05:00

Apparently, yesterday's announcement about the result of the investigations of Professors Bradford, Roisman, and Mitchell hasn't slowed down Bradford.

Ed. note: As was readily recognized under this post's comments, this story was indeed a spoof for April Fools Day... I just wanted to make that explicitly clear. CNN, of course, never posted any such article. -lds

SBA Election wrap-up

2006-04-01T11:18:00.000-05:00

The SBA elections concluded on Friday, and the executive board slate of Matthew Morgan defeated that of William Saint. Thus Matthew Morgan is the new SBA President, Pratik Patel the Vice-President (Day), Scott Smith the Vice-President (Night), Meagan Merril the Secretary, and Michael Allen the treasurer.

In other positions, Aaron Culp defeated Jennifer Wilson for 2L Day Representative, Lindsay Carlberg took 3L Day Representative unopposed, AJ Feeny-Ruiz took 3L Night Representative unopposed, Terry Wilson took 4L Representative unopposed, and I took ABA Representative unopposed.

The 2L Night Representative is still unfilled, as nobody ran for the position.

...

This brings me to the matter of the candidate statements. I have appended to this post links to the statements of all the candidates who submitted them.

Now, a commenter on a previous post asked for ILN to post the statements of the candidates before the election. I responded saying that I was "prohibited" from doing so, and it is this issue which I will now elaborate upon.

Before the elections were held, I wanted to post the candidate statements, but since I was running for a position (unopposed), I felt I should ensure that doing so was not a violation of the election rules or the SBA Constitution. My reading of the rules did not indicate that there would be any violation, but I e-mailed Christopher Americanos, the previous SBA Vice-President and the person in charge of the elections, to make sure.

He wrote me back and essentially said that it was within his sole discretion to prohibit me from posting the statements and that his decision was not appealable. I inquired as to what provision of the election rules or constitution would be violated, and he was unable or unwilling to cite any.

I reluctantly conceded, but I am now compelled to discuss the matter with an eye to the future. If Chris' assertions to me were correct, that means that one person would be endowed with the unappealable unilateral power to cancel any person's candidacy, without regard for the election rules or the constitution. I hope he was indeed incorrect, but if he was right, then the system obviously needs to be changed. If this is the case, the new SBA leadership should amend the rules to vest election powers in more than one person, create an appeals process, and generally take measures to ensure that those in charge of the elections are bound to the rules.

...

Candidate Statements:

Click the names to download the statements for the following: the Morgan slate, the Saint slate, Jennifer Wilson, Aaron Culp

Dean Mead's statement

2006-03-31T14:04:00.000-05:00

Statement by interim Dean Mead to the students:

Dear Students,

I want to let you know that at long last the University processes that were initiated last fall to address the charges of violations of the Code of Academic Ethics brought by Professors Mary Mitchell and Florence Roisman against Professor William Bradford and his countercharges of discrimination against them have been completed. As you may know, Executive Vice-Chancellor and Dean of Faculties, William Plater, appointed an Academic Ethics Review Panel to provide him with recommendations for resolving the issues raised in the complaints. A number of these issues were made moot by Professor Bradford’s resignation. Nevertheless, the Panel took great care to consider the remaining issues and has issued a report to Dean Plater. It found no evidence of discrimination on the part of Professors Mitchell and Roisman and concluded that they conducted themselves responsibly and honorably. In my view, Professors Mitchell and Roisman have now been fully exonerated by these actions.

In keeping with the confidential nature of the proceedings, Dean Plater has written a confidential letter to Professors Mitchell and Roisman indicating that the matter of the grievances is now fully resolved and the matter is closed. I agree, and I ask that you join me in putting this unfortunate episode behind us and moving forward in an atmosphere of mutual respect and collegiality.

Susanah Mead
Interim Dean and Professor of Law
Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis

...

I promise I will follow up on this next week, though I do not feel there is much left to the story.

Elections, Day 2

2006-03-31T11:48:00.000-05:00

Today (Friday, March 31) is the second day of voting in the SBA elections. Below is the list of the candidates/slates again, but reversing the order in which the executive slates were published yesterday.

EXECUTIVE SLATE #2
- President: Matthew Morgan
- Vice-President (Day): Pratik Patel
- Vice-President (Night): Scott Smith
- Secretary: Meagan Merrill
- Treasurer: Michael Allen

EXECUTIVE SLATE #1

- President: Bill Saint

- Vice-President (Day): Jenna Zent

- Vice-President (Night): AT Young

- Secretary: Hillary Knipstein

- Treasurer: David Rogers

2L DAY REPRESENTATIVE:
- Aaron Culp
- Jennifer Wilson

ABA REPRESENTATIVE:
- Lucas Sayre

Elections

2006-03-30T09:28:00.000-05:00

SBA Elections begin today. These are the candidates:

EXECUTIVE SLATE #1
- President: Bill Saint
- Vice-President (Day): Jenna Zent
- Vice-President (Night): AT Young
- Secretary: Hillary Knipstein
- Treasurer: David Rogers

EXECUTIVE SLATE #2
- President: Matthew Morgan
- Vice-President (Day): Pratik Patel
- Vice-President (Night): Scott Smith
- Secretary: Meagan Merrill
- Treasurer: Michael Allen

2L DAY REPRESENTATIVE:
- Aaron Culp
- Jennifer Wilson

ABA REPRESENTATIVE:
- Lucas Sayre

Voting will take place today and tomorrow in the atrium from 11:30 AM-1:30 PM and 4:30 PM-6:00 PM. Graduating students are not eligible to vote.

If you were wondering whether I copied and pasted most of this from Christopher Americanos' e-mail from Monday, "Yeah, pretty much," but now, you are reminded of it.

Breaking News: IU-Indy moves up 77th

2006-03-29T10:25:00.000-05:00

A copy of the latest U.S. News & World Report law school rankings has been leaked, and in the rankings, IU Law-Indy has moved up to 77th. Since the rankings have not been officially released, this document's authenticity cannot be verified.

A look at the state's other law schools reveals the following: Notre Dame in a 4-way tie at 22nd, IU-Bloomington in a 2-way tie at 37th, and Valparaiso not in the top 100.

More coverage planned...

Note: Last year, IU-Indy was ranked 95th, and two years ago it was ranked 63rd.

Taliban at Yale

2006-03-23T14:56:00.000-05:00

John Fund has a column in the Wall Street Journal regarding the Taliban member who is a student at Yale. The column certainly does not protray Yale in a very good light on this matter. But Fund has a good point. Here's his closing:

There is a line beyond which tolerance and political correctness become willful blindness. Eli Muller, a reporter for the Yale Daily News, was stunned back in 2000 when the lies of another Taliban spokesman who visited Yale "went nearly unchallenged." He concluded that the "moral overconfidence of Yale students makes them subject to manipulation by people who are genuinely evil." Today, you can say that about more than just some naïve students. You can add the administrators who abdicated their moral responsibility and admitted Mr. Hashemi.

There are people in this world who really are evil. But some refuse to admit this--they instead subscribe to the philosophy of total moral relativity. The more people in the West that think this way, the more Islamist terrorists will make gains.

Law prof at Memphis bans laptops in class

2006-03-23T14:51:00.000-05:00

A law professor at the University of Memphis has banned laptops in her class room. Professor June Entman says they are too distracting.

As can be expected, "[t]he move didn't sit well with the students, who have begun collecting signatures against the move and tried to file a complaint with the American Bar Association. The complaint, based on an ABA rule for technology at law schools, was dismissed."

Well, I should clarify. I would have expected the students to be upset. I'm more than a bit surprised that they have gone so far as to file a complaint with the ABA. Since when did having a laptop in school become a right?

Legal news from The Onion

2006-03-22T15:53:00.000-05:00

This is from The Onion's latest news-in-brief, headline "Constructionist Supreme Court To Revisit Women's Suffrage":

WASHINGTON, DC—The Supreme Court, demonstrating its new constructionist leaning since the appointment of Justice Samuel Alito, will re-examine arguments behind the 19th Amendment this week. "There was no constitutional precedent for amending the law of the land so dramatically," the Heritage Foundation's Trent England said Monday. "A case could be made on social grounds, but what the Court will determine is exactly what the framers of the Constitution wanted." While it's difficult to predict an outcome, observers believe Ruth Bader Ginsburg will use her three-fifths of a vote to oppose.

Professor Bradford filed amicus brief in Rumsfeld v. FAIR

2006-03-08T11:38:00.000-05:00

A friend of mine found this amicus brief on Georgetown Law's website. Check out page 9 of the .pdf to see Professor Bradford listed as one of the amici curiae. The brief supports the government's position in favor of the Solomon Amendment.

The brief can also be retrieved on LexisNexis, using the citation: 2005 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 455. Lexis lists the brief's filing date as July 18, 2005, explaining why Professor Bradford listed himself as a member of the Indiana law faculty.

Proposed NJ law to prohibit anonymous online forum posts

2006-03-07T15:46:00.000-05:00

The law would hold liable certain internet service providers and online content providers for defamatory messages posted on an online forum. Additionally, paragraph 3 provides:

An operator of an interactive computer service or an Internet service provider shall establish and maintain reasonable procedures to enable any person to request and obtain disclosure of the legal name and address of an information content provider who posts false or defamatory information about the person on a public forum website.

An "information content provider" is defined as "any person or entity that is responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation or development of information provided through the Internet or any other interactive computer service."

Read the text of the proposed law here.

Prom Advice?

2006-03-07T12:12:00.000-05:00

Reporter Abe Aamidor of The Indianapolis Star is hoping to speak with veterans of high school and college proms (e.g., people who are now out of school) about their prom experiences, what they liked, what they'd do differently, and advice they'd give to first-time prom-goers this year.

Your experiences at the recent Barrister's Ball (otherwise known as the "law school prom") may be helpful, but so would your undergraduate and high school experiences. He is mostly looking for Indiana residents or natives. You can contact Abe at abe.aamidor@indystar.com or 317-444-6472.

Ohio lawmaker proposes ban on adoption by GOPers

2006-02-28T16:30:00.000-05:00

This article's headline is eye-catching, is it not? But as expected, this proposal by Democrat state senator, Robert Hagan, is tongue-in-cheek-- a spoof to protest a measure introduced by an Ohio house Republican that would forbid households with a prospective gay parent from adopting.

Hagan called that measure divisive and homophobic... And I agree. I have yet to see credible evidence showing that homosexuals are unable to be effective adoptive parents.

[thanks to Alan Bauerle for the link]

Teenager versus the city of Kokomo

2006-02-22T14:21:00.000-05:00

According to this Kokomo Tribune article, a Western High School student has won his lawsuit against the city of Kokomo. The 16-year old student, Ryan Nees, wanted the city to give him a copy of the city's newsletter e-mail address list. He wanted to compare the list to the addresses in the mayor's campaign list.

Claiming authority under Indiana law, the city attempted to restrict Nees to hand copying the records at city building. The law in question, according to the article, specifically refers to mailing addresses and fails to mention e-mail addresses. Howard Circuit Judge Lynn Murray, however, granted Nees' request, arguing that if the law is to cover e-mail addresses, it is a matter for the General Assembly to cover in revising the law.

Supreme Court to hear partial-birth abortion case

2006-02-22T14:09:00.000-05:00

The Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear a case on the constitutionality of the partial-birth abortion ban. Congress passed the law in 2003, but it never entered effect, as several federal judges have declared it unconstitutional.

In 2000, the Supreme Court struck a state law banning the procedure, with Justice O'Connor as the tie-breaking vote. With Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito now on the court, the decision is expected to be otherwise this time around. Plus, the fact that the court even decided to hear this case signals that they are likely to produce a change in the jurisprudence.

How Not To Decline A Job Offer.

2006-02-16T22:01:00.000-05:00

A small Boston area criminal defense firm wanted to hire a 2004 graduate who passed the Massachusetts bar. William A. Korman decided to hire Dianna L. Abdala, 24, a 2004 graduate of Suffolk University Law School. Ms. Abdala left a voice mail the night before she was to start on February 6 declining the job offer. Both parties agree to the basic facts though Ms. Abdala claims to have been pondering the job offer and hadn’t accepted it yet. A series of interesting voice mails and email exchanges took place. Sacha Pfeiffer of The Boston Globe notes [free registration required], “Once again, a friendly reminder: The next time you're tempted to send a nasty, exasperated, or snippy e-mail, pause, take a deep breath, and think again.”

Below are the emails Korman and Abdala sent. The only editing performed is to reverse the chronological order to be read from top to bottom.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dianna Abdala
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 9:23 PM
To:
Subject: Thank you

Dear Attorney Korman,

At this time, I am writing to inform you that I will not be accepting your offer.

After careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that the pay you are offering would neither fulfill me nor support the lifestyle I am living in light of the work I would be doing for you. I have decided instead to work for myself, and reap 100% of the benefits that I sew.

Thank you for the interviews.

Dianna L. Abdala, Esq.

----- Original Message -----
From: William A. Korman
To: 'Dianna Abdala'
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 12:15 PM
Subject: RE: Thank you

Dianna -

Given that you had two interviews, were offered and accepted the job (indeed, you had a definite start date), I am surprised that you chose an e-mail and a 9:30 PM voicemail message to convey this information to me. It smacks of immaturity and is quite unprofessional. Indeed, I did rely upon your acceptance by ordering stationary and business cards with your name, reformatting a computer and setting up both internal and external e-mails for you here at the office. While I do not quarrel with your reasoning, I am extremely disappointed in the way this played out. I sincerely wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors.

- Will Korman

-----Original Message-----
From: Dianna Abdala
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 4:01 PM
To: William A. Korman
Subject: Re: Thank you

A real lawyer would have put the contract into writing and not exercised any such reliance until he did so.

Again, thank you.

----- Original Message -----
From: William A. Korman
To: 'Dianna Abdala'
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 4:18 PM
Subject: RE: Thank you

Thank you for the refresher course on contracts. This is not a bar exam question. You need to realize that this is a very small legal community, especially the criminal defense bar. Do you really want to start pissing off more experienced lawyers at this early stage of your career?

-----Original Message-----
From: Dianna Abdala
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 4:29 PM
To: William A. Korman
Subject: Re: Thank you

bla bla bla

____________________________

After that final email Mr. Korman forwarded the email series to a colleague and noted a similar series of voice mails occurred.

From the Boston Globe article, “''It almost sounds too obvious, but I'll say it: You should never write an e-mail that you are not willing to see preserved forever in history," said Boston Bar Association president-elect Jack Cinquegrana, who frequently handles cases that use e-mail as evidence.”

In case you’re curious the position is not open at this time.

An unfortunate loss

2006-02-16T15:10:00.000-05:00

News that Shannon Williams is leaving the law school staff should come as sorry news for everyone associated with the law school. Given the generally negative comments following the post below I wanted to take the liberty of offering a different take here.

Although Shannon's contributions to the school community are wide and deep, I'll begin with her primary job in leading the Office of Professional Development. In that capacity she is charged with assisting students in finding jobs following graduation. Statistics consistently indicate that 70-75% of all legal jobs are found through networking (see Emory as one example). Many of these positions are never advertised. In other words, the vast majority of law school graduates must rely on their own networking skills to chart their future. It seems as though too many students want less of a job search facilitator in the OPD and more of a job search manager. Besides being impractical, it's ineffective. Ultimately we the students are the best advocates for why we should be hired and it is up to us to make that case.

But that doesn't mean the OPD is irrelevant. It should offer advice on resumes, arrange on campus interviews and, when asked, help connect students with alumni. Under Shannon the office has tripled in size, allowing for tremendously more personalized help. Thanks to improvements in internet scheduling, on campus interviews are easier to arrange. To be sure, there is still room for improvement. There always is. But Shannon's tireless efforts have drastically improved the OPD.

Finally, I've seen Shannon do things for the law school behind the scenes for which she receives far too little credit. She founded the Indianapolis Bar Association's Law Student Division Executive Committee, a committee on which I serve. Shannon was the driving force behind this board which helps put on numerous events such as take a law student to lunch day, kickball, summer connection, and much more.

Shannon often goes about her work with so much humility that she doesn't garner the attention and recognition she deserves. I for one am sorry to see her leave, but I trust that she will make an equally significant impact for new lawyers at Baker & Daniels. I can only hope that Shannon's successor is as dedicated as she is.

Shannon Williams informs students that she will be leaving the law school

2006-02-14T14:42:00.000-05:00

She sent the following letter to the law school listserv:

<<
With somewhat of a heavy heart, I will be leaving the law school and my position as Director of Professional Development and Pro Bono Programs. After over twelve years with the law school and six of those serving as Director, I have decided that a new career direction is appropriate for me at this time. I have been hired by Baker & Daniels to serve as their Manager of New Lawyer Hiring and IÂm very excited about this new opportunity. My official last day with the law school will be Friday, March 10.

As I look back to six years ago, IÂm very proud of what I have been able to accomplish as the Director of this office. When I started as Director the office had not been converted technologically at all Â and now to see that almost all we do is electronic in nature is amazing. The staff size was one professional and an administrative person Â we now have three professionals and a part-time administrative person. There was not a separate person overseeing the Pro Bono Program Â we now have a professional over that area (LaWanda has done a tremendous job) and have seen the Pro Bono Program grow to wonderful levels of recognition nationally. IÂm proud of all the programming I was able to initiate to hopefully serve our students and alumni in the best ways possible. I know that there is always more that could be done in the eyes of the student body Â but with the number of staff we have I am proud of what we are able to achieve on a daily basis.

Of course, I did not do this on my own Â I was fortunate to be able to retain wonderful team members especially LaWanda Ward, Chasity Adewopo, and Kristi Dietz who share the same vision of serving our student body and alumni base. I have also been privileged to serve under Deans who believed in me and what my vision for the office was and gave me complete control to do as I thought best Â I will always be grateful for that opportunity. I am particularly thankful to Norm Lefstein for giving me the opportunity to prove myself as Director and Jonna MacDougall who served as my boss for many years during my first Âgo aroundÂ at the law school and taught me so much.

I will definitely miss my law school family Â but will always have fond memories of the opportunities I was given and the wonderful friendships I made during my years here. It has been an honor to serve this law school, its student body and alumni base. I truly believe in this school and the students who attend here Â and I wish all of you the very best in your future endeavors.

Take Care
Shannon :-)
>>

As the administration begins the process to hire a new director of the office of Professional Development, it is important that students and professors both give significant input on the direction they'd like the office to take.

Come see the Law Revue Talent Show!

2006-02-10T10:45:00.000-05:00

What: "Using our patented 'Actual Reality' technology, you'll see music, comedy, drama, and... dramedy, all LIVE right BEFORE YOUR EYES! It's like the performers are right there in the room! Because they are! Tickets are available AT THE DOOR for just $5 and include an entry to win one of our fabulous door prizes. And best of all, proceeds go to benefit the Loan Repayment Assistance Program Endowment! The show is family friendly so bring your kids!! CASH BAR of BEER AND WINE!!! Don't miss it!" - Lauren Biloski

When: Tomorrow, Saturday Feb. 11 @ 7 P.M.

Where: the law school atrium

***CORRECTION: this post originally misstated the time as 11 P.M. The correct time, 7 P.M. is now listed...

Honoring the Great Communicator

2006-02-06T16:15:00.000-05:00

Today is the anniversary of President Ronald Reagan's birth in 1911. Recommended reading: his Wikipedia bio, his IMDB actor profile, and this list of his speeches in full text.

Perhaps Reagan's greatest feature was that he united our country in a way that would be thought unthinkable by today's partisan standards. And for those who doubt that statement last statement, I suggest your perusal of this 1984 presidential electoral map:

President Reagan accomplished this through a political attitude best embodied by this quote pulled from his 1980 Nomination acceptance speech:

"Trust me" government asks that we concentrate our hopes and dreams on one man; that we trust him to do what's best for us. My view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons and parties. The trust is where it belongs--in the people. The responsibility to live up to that trust is where it belongs, in their elected leaders. That kind of relationship, between the people and their elected leaders, is a special kind of compact.

This is, perhaps, a lesson that both President George W. Bush and the Congressional Democrats should take to heart.

A victory!

2006-01-30T17:02:00.000-05:00

In my recent posts on the confirmation process of Samuel Alito, I have remained relatively silent in giving my own opinion on the matter. Now, with a successful cloture vote just having been recorded, the path is clear for a simple majority to confirm Alito tomorrow morning.

And I have no qualms declaring this a victory, not just for Republicans, but for all Americans. It is a victory because the process worked, and the growing politicization of the court succumbed to reason and a fair treatment of a fair nominee.

The vote to end debate (and avoid a filibuster) was 72-25, with over a third of the Democrats voting to give Alito an up-or-down vote tomorrow morning. Several of these same Democrats will probably vote against Alito in the actual confirmation vote, showing that they understand the gravity of using the filibuster tactic. They may disagree with some or much of Alito's ideology, but they also realize that the filibuster should only be used in truly extreme situations. Built into this realization is the notion that Supreme Court justices are to exercise an independent mind and they are not a rubber stamp of those who nominate and confirm them.

Additionally, once confirmed, if Alito sticks to a textual mode of Constitutional interpretation as expected, his presence on the Court should serve to further depoliticize it. I'll let Justice Scalia explain (from his dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey):

In truth, I am as distressed as the Court is -- and expressed my distress several years ago, see Webster, 492 U.S. at 535 -- about the "political pressure" directed to the Court: the marches, the mail, the protests aimed at inducing us to change our opinions. How upsetting it is, that so many of our citizens (good people, not lawless ones, on both sides of this abortion issue, and on various sides of other issues as well) think that we Justices should properly take into account their views, as though we were engaged not in ascertaining an objective law but in determining some kind of social consensus. The Court would profit, I think, from giving less attention to the fact of this distressing phenomenon, and more attention to the cause of it. That cause permeates today's opinion: a new mode of constitutional adjudication that relies not upon text and traditional practice to determine the law, but upon what the Court calls "reasoned judgment," ante, 505 U.S. at 849, which turns out to be nothing but philosophical predilection and moral intuition. [emphasis added]

It is my upmost hope that when the tables are turned -- when Republicans finds themselves in the minority with a Democratic president -- that they show a similar respect to the confirmation process as these brave cloture-voting Democrats have shown.

[Tomorrow I'll have a post discussing the impact that Alito could have on the Court's jurisprudence]

Bush's wiretapping

2006-01-18T10:41:00.000-05:00

President Bush's clandestine domestic wiretapping program has drawn ire from those who feel it violates individuals' civil liberties, and praise from those who feel it is necessary to discover terrorists operating on U.S. soil. And now the first lawsuits challenging the program have been filed.

The question of the program's legality is at the forefront of the news and is also the topic of this semester's Moot Court competition. The Bush administration has claimed legal foundation for its program under two sources: its general Article II war powers and statutory power under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).*

Since I do not yet have a well-researched opinion on the matter, I will provide links to interesting articles and legal opinions from time to time.

Let me first direct you to this post by a buddy of mine (and fellow former Domer), Chris Letkewicz, which is skeptical of the Bush administration's legal claims and provides a lot of information on FISA and many helpful links.

Finally, Wired has a column questioning the efficacy of mass surveillance by the government.

*As purportedly excepted by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force

Prof. Cooper retiring

2006-01-17T11:00:00.000-05:00

From blogging anyway. After three years of being the school's only blogging professor, Prof. Cooper offers his goodbye here.

Breaking News: IU's Herbert to Leave

2006-01-13T17:56:00.000-05:00

The Indianapolis Star reports the following:

Indiana University President Adam Herbert told trustees today that he will quit when his contract runs out in 2008, a move that signals his surrender in a long battle with Bloomington faculty members, IU alumni, state leaders and other critics who have questioned whether Herbert was up to the job.

The decision also effectively puts to rest the question of whether the trustees will consider an unprecedented midyear job review of Herbert, a decision they were expected to make Saturday.

Herbert, who is about halfway through is five-year contract, requested a head start to the search for his replacement, according to his letter to the nine-member trustees board.

Alito unstoppable?

2006-01-11T16:21:00.000-05:00

After the third (and final ?) day of the Alito confirmation hearing, many are predicting that he will be confirmed without much difficulty. I have viewed most of the hearing thus and it is my observation that he has handled and deflected the two main issues that Democratic opponents used to attack him: his non-recusal in the Vanguard case, and his membership in the Concerned Alumni of Princeton.

To get a handle on these two issues and Judge Alito's responses, I recommend going to CSPAN.org.

This snapshot from the (usually conservative) Drudge Report displays the sentiment of confidence from the right.

Annoying Law Forbids Annoyances

2006-01-09T19:44:00.000-05:00

There's a highly disturbing story in CNET titled, "Create an e-annoyance, go to jail." It begins:

Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.

It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.

Sen. Arlen Specter apparently burried the law in the "Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act," carrying stiff fines and up to two years in prison. Here's the relevant language in Sec. 113:

"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

I've written a longer analysis of this at Indiana Barrister.

Welcome back! (to the Supreme Court?)

2006-01-07T15:07:00.000-05:00

Welcome back, everybody. I hope your break was peaceful, relaxing, and blessed. If you're like me, these last few weeks without the socratic method and argument have been quite refreshing. But of course, by refreshing, I mean to say that I've been energized for yet another several-month stint of argument and debate-- all constructive ganz klar!

And now that the Senate has also had their break, the confirmation hearings for Judge Alito should begin soon (we hope). Will he waltz onto the Supreme Court, as John Roberts did? This AP article does a good job spelling out his outlook.

2006-01-03T13:43:00.000-05:00

Breaking News

"Activist Judge Cancels Christmas"

2005-12-16T08:20:00.000-05:00

Here are some excerpts from The Onion's take on the "war for Christmas":

WASHINGTON, DCÂIn a sudden and unexpected blow to the Americans working to protect the holiday, liberal U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Reinhardt ruled the private celebration of Christmas unconstitutional Monday.

"In accordance with my activist agenda to secularize the nation, this court finds Christmas to be unlawful," Judge Reinhardt said. "The celebration of the birth of the philosopher JesusÂbe it in the form of gift-giving, the singing of carols, fanciful decorations, or general good cheer and warm feelings amongst familiesÂis in violation of the First Amendment principles upon which this great nation was founded." ...

America's children are bearing the brunt of Reinhardt's marginal, activist rulings.

"Why did the bad man take away Christmas?" 5-year-old Danny Dover said. "I made a card for my mommy out of paper and glue, and now I can't give it to her."

Shortly after Dover issued his statement, police kicked down his door, removed his holiday tree, confiscated his presents, and crushed his homemade card underfoot...

"Our hearts go out to the Americans this ruling affects," Sen. Chip Pickering (R-MS) said. "If it's any condolence, I wish you all a Happy Holidays, which, I'm afraid, is all I'm legally allowed to say at this time."

"The Liberal Case for the Solomon Amendment"

2005-12-14T23:46:00.000-05:00

The Solomon Amendment, which denies federal funding to universities that bar military recruiters, has been the subject of much controversy in recent years as an increasing number of universities wish to ban career recruiters from organizations that discriminate against homosexuals. The amendment is the subject of a case awaiting decision from the Supreme Court.

Typically, liberals are portrayed as opposing the Solomon Amendment (on gay rights grounds), but the issue is certainly one which transcends party lines to a certain extent.

Thus, this column from The New Republic which makes a case for liberals to support the Solomon Amendment, is quite interesting. The column basically argues that the Solomon Amendment promotes class diversity in the nation's military. I'm not convinced, but read it for yourself.

Indiana State to Start Law School?

2005-12-11T17:02:00.000-05:00

From Saturday's Fort Wayne Journal Gazette: Indiana State to Study Possibility of Opening Law School:

Indiana State University officials are considering whether to start the state's third public law school, saying many interested students are not being admitted elsewhere because of a lack of space. A feasibility study to be done by the school and the Indianapolis law firm Barnes and Thornburg is to be finished in June.

...

But the announcement took school faculty and state higher education officials by surprise.

"We know very little about it," said Stan Jones, the state's higher education commissioner. "I think we need to be certain we really have a need in the state for another law school before we would walk down that path."

On this date in 1816

2005-12-11T09:31:00.000-05:00

...Indiana became the 19th U.S. state.

Faculty news

2005-12-07T11:51:00.000-05:00

Prof. William F. Harvey, who in many ways is a father figure to the law school, will be roasted at a dinner hosted by the Indianapolis Legal Aid Society. In other faculty news, rising star Professor Gerard Magliocca recently gave a presentation at New York University Law School as part of their Legal History Colloquium. His presentation was taken from his upcoming book, One Turn of the Wheel: Andrew Jackson and the Modern Constitution. The school website quotes him as saying:

"This book takes a new look at how constitutional law is created and destroyed. In it, I argue that the primary force shaping our legal institutions and practices is a competition between different generations that collide according to a regular and predictable pattern. To see this constitutional cycle in motion, the text focuses on the rise and fall of one of these creative generations -- Jacksonian Democracy. In the process, the study dramatically reinterprets the landmarks of the ante-bellum era, including Marshall's opinion in M'Culloch v. Maryland, the removal of the Cherokee Tribe along ‘The Trail of Tears,’ the infamous Dred Scott opinion, and the origins of the Fourteenth Amendment."

I've read the first chapter of the book and I can honestly say I expect it to be one of the best books on legal history I've read.

"Web of Lies"

2005-12-07T11:31:00.000-05:00

Inside Higher Ed carries an article on the Bradford affair titled, "Web of Lies," which seems very well written. Prof. Eugene Volokh of The Volokh Conspiracy, one of the most widely read legal weblogs in the country, also offers this post on the subject. Much of it is a summary of the events that have transpired, but Prof. Volokh also includes an email that Bradford recently sent to him.

Wikipedia

2005-12-05T18:03:00.000-05:00

One of the greatest internet experiments of all time is in the midst of tweaking its policy.

Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia that allows anyone to contribute articles, is tightening its rules for submitting entries following the disclosure that it ran a piece falsely implicating a man in the Kennedy assassinations. Wikipedia will now require users to register before they can create articles, Jimmy Wales, founder of the St. Petersburg, Fla.-based Web site, said Monday.

Considering that you don't need an email address or any other bona fide identifying fact to register, I'm not sure how much this will truly change things. As an interesting aside, there are several Wikipedia articles related to the school. Here's the link to the school's main article.

A graphic representation of final exams

2005-12-05T00:00:00.000-05:00

Click here. (Warning: When I say "graphic," I mean graphic.)

"Truth comes out"

2005-12-04T08:51:00.000-05:00

Infamous Indianapolis Star columnist Ruth Holladay, who in many ways helped catapult the Bradford/Roisman discussion to the national stage, offers what appears to be a mea culpa in today's paper. Holladay offers an abbreviated account of Bradford's now-debunked claims, her initial column, and the subsequent fallout on this blog and elsewhere. She concludes with a quote from Prof. Karlson that sums it all up quite nicely: "I don't think that anyone comes off looking very good in this."

Professor Bradford resigns

2005-12-01T21:57:00.000-05:00

According to more than one source, Professor Bradford has submitted a letter of resignation to the university.

I am awaiting confirmation from the Dean and from Bradford himself, and I will post the letter of resignation if possible.

Update: Dean Mead has confirmed his receipt of his resignation and will be sending a statement to the student body.

C-SPAN to Air Same Day Oral Argument in Abortion Case

2005-11-30T01:28:00.000-05:00

The WashPost's excellent Campaign for the Supreme Court blog carries this blurb from a C-SPAN press release:

Wednesday's one-hour, Supreme Court oral argument in a noted abortion case will air at approximately 12:15 p.m. ET on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Radio and c-span.org as soon as the recording is released by the Court.

The Supreme Court agreed earlier this month to the same-day release of audio recordings of oral arguments in two upcoming cases of particular national interest, in response to a request from C-SPAN.

The two cases to be aired on C-SPAN are today's Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England abortion case and a December 6th military recruitment case, Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic & Institutional Rights.

...

I realize that the same-day airing of only two cases will not cause earth-shattering effects, but I sincerely hope that this does not mark the beginning of a trend. Lawyers arguing before the justices should only be concerned with one thing: convincing those justices of their case. Likewise, the justices should only be concerned with hearing those lawyers and asking them insightful questions.

This argument is not new: live or same-day airing of oral arguments would politicize the court and would thus be a harmful development. The lawyers and the justices would be tempted to pander to public opinion, even though they are not and should not be beholden to it. The court already has been overly politicized and we see the result: a populace which is dangerously ignorant regarding its function. Too many people see the justices as representatives and the court as a super-legislative body.

We see the result: confirmation hearings that threaten to shut down the Senate and that involve investigations into nominees' video rental records.

So why should we fan the flames by airing oral arguments like this? I say the current level of publicity and transparency is quite sufficient.

Just so you know

2005-11-29T08:18:00.000-05:00

Room 235D, a computer lab, was reserved on November 10 from 10:45-1PM.

Padilla indicted... after 3 years in prison

2005-11-23T10:49:00.000-05:00

Three years after being detained Jose Padilla, accused of planning a radiological attack (dirty bomb) in America, has finally been indicted. I echo Andrew Sullivan's comments in this post, that while I have no sympathy for terrorists, an American citizen should not be held this long without formal charges.

Whatever happened to the fifth and sixth amendments?

Update: In the original version of this post, I mistakenly stated that Padilla was responsible for bringing a shoe-bomb on an airplane. The current version of the post contains the correction.

Tip to legislators...

2005-11-23T10:18:00.000-05:00

...write your statutes specifically enough and you'll avoid nasty "little" philosophical questions such as this: is an unborn baby a "person" under your High-Occupancy Vehicle law?

Academic Blogging

2005-11-16T16:04:00.000-05:00

I liked the discussion following this post on law professors blogging. As the post made clear, I favor it, but several commenters offered good opposing arguments. Robert S. Boynton has written an interesting piece on the subject in Slate. Here's a quote:

. . . [A]cademic blogging represents the fruition, not a betrayal, of the university's ideals. One might argue that blogging is in fact the very embodiment of what the political philosopher Michael Oakshott once called "The Conversation of Mankind"—an endless, thoroughly democratic dialogue about the best ideas and artifacts of our culture. Drezner's blog, for example, is hardly of the "This is what I did today …" variety. Rather, he usually writes about globalization and political economy—the very subjects on which he publishes in prestigious, peer-reviewed presses and journals. If his prose style in the blog is more engaging than that of the typical academic's, the thinking behind it is no less rigorous or intelligent.

(Via Prof. Orin Kerr, who also offers worthwhile commentary that begins, "in some ways, academic blogging is more challenging than traditional scholarly writing.")

Anti-white bias at SIU?

2005-11-12T10:49:00.000-05:00

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, the government may sue Southern Illinois University (SIU) for discriminating against whites, Asians, males, and anyone else who's not black and female:

"The University has engaged in a pattern or practice of intentional discrimination against whites, non-preferred minorities and males," says a Justice Department letter sent to the university last week and obtained by the Chicago Sun-Times.

The letter demands the university cease the fellowship programs, or the department's civil rights division will sue SIU by Nov. 18.

The article lists three fellowships in question, including one "For underrepresented minority students to initiate graduate study in science, technology, engineering and math." One of the primary laws cited is Title VII of Civil Rights Act. In a 2003 decision, Grutter vs. Bollinger, the Supreme Court said in a 5-4 ruling that race could be included as a factor in determining admissions, but not the sole factor.

Liberal Illinois Senator Barack Obama accuses the Bush administration of trying to divide voters. "One of my concerns has been with all the problems the Bush administration is having, that they’ll start resorting to what they consider to be wedge issues as a way of helping themselves politically." But race-based scholarships aren't divisive? Obama's logic seems backward.

From my brief inspection of two of the fellowships, race appears to be the only factor. The outcome of this DOJ pressure, and any subsequent litigation, will have far-reaching implications on the scholarship culture and, in turn, higher education across the country.

The results are in!

2005-11-12T08:21:00.000-05:00

Congratulations to all those making 2005 Order of the Barristers.

The Great Debate

2005-11-10T21:50:00.000-05:00

If you had a choice, would you chose a regular in-class written exam, or a 24 to 48 hour take home exam? Here's my take.

2005-11-08T16:02:00.000-05:00

Census of Law Professor Bloggers
Daniel J. Solove at Concurring Opinions has updated his very useful census of law professors who blog. He counts 182 bloggers, an increase of 40% from his June 2005 census. The law schools with the most bloggers are:

Chicago (14)
UCLA (7)
San Diego (7)
GW (5)
George Mason (5)
Stanford (4)
Northwestern (4)
Ohio State (4)
U.C. Davis (4)
Cincinnati (4)

Despite my consistent urging, professors at IU-Indy remain apathetic about academia's future medium. Professor Cooper is the school's only blogging professor.

Update: Prof. Glenn Reynolds writes, "Interestingly, the presence of blogging faculty seems to correlate with higher rankings."

More on Alito

2005-11-08T13:23:00.000-05:00

- Interested in Judge Alito's ideological underpinnings? Check out this excellent and thorough NYTimes article which discusses Alito's conservatism and his ideological roots.

- If Judge Alito is confirmed, a majority of the Supreme Court would be Catholic. Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and now Roberts are the current Catholic members of the court. This WashPost article looks at the historical developments that led to conservative Catholics' increased participation in constitutional law.

- Finally, Senator Joseph Biden, a potential Democratic presidential nominee, says that Senate Democrats will be unlikely to filibuster Alito's confirmation. On this note, this blogger admit to being mildly surprised.

Too Many Law Schools

2005-11-03T18:17:00.000-05:00

Inside Higher Education reports on the increase in the number of law schools over the past few years.

There is no shortage of jokes about the United States having too many lawyers. If there are any corollaries about law schools, the punch lines are falling on deaf ears at a host of institutions that have plans to open law schools.

Since 2003, at least seven new law schools have opened, and several more are on the way, including three that were announced this month at Drexel and Elon Universities and Mills College. Officials at some of those institutions said the new law schools are not just adding more desks, but will fill particular niches. Student demand suggests that the new schools are welcomed. . . .

John A. Sebert, the consultant on legal education to the American Bar Association, said that new law schools have generally been started by for-profit or religious institutions, or in states that perceive a dearth of lawyers. Liberty University School of Law, which opened in 2004, is one of the young religiously affiliated schools. On the blog of Bruce W. Green, the dean of the Liberty law school, the April 8, 2003 entry points out that the opening of law schools has not kept pace with population growth.

Still, some people, and not just bankers in need of lawyer jokes, wish there were less need to open more law schools.

Robert J. D’Agostino, a professor at the John Marshall Law School, thinks that, while the job market may suggest a need for more lawyers, an unfortunate trend of lawyers and judges effectively “becoming legislators,” he said, is pushing the need for more lawyers.

D’Agostino pointed to high profile class action suits – often against gun and cigarette manufacturers – where lawyers have “attempted to legislate by running companies out of business. It’s expanding tort law to blend into the legislative arena,” he said. “We had to have the vaccine companies threaten to pull out of the country” before the government stepped in, he said, referring to cases in which a small number of people adversely affected by a useful vaccine stood to win massive amounts of money in court.

An issue close-at-hand

2005-11-03T10:53:00.000-05:00

The legal question is a relatively new one: should internet sites be able to be forced to surrender subscriber lists and commenting information?

That is precisely the question now before a court in Maryland, a decision on which could influence litigation on this issue in other regions of the nation. From this AP article:

The publisher of a financial newsletter told Maryland's second highest court Wednesday that he should not be forced to disclose his subscriber list and other information sought by an Arizona company seeking those it says made defamatory online comments.

The publisher, Timothy M. Mulligan, told the judges "almost everything we publish could potentially be subpoenaed," putting him in the position of constantly appearing for depositions if his request to quash a subpoena by the Arizona drug company, Matrixx Initiatives, is denied.

The judges, however, appeared to side with Matrixx, repeatedly asking why Mulligan should not appear for the deposition and invoke his right not to reveal his subscribers and sources under Maryland's so-called "Shield Law," which protects the rights of the press.

"My sense is it didn't go well," Mulligan said after the hearing.

"It's not clear yet, but it will probably be in litigation for years because I have no intention of giving up my sources or subscribers."

After the hearing, Matrixx attorney David Tobin said "no one has the right to make defamatory comments. That is not protected speech."

Leiter's Law School Rankings

2005-11-02T10:43:00.000-05:00

The Law Professor Blog Network has announced the launch of Leiter's Law School Rankings by Brian Leiter, the Joseph D. Jamail Centennial Chair in Law at the University of Texas School of Law, in association with Law Professor Web Services LLC.

Leiter’s Law School Rankings (1) contains two brand new law school quality rankings, and (2) expands and redesigns the rankings material formerly maintained on the University of Texas School of Law web site.

The new 2005 rankings are:

Faculty Quality Rankings: Scholarly Impact (Citations), summarized below
Student Quality Rankings

Leiter’s Law School Rankings presents law school rankings material in seven categories:

Newest Rankings contains the latest 2005 rankings (Faculty Quality Rankings: Scholarly Impact (Citations) and Student Quality Rankings)
Faculty Rankings contains rankings of scholarly quality (as measured by reputation, productivity, and impact) and teaching quality, as well as a listing of faculty moves
Student Rankings contains rankings of student quality (as measured by LSAT scores and undergraduate GPAs)
Job Placement contains rankings of placement of students at elite law firms, a well as listings of where faculty went to law school and Supreme Court clerkships
U.S. News Rankings contains discussions of the U.S. News & World Report Law School Rankings and how the rankings on this site differ from U.S. News
Archives contains Educational Quality Rankings of U.S. Law Schools from earlier years
Links contains links to law review articles on law school rankings (the links are to the articles on SSRN, Hein-on-Line, and Westlaw, in that order of priority)

The impending nomination battle

2005-11-01T13:03:00.000-05:00

George Will offers his thoughts on the impending senate confirmation battle over Judge Alito. He notes the fact that Alito was unanimously confirmed by a Democrat-controlled Senate to the 3rd Circuit during George Bush, Sr.'s tenure, and ends his column:

This is a debate the President, who needs a victory, should relish. Will it, as Democrats mournfully say, "divide the country? Yes. Debates about serious subjects do that. The real reason those Democrats are mournful is that they correctly suspect they are on the losing side of the divide.

Indeed, the Democrats will be unable to stop Alito's confirmation. However, if they are correct in saying that Alito is antithetical to mainstream America, then the Republicans could take a political hit in '06 and '08.

Alito nominated

2005-10-31T09:01:00.000-05:00

President Bush has nominated Samuel Alito, a 3rd Circuit judge, for the Supreme Court. From this AP article:

Judicial conservatives praise Alito's 15 years on the Philadelphia-based court, a tenure that gives him more appellate experience than almost any previous Supreme Court nominee. They say his record shows a commitment to a strict interpretation of the Constitution, ensuring that the separation of powers and checks and balances are respected and enforced. They also contend that Alito has been a powerful voice for the First Amendment's guarantees of free speech and the free exercise of religion.

Update: Time has a short article that discusses differences between Alito and Scalia.

Libby indicted, Rove still under investigation

2005-10-28T13:16:00.000-04:00

Vice President Cheney's top advisor, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted today. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has filed the grand jury's indictment on a charge of obstruction of justice and perjury.

Meanwhile, Rove is still under investigation, and Fitzgerald could impanel a new grand jury to seek an indictment of Rove on similar charges. That grand jury would probably only take days, as they would have the complete record of the prior grand jury before them.

Update: Libby has resigned. If convicted on all five counts of his indictment, he could face up to 30 years of prison.

The letter

2005-10-27T10:10:00.000-04:00

Check out Miers' letter of withdrawal here. In the letter she states that the reason she chose to withdraw was to avoid tensions arising from Senators' request for privileged executive documents regarding her service as White House Counsel.

Update: Many pundits have stated their disbelief in Bush/Miers' claim that her withdrawal was out of concern for the balance of powers and for executive privilege. Count me as one of them. The reasoning contained in Miers' letter and in Bush's statement of acceptance of that letter is a form of subterfuge to distract people from the weakness of the nomination, by placing blame upon the Senate confirmation process.

Another Brief Supreme Court Update

2005-10-27T09:14:00.000-04:00

It was just announced that Harriet Miers has decided to withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court.

NAELA Student Journal Writing Competition

2005-10-25T13:08:00.000-04:00

The National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA) is offering a writing competition on topics related to one or more of the following three issues in an elder law practice: 1) diversity in senior housing, 2) diversity in access to health care, and 3) diversity in capacity and guardianship. The top eight articles selected will be published in the NAELA Student Journal in the spring of 2006. The writing competition will promote a greater interest in, and understanding of, elder law issues. This opportunity is open to all students in good standing who attend a law school within the United States. NAELA is pleased to offer a $1,500 cash prize for the best article submitted. The winner will be honored at the Spring 2006 NAELA Symposium in Washington D.C. and receive up to $1000 for travel and meeting related expenses. The second place winner receives $1000 cash, and the third place winner receives $500 cash. The top eight authors will also receive a complimentary one-year membership to NAELA. Follow these links for more and the competition flyer suitable for posting.