No one ever gets framed, really...
High School principal (with the "pal" at the end) attemted to frame a high school student, saying, "I know this isn't or wasn't ethical," but since "we both know he is dealing drugs, [ ] I wanted to catch him so I put drugs in the locker."
A blog devoted to law, politics, philosophy, & life. Nothing in this blog is to be construed as legal advice.
Wednesday, February 25, 2004
On children and puppies
At Crescat Sententia, a debate over whether to have children rages. (Well, "rages" isn't the right word).
My wife used to want to have children. Then we bought a puppy. Having to wake up early and stay up late (based on the whim of the puppy and how much he naps during the day), having to take the dog out 10 or 15 times a day (when we're lucky enough to catch him before he goes on the carpet), and having to be ready to jump up at a moment's notice to ensure the puppy does not destroy anything else has changed her mind. If having a puppy is this much stress, imagine what having a child would be like.
At Crescat Sententia, a debate over whether to have children rages. (Well, "rages" isn't the right word).
My wife used to want to have children. Then we bought a puppy. Having to wake up early and stay up late (based on the whim of the puppy and how much he naps during the day), having to take the dog out 10 or 15 times a day (when we're lucky enough to catch him before he goes on the carpet), and having to be ready to jump up at a moment's notice to ensure the puppy does not destroy anything else has changed her mind. If having a puppy is this much stress, imagine what having a child would be like.
Kid 'n Play
The Lock v. Davey decision is now available. It is a 7-2 decision written by C.J. Rehnquist. Rather than rely on the text of the Constitution, Rehnquist applies the "play in the joints doctrine." The doctrine "play in the joints" seeks to answer this question: Is it true that every time a funding decision would not violate the Establishment Clause then States must fund religious and non-religious groups equally or else violate the Free Exercise Clause? In other words, if a "faith-based" initiative would not violate the Establishment Clause, then must the State and Federal governments fund these initiatives because the Free Exercise Clause requires non-discriminatory funding?
Incidentally, this is not the first time "play in the joints" has been risent. See Groh v. Ramirez (No. 02-811), a Fourth Amendment case. Oral Argument Transcript at 40, Lines 20-24.
(Rehnquist asks: "Of course, that's really not what the Fourth Amendment says, is it? It just - it doesn't say you need - you need - I mean, surely there's some play in the joints, isn't there? It's - it categorically
prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, right?")
The Lock v. Davey decision is now available. It is a 7-2 decision written by C.J. Rehnquist. Rather than rely on the text of the Constitution, Rehnquist applies the "play in the joints doctrine." The doctrine "play in the joints" seeks to answer this question: Is it true that every time a funding decision would not violate the Establishment Clause then States must fund religious and non-religious groups equally or else violate the Free Exercise Clause? In other words, if a "faith-based" initiative would not violate the Establishment Clause, then must the State and Federal governments fund these initiatives because the Free Exercise Clause requires non-discriminatory funding?
Incidentally, this is not the first time "play in the joints" has been risent. See Groh v. Ramirez (No. 02-811), a Fourth Amendment case. Oral Argument Transcript at 40, Lines 20-24.
(Rehnquist asks: "Of course, that's really not what the Fourth Amendment says, is it? It just - it doesn't say you need - you need - I mean, surely there's some play in the joints, isn't there? It's - it categorically
prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, right?")
Heck v. Humphrey & Section 1983
Muhammad v. Close makes clear that the Heck v. Humphrey bar against Section 1983 claims applies only where the action attacks the underlying conviction or determination of actual confinement time. (Slip Opinion at 4-5)("His §1983 suit challenging this action could not therefore be construed as seeking a judgment at odds with his conviction or with the State’s calculation of time to be served in accordance with the underlying sentence. That is, he raised no claim on which habeas relief could have been granted on any recognized theory, with the consequence that Heck’s favorable termination requirement was inapplicable.")
Muhammad v. Close makes clear that the Heck v. Humphrey bar against Section 1983 claims applies only where the action attacks the underlying conviction or determination of actual confinement time. (Slip Opinion at 4-5)("His §1983 suit challenging this action could not therefore be construed as seeking a judgment at odds with his conviction or with the State’s calculation of time to be served in accordance with the underlying sentence. That is, he raised no claim on which habeas relief could have been granted on any recognized theory, with the consequence that Heck’s favorable termination requirement was inapplicable.")
Lawyer loses $150 an hour for poor writing.
In a civil rights case (where the prevailing plaintiff is awarded attorney's fees), the lawyer was compensated $300 per hour for his trial work. But this rate was cut in half for his written work because of its poor quality.
In a civil rights case (where the prevailing plaintiff is awarded attorney's fees), the lawyer was compensated $300 per hour for his trial work. But this rate was cut in half for his written work because of its poor quality.
Saturday, February 21, 2004
No meal reimbursement for work on Christmas Day
This exchange is so sad, for so many different reasons.
This exchange is so sad, for so many different reasons.
Friday, February 20, 2004
Capitalism meets Christ
I am a Christian and I am a capitalist. But this makes me sick:
"Replicas of the nails used to hang Jesus on the cross have become the red-hot official merchandise linked to Mel Gibson's controversial new movie, "The Passion of the Christ."
Pendants made from the pewter, 2 1/2-inch nails - selling for $16.99 - all but flew out of the Christian Publications Bookstore on West 43rd Street as soon as they were put on display.
"Hundreds of stores across the country will be selling licensed items tied to the movie, a graphically violent depiction of the last 12 hours of Christ's life, which opens next week on Ash Wednesday.
"The souvenirs include a book, pins, key chains, coffee mugs and T-shirts.
Instead donating more money to one of the many deserving charities, these consumers are wasting money on trikets, junk, and other possessions of this world.
I am a Christian and I am a capitalist. But this makes me sick:
"Replicas of the nails used to hang Jesus on the cross have become the red-hot official merchandise linked to Mel Gibson's controversial new movie, "The Passion of the Christ."
Pendants made from the pewter, 2 1/2-inch nails - selling for $16.99 - all but flew out of the Christian Publications Bookstore on West 43rd Street as soon as they were put on display.
"Hundreds of stores across the country will be selling licensed items tied to the movie, a graphically violent depiction of the last 12 hours of Christ's life, which opens next week on Ash Wednesday.
"The souvenirs include a book, pins, key chains, coffee mugs and T-shirts.
Instead donating more money to one of the many deserving charities, these consumers are wasting money on trikets, junk, and other possessions of this world.
"Getting More from Google"
If you are a googlephile, you will enjoy this article. (Requires free registration to the MIT Technology Review. With a smart-sounding title like that, who wouldn't register).
If you are a googlephile, you will enjoy this article. (Requires free registration to the MIT Technology Review. With a smart-sounding title like that, who wouldn't register).
Ex Enron CEO indicted
here.Jeff Skilling's lawyer is Daniel M. Petrocelli, a highly respected civil litigator. Petrocelli was lead council in the Simpson civil trial. I read his closing argument in that trial. His closing argument was among the best I have ever seen. The government has their hands full. One more reason to never be charged with a crime until you are very, very wealthy.
here.Jeff Skilling's lawyer is Daniel M. Petrocelli, a highly respected civil litigator. Petrocelli was lead council in the Simpson civil trial. I read his closing argument in that trial. His closing argument was among the best I have ever seen. The government has their hands full. One more reason to never be charged with a crime until you are very, very wealthy.
Breath out, start up.
CrimLaw links to an article discussing the New Mexico legislature's attempt to require all cars to have a device that requires the driver to blow into a breatalyzer before the ignition would start.
My hunch is this law would be invalid under the Dormant Commerce Clause as a undue burden on interstate commerce. I also think it would be invalid under a theory of field preemption due to the extensive involvement of the federal government.
CrimLaw links to an article discussing the New Mexico legislature's attempt to require all cars to have a device that requires the driver to blow into a breatalyzer before the ignition would start.
My hunch is this law would be invalid under the Dormant Commerce Clause as a undue burden on interstate commerce. I also think it would be invalid under a theory of field preemption due to the extensive involvement of the federal government.
Wednesday, February 18, 2004
The New Federalism?
ALAFAIR BURKE has a Findlaw column examining Sabri v. United States.
The United States surprised her (and me) when it argued that Congress had the power to enact the federal program bribery statute (18 U.S.C. 666(a)(2)) under the Necessary and Proper Clause.
ALAFAIR BURKE has a Findlaw column examining Sabri v. United States.
The United States surprised her (and me) when it argued that Congress had the power to enact the federal program bribery statute (18 U.S.C. 666(a)(2)) under the Necessary and Proper Clause.
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
Political advocacy in action - the filibuster that never was
I imagine someone could write an interesting human-interest piece about the Democrat filibusters of conservative nominees. What was it like for Miguel Estrada to be denied an up-or-down vote? How did his family feel seeing his integrity questioned? Did he grow stronger or weaker as a result of the experience? Is he cynical?
And what about Doug Kmiec? An article on him would have to be called: "The Filibuster that Never Was."
***December 9, 2002***
A balloon is thrown...
Legal Scholar Is Considered for Court
"President Bush is considering naming Douglas W. Kmiec, the dean of the law school at Catholic University and a prominent social conservative scholar, to the federal appeals court based in Washington, administration officials said today."
***DECEMBER 10, 2002***
The special interest groups attack...
Alliance for Justice Statement on Douglas Kmiec
Statement of Nan Aron, President of the Alliance for Justice, Regarding Possible Kmiec Nomination to Court of Appeals
"Washington, DC — The Alliance for Justice expressed grave concerns over reports that the White House is considering Professor Douglas Kmiec for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Alliance for Justice President Nan Aron noted: "Kmiec's record reflects an ultra-conservative philosophy opposing a woman's right to choose, bipartisan civil rights legislation and regulations on property. He would be a very poor, divisive choice for the D.C. Circuit."
The D.C. Circuit, widely viewed as the second most-important court in the country because of its unique jurisdiction and location in the nation's capital, is currently made up of four Democrat and four Republican appointees, with four vacancies. President Bush has previously nominated D.C. lawyers John Roberts and Miguel Estrada to the court. Battles over vacancies on the D.C. Circuit during the Clinton years were heated, with some Senate Republicans arguing that the workload of the court was such that the 11th and 12th vacancies did not need to be filled. On September 24, 2002, Senator Jeff Sessions reiterated his opposition to filling more than ten seats on the D.C. Circuit. Nonetheless, the White House is reportedly considering nominations, including Kmiec's, to fill the 11th and 12th seat.
Kmiec has stated that the Civil Rights Act of 1991 was likely to create racial quotas and should be declared unconstitutional. He has submitted Congressional testimony that "Abortion is more than the killing, it is also the coarsening of the American heart . . . . [A]bortion undermines all life." Kmiec has also written that many property regulations are unconstitutional unless they provide compensation to the property owners-a view that calls into question key environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act.
Responding to rumors of Kmiec's nomination, Aron said, "not only would Kmiec's nomination fly in the face of Senate Republicans' own assertions that an 11th judge on the court was not necessary, it would make a mockery of administration pledges of conciliation and cooperation and of President Bush's claims to be a `uniter not a divider.' It would be further evidence that this administration is intent on packing the courts with ultraconservatives, in direct contravention of the interests and will of the American people."
***DECEMBER 12, 2002***
The "mainstream" media begins throwing mud. [Do we really care if the guy put D.C. plates on his car within 30-days of his moving from California to D.C.? Even I don't care, and I am pretty intolerant of inconsistencies.]
Judge Scofflaw?
"After the New York Times claimed Tuesday that Catholic University Law School Dean Douglas W. Kmiec is on President Bush's short list for a coveted seat on the Washington federal appeals court, one of Kmiec's Northwest D.C. neighbors helpfully pointed out to us that he keeps California plates on his cars."
***DECEMBER 19, 2002***
The "mainstream" media coincidentally argues that maybe we don't need any new judges on the D.C. Circuit. [Do a survey. Ask any federal judge you know if he or she is "underworked".]
How Many Judges?
Thursday, December 19, 2002; Page A40
"YOU MIGHT NOT expect that the question of how many judges a court needs would become a festering political problem. But how to staff the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is threatening to become just that -- again. The court, which is one of the most important in the country, has 12 authorized judgeships. But during the Clinton administration, Republican senators blocked qualified nominees to its 11th and 12th seats; its declining workload made additional judges unnecessary, they said. Now President Bush, poised to win confirmation of nominees John G. Roberts and Miguel A. Estrada to the vacant ninth and 10th seats on the court, wants to fill the additional slots as well. An ugly fight could await the nominees, whoever they turn out to be."
***DECEMBER 19, 2002***
In the Wall Street Journal, Kmiec asks in vain that you...
Judge Me By My Work, Not By My Faith
"Last week, the New York Times reported that President Bush was considering
nominating me to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit. While many friends from my days in the Justice Department, former
students now practicing at law firms across the country, and sitting judges
wrote or called to encourage this development, a stark, inside-the- Beltway
question emerged from the report: Can an avowedly pro-life Catholic actually
serve on such court?"
[NOTE: I have the full-text of these articles. I do not know enough about Copyright to know if I can post them.]
I imagine someone could write an interesting human-interest piece about the Democrat filibusters of conservative nominees. What was it like for Miguel Estrada to be denied an up-or-down vote? How did his family feel seeing his integrity questioned? Did he grow stronger or weaker as a result of the experience? Is he cynical?
And what about Doug Kmiec? An article on him would have to be called: "The Filibuster that Never Was."
***December 9, 2002***
A balloon is thrown...
Legal Scholar Is Considered for Court
"President Bush is considering naming Douglas W. Kmiec, the dean of the law school at Catholic University and a prominent social conservative scholar, to the federal appeals court based in Washington, administration officials said today."
***DECEMBER 10, 2002***
The special interest groups attack...
Alliance for Justice Statement on Douglas Kmiec
Statement of Nan Aron, President of the Alliance for Justice, Regarding Possible Kmiec Nomination to Court of Appeals
"Washington, DC — The Alliance for Justice expressed grave concerns over reports that the White House is considering Professor Douglas Kmiec for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Alliance for Justice President Nan Aron noted: "Kmiec's record reflects an ultra-conservative philosophy opposing a woman's right to choose, bipartisan civil rights legislation and regulations on property. He would be a very poor, divisive choice for the D.C. Circuit."
The D.C. Circuit, widely viewed as the second most-important court in the country because of its unique jurisdiction and location in the nation's capital, is currently made up of four Democrat and four Republican appointees, with four vacancies. President Bush has previously nominated D.C. lawyers John Roberts and Miguel Estrada to the court. Battles over vacancies on the D.C. Circuit during the Clinton years were heated, with some Senate Republicans arguing that the workload of the court was such that the 11th and 12th vacancies did not need to be filled. On September 24, 2002, Senator Jeff Sessions reiterated his opposition to filling more than ten seats on the D.C. Circuit. Nonetheless, the White House is reportedly considering nominations, including Kmiec's, to fill the 11th and 12th seat.
Kmiec has stated that the Civil Rights Act of 1991 was likely to create racial quotas and should be declared unconstitutional. He has submitted Congressional testimony that "Abortion is more than the killing, it is also the coarsening of the American heart . . . . [A]bortion undermines all life." Kmiec has also written that many property regulations are unconstitutional unless they provide compensation to the property owners-a view that calls into question key environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act.
Responding to rumors of Kmiec's nomination, Aron said, "not only would Kmiec's nomination fly in the face of Senate Republicans' own assertions that an 11th judge on the court was not necessary, it would make a mockery of administration pledges of conciliation and cooperation and of President Bush's claims to be a `uniter not a divider.' It would be further evidence that this administration is intent on packing the courts with ultraconservatives, in direct contravention of the interests and will of the American people."
***DECEMBER 12, 2002***
The "mainstream" media begins throwing mud. [Do we really care if the guy put D.C. plates on his car within 30-days of his moving from California to D.C.? Even I don't care, and I am pretty intolerant of inconsistencies.]
Judge Scofflaw?
"After the New York Times claimed Tuesday that Catholic University Law School Dean Douglas W. Kmiec is on President Bush's short list for a coveted seat on the Washington federal appeals court, one of Kmiec's Northwest D.C. neighbors helpfully pointed out to us that he keeps California plates on his cars."
***DECEMBER 19, 2002***
The "mainstream" media coincidentally argues that maybe we don't need any new judges on the D.C. Circuit. [Do a survey. Ask any federal judge you know if he or she is "underworked".]
How Many Judges?
Thursday, December 19, 2002; Page A40
"YOU MIGHT NOT expect that the question of how many judges a court needs would become a festering political problem. But how to staff the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is threatening to become just that -- again. The court, which is one of the most important in the country, has 12 authorized judgeships. But during the Clinton administration, Republican senators blocked qualified nominees to its 11th and 12th seats; its declining workload made additional judges unnecessary, they said. Now President Bush, poised to win confirmation of nominees John G. Roberts and Miguel A. Estrada to the vacant ninth and 10th seats on the court, wants to fill the additional slots as well. An ugly fight could await the nominees, whoever they turn out to be."
***DECEMBER 19, 2002***
In the Wall Street Journal, Kmiec asks in vain that you...
Judge Me By My Work, Not By My Faith
"Last week, the New York Times reported that President Bush was considering
nominating me to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit. While many friends from my days in the Justice Department, former
students now practicing at law firms across the country, and sitting judges
wrote or called to encourage this development, a stark, inside-the- Beltway
question emerged from the report: Can an avowedly pro-life Catholic actually
serve on such court?"
[NOTE: I have the full-text of these articles. I do not know enough about Copyright to know if I can post them.]
Man serves 4-hour detention for daughter.
"On the morning of Friday January 30, Hatton said he decided it was too cold for his children to go to school that day. But the Lovington High School Handbook does not list "parental concern for a child's safety" as one of six excused absences in their handbook."
***
"Lovington High School Principal Kevin Van Meter said the Hatton's 16 year old daughter's absence was unexcused, and punished her with five days detention. He based the punishment on a provision in the Lovington High School Handbook which states, “The student will be considered truant for all unexcused absences. The student will make up all time for unexcused absences unless the administrator deems the absence to be unavoidable.”
The principal sentenced the daughter to a 4-hour detention. Her father is serving the sentence instead.
Can you see why so many of us hate(d) school?
"On the morning of Friday January 30, Hatton said he decided it was too cold for his children to go to school that day. But the Lovington High School Handbook does not list "parental concern for a child's safety" as one of six excused absences in their handbook."
***
"Lovington High School Principal Kevin Van Meter said the Hatton's 16 year old daughter's absence was unexcused, and punished her with five days detention. He based the punishment on a provision in the Lovington High School Handbook which states, “The student will be considered truant for all unexcused absences. The student will make up all time for unexcused absences unless the administrator deems the absence to be unavoidable.”
The principal sentenced the daughter to a 4-hour detention. Her father is serving the sentence instead.
Can you see why so many of us hate(d) school?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2004
(138)
- ► 04/18 - 04/25 (2)
- ► 04/11 - 04/18 (2)
- ► 04/04 - 04/11 (4)
- ► 03/28 - 04/04 (8)
- ► 03/21 - 03/28 (6)
- ► 03/14 - 03/21 (5)
- ► 02/29 - 03/07 (7)
- ► 02/22 - 02/29 (7)
- ► 02/15 - 02/22 (22)
- ► 02/08 - 02/15 (21)
- ► 02/01 - 02/08 (17)
- ► 01/25 - 02/01 (23)
- ► 01/18 - 01/25 (5)
- ► 01/11 - 01/18 (1)
- ► 01/04 - 01/11 (7)
-
►
2003
(14)
- ► 12/28 - 01/04 (6)
- ► 12/21 - 12/28 (8)