* Does a federal district court have to recruit pro bono counsel for a pro se litigant? [Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals via How Appealing]

* DOJ cool with torture tough interrogation techniques. [New York Times]

* Bush doesn't care about poor kids. [AP via Athens Banner-Herald]

* The ACLU doesn't want to let Bush protect us. [Jurist]

* Falcons want their money back; so do Falcons fans (last week's fine win notwithstanding). [Atlanta Journal-Constitution]

Some fashion advice for Arab-Americans traveling by plane: leave the Arabic-slogan t-shirts at home.

Unless you want to become the plaintiff in an ACLU lawsuit. Consider this recently filed case:

The American Civil Liberties Union and New York Civil Liberties Union today filed a federal civil rights lawsuit charging that a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) official and JetBlue Airways illegally discriminated against an American resident based solely on the Arabic message on his t-shirt and his ethnicity.

JetBlue and the TSA official, identified as "Inspector Harris," would not let Raed Jarrar board his flight at John F. Kennedy Airport until he agreed to cover his t-shirt, which read "We Will Not Be Silent" in English and Arabic script.

According to the complaint, Harris told Jarrar that it is impermissible to wear an Arabic shirt to an airport and equated it to a "person wearing a t-shirt at a bank stating, ‘I am a robber.'"

Oy. Gotta love those enlightened TSA officials. Should Jarrar have worn a burqa instead?

Okay, seriously -- if Raed Jarrar were a terrorist intent on wreaking havoc, would he really have worn such a t-shirt on to an airplane? Isn't that just a recipe for extra-special scrutiny from the federal air marshal?

(On the other hand, perhaps one could argue, under a "reverse psychology" rubric, that a terrorist might don such a t-shirt because everyone would think: "Only the most dumb-ass terrorist would call attention to himself with his outfit!")

ACLU Sues TSA Official, JetBlue for Discriminating Against Passenger Wearing Arabic T-Shirt [American Civil Liberties Union]
"We Will Not Be Silent" [ACLU (lawsuit homepage)]
The Airline Screening Playset: Hours of Fun! [Concurring Opinions]
After 5 Years In U.S., Terrorist Cell Too Complacent To Carry Out Attack [The Onion]

* Banned children's book about Cuba, "Vamos a Cuba," now in court. [Miami Herald]

* "Hit Movie 'Knocked Up' With a Lawsuit." [WSJ Law Blog]

* Should Libby be pardoned? [LA Times via BLT]

* More pardoning analysis from NYT. [New York ]

* Cleared Duke lacrosse players given extra year of eligibility. [New York Times]

* ACLU v. Boeing over alleged CIA torture flights. [Jurist]

* Save it for the field, fellas. [Reno Gazette-Journal]

* Milberg partner may plea in class-action kickback case. [WSJ Law Blog]

* There was a time when a TV writer strike meant something, but if recently, you've found yourself watching the Pussycat Dolls reality show, you too might welcome a return to more scripted programs. [Los Angeles Times]

* I'd pay for license plates that read "God is Dead"--Nietzsche (front) and "Nietzsche is Dead"--God (back). [Indy Star]

* CBS just defended itself by claiming it can't be racist since Les Moonves's wife is Asian. And that they're upholding free speech or something. [New York Times]

* I would totally convert for non-decrepit, hot media mogul Edgar Bronfman Jr. I wouldn't even care that he was just an entitled dabbler before he was handed the reins of the Seagram Company and pummeled Napster into submission. [CNN Money]

* Like you, this attorney and concerned citizen opted for law school because science just wasn't her thing. [J-Walk Blog]

* Kettles Retailers are being told they're black warned not to infringe upon Kate Moss's much-hyped and copyrighted "Pot"-shop Topshop collection. [Fashionista; Retail Week]

(An explanatory note for those of you who couldn't care less: Topshop is an H&M-esque retailer that rips off designs from everybody so that broke girls and boys can swath themselves in sweatshop-produced crap and still have money left over for cigarettes.)

* Power may be the great aphrodisiac, but in my experience, sexual harassers in the professional workplace are just pervs or losers who couldn't find a date in high school. Sometimes it's that simple. [Feminist Law Professors]

* In these violent times, "Red Asphalt" just doesn't do the trick in scaring the bejesus out of high school drivers. [Central Ohio]

* School lunches + biometrics = ACLU. Of course. [Turn to 10]

* With tax law, the sky's the limit. Seriously. [CNN; TaxProf Blog]

* Slow... Typist... Sues... His... Law... School. Must have taken forever to type the complaint (especially with a last name like "Zachariasewycz"). [WSJ Law Blog]

* ACLU seeks disclosure on NSA wiretaps in the Sixth Circuit. [SCOTUSblog]

* Vote Roberts for Chief Justice! [SCOTUSblog]

Move over, Fire Island. See ya later, Provincetown. Rehoboth Beach, you're all washed up.

The gay destination of choice for summer 2007? This may come as a surprise to you, but it's 125 Broad Street, New York, New York -- home of the estimable law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell (plus the ACLU's LGBT Rights Project).

From Aaron Charney, the plaintiff in Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell:

I am informed by numerous sources that David Braff (at right), on behalf of certain gay S&C partners, circulated a memorandum stating that such partners are pleased with the work environment at S&C.

What exactly makes Sullivan such a fabulous workplace for gays? Is it the subsidized gym? The proximity to S&C client Goldman Sachs, home to countless cute banker boys with seven-figure incomes? The complimentary cosmos served in the firm cafeteria?

If you have a copy of this memo, please send it our way, by email.

We're looking forward to seeing it. But Charney seems less than impressed:

Braff’s memo directly misses the point. My complaint concerns the discrimination and retaliation perpetrated by S&C against me. S&C clearly has no defense against the allegations enumerated in my Complaint and instead seeks to muddy the waters by trying to divert people’s attention away from the issue at hand. S&C’s campaign of diversion is the latest example of S&C’s unwilling[ness] to enforce the firm office manual’s anti-discrimination policy and confirms why I was left with no choice but to pursue this legal matter.

Charney's willingness to speak freely about the case -- or to try it in the court of public opinion, as his critics claim -- may explain why he seems to be winning the PR war, at least at the current time. In our reader poll, which is still ongoing, about two-thirds of respondents support him over S&C.

(But that is down somewhat from the 75 percent support that Charney enjoyed earlier in the afternoon. Could an anti-Aaron backlash be developing?)

Update: One of you has posted what appears to be the gay partners' memo in the comments. Thanks!

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell (scroll down)

* I have been remiss in not updating you on the legal woes of the blogger everyone loves to hate. And if you still think Paris Hilton when you hear Perez Hilton, well, I wish I were you and had never discovered the e-crack that is the gossip blog. [Los Angeles Times]

* Professor Volokh expresses his indignation at an entire generation of selfish bastards. Holla. Also cf: this for proof that academics may have too much time on their hands. [Volokh Conspiracy]

* The high school’s zero-tolerance policy for weapons may ironically save this senior (at right) from getting his ass kicked. And keep alive a glimmer of hope that he will not die a virgin. [New York Times]

* I think people who take LSAT prep classes or 1L Boot Camp before law school are lame. So you can guess what I think about law students who buy other students’ outlines, and for that matter, the students who sell their outlines (who might not be so cash-strapped had they not taken the LSAT prep classes or 1L Boot Camp in the first place). [The Conglomerate]

* I think this is funny, and rest assured, the baby is okay. But I still feel like someone is going to be sued, especially if the baby ends up growing a different set of genitals. [AP via Forbes]

* All may not be genetically sound with Suri babies of holoprosencephaly sufferers. (But does genetic perfection really exist?) And once again, wordplay gets us out of the woods of potential litigation by a crazy actor midget. [Overlawyered]

* Jack Abramoff has been hitting the books in the prison law library and will represent himself in two lawsuits filed against him by Indian tribes. I think “kitchen duty and carpentry” is prison-speak for “shower activities.” [Law.com]

* Off-ensive or just off-menu? Not brought to you by the people who brought you this refreshing drink. [Vivir Latino via Racialicious]

* Remember when we used to de-contract words (e.g., “does not” for “doesn’t”) to inch our way towards the minimum word requirement? [FN1] Apparently, this is the only way law school is not like high school. [PrawfsBlawg]

[FN1] Enough already! law professors lament. And yes, smart aleck, footnotes do count toward the word limit.

* Running with Scissors writer Augusten Burroughs is being sued for libel, not for his part in the adaptation of his memoir into the abysmally bad film version. [Vanity Fair]

* Any future husband of mine should be so lucky as to take on “Q” as their last name, or our combined last name. But for the record, could it be that “Buday” is pronounced “booty”? [ACLU of Southern California via PrawfsBlawg]

* The feds and the ACLU wrangle over a classified document. Is such use of the grand jury subpoena creative, or improper? [New York Times]

* A Swift (& Co.) crackdown: federal raids on meatpacking plants in six states result in over 1,200 arrests on immigration charges. [Associated Press]

* MoveOn and those Swift Boat Veterans get fined. [New York Times]

* "Seventh Circuit reinstates claim asserting that ... members of the plaintiff classes have bought products or services from some of the defendants that they would not have bought had the defendants not concealed their involvement in slavery." [How Appealing]

* Girls Gone Wild guy gets community service for filming underage women. [MSNBC]

* "College Student Gets Mother-in-Law to Co-Sign $10,000 Loan to Buy Apple Computer, Has $7,800 DOI Income When He Repays Only $2,200 After Taking High-Paying Job at Microsoft." [TaxProf Blog]

* A British police inquiry rejects conspiracy theories concerning the death of Princess Diana, concluding that the 1997 car crash was a "tragic accident." [Associated Press]

* Does anyone know if "ABV D LAW" is taken? [WSJ Law Blog]

No, we're not talking about that time on "The OC" when Marissa Cooper (Mischa Barton) shared a girl-on-girl kiss with Alex (Olivia Wilde). Rather, we're referring to a civil rights case currently pending before Judge James Selna, in the Central District of California.

From the L.A. Times (via How Appealing):

Two high schoolers are caught kissing on campus.

Ordinarily, such an incident would garner little attention. But for Charlene Nguon, a smattering of kisses and hugs stolen after school and in between classes led to detention, suspensions, a transfer and a lawsuit.

The reason? That's what a federal judge in Santa Ana will soon decide.

Nguon says it's because she was kissing a girl. Ben Wolf, who was then principal of Garden Grove's Santiago High School, says that's not the case at all. He insists the problem was that, regardless of whether it was a girl or boy, Nguon continued the kissing despite repeated warnings to knock it off.

And that's just the tip of this salaciously sapphic iceberg.

Check out the rest, after the jump.

Apperances can be deceiving. The smiling woman above looks like a sweet old lady (or perhaps she's middle-aged).

But don't be fooled. This pleasant-looking woman opened a can of whoop-ass at the final panel discussion of the Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention. She rained hellfire and brimstone upon the audience, and placed at least two of the panelists on an express train to Hell.

As we mentioned earlier, that last panel "discussion" was insane. It was a no-holds-barred fight between the Federalist Society's two major constituencies: the social conservatives and the libertarians. It was a smart move to save this intra-societal slugfest until the end of the weekend.

The nominal title of the panel: "The Role of Government in Defining Our Culture." A more appropriate title for the panel: "Watch Libertarians and Social Conservatives Rant at Each Other About Gay Marriage."

The combatants participants:

Moderator cum lion tamer: Hon. Edwin Meese III, former Attorney General
For the libertarians: Dr. Charles Murray, AEI; Mr. Anthony Romero, ACLU
For the social conservatives: Mrs. Phyllis Schlafly, Eagle Forum; Professor Hadley Arkes, Amherst College
Kinda in between: Professor William Eskridge, Yale Law School
Kinda irrelevant: Hon. Walter Dellinger, currently of O'Melveny & Myers and Duke Law School (and former acting Solicitor General)

A blow-by-blow account of this intellectual battle royal, after the jump.

* While I was not exactly clued into the significance of 1L year, you know, if it ain’t broke... although I sure am ready for an updated version of Scott Turow’s One L. [Law School Innovation Blog]

* The ACLU may be on to something. My mom still doesn’t know how to use email attachments. [Cookie Magazine]

* Summer associates of 2007, start drawing up your restaurant lists. [New York Times]

* Here we go again... If the music industry can turn any old 13-year-old into a pop star, then it can also turn any old 13-year-old into a criminal. [Reuters]

* The Danish have taken the transfat out of their pastries (and everything else). [Associated Press via Drudge Report]

* Indeed, politics aside, who is more retarded in this case -- the cops or the ACLU? [May It Please the Court]

* Yet again, Walmart proves that cheap has its price. [The Conglomerate]

* The United States population topped 300 million today at 7.46am EST, but just 39 years ago, the official 200 millionth baby was born, and he ended up a lawyer. (And may we objectively comment that this particular person of Asian heritage really does look young.) [Inside Opinions: Legal Blogs]

* I don’t know much about fair trade, but I know this isn’t it. And yes, I know, much more than chocolate is at stake. [Associated Press]

* Lawyer facing 30 years gets 28 months for the terrorism equivalent of passing a note in class. [New York Times]

* This guy is talking major smack about the Constitution. Where does he get off speaking his mind in a free press? And all without the fear of having the king's soldiers quartered in his residence! [L.A. Times]

* Coming soon to a comic-con near you: " By becoming a more skillful listener and communicator, Attorney Man masters the art of sales and develops a healthy roster of supersatisfied clients. `Wow! Look at those learned hands!' one client gushes admiringly." [Boston Globe via WSJ Law Blog]

* Another stock scandal for a high ranking government official. Who'd have thought the former chairman of the F.D.A. Obesity Working Group would come up with an easy way to make money. [N.Y. Times]

* Nadine and Nino go mano-a-mano this weekend on CSPAN (Washington's ESPN). Says the mildly-worded AP article, "Scalia... generally finds himself taking the opposite position to the ACLU." [Law.com]