So this is the 21st century? Where courts award punitive damages for offensive words and pictures? Isn’t “the scummiest kind of sexually offensive tripe” exactly what we always used to say people had to put up with in a free country? Man, that was so 20th century!
3. Suing Autodmit [Instapundit]
Professor Glenn Reynolds — who kindly links to our post, by the way — largely agrees with Professor Althouse. He sarcastically observes: “Stuff that offends dumb hicks in the heartland is constitutionally protected. Stuff that offends Yale Law Students must be stamped out!”
More links, after the jump.
The brilliant and irascible Judge Alex Kozinski, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, has handed down his opinion on blogs, and it’s scathing. The audio link is down, but Orin Kerr helpfully gives us the juicy bits:
ERIC GOLDMAN: So but what about blogs? . . .
JUDGE ALEX KOZINSKI: I hate them, hateful things.
ERIC GOLDMAN: Why do you hate blogs? . . . .
JUDGE ALEX KOZINSKI: I just think it’s so self-indulgent, you know. “Oh, I’m so proud of what I’m saying, I think the world instantly wants to know what I’m thinking today.” People wake up thinking, . . . . “I wonder what great thoughts have come into his mind this morning that I can feel myself edified by. I can’t really have breakfast — really enjoy my day — until I hear the great thoughts of Howard Bashman!” I don’t think so. I go for months without ever knowing what Howard has to say. So I don’t know. I find it sort of self-indulgent. And I find it grandiloquent. And I find it annoying, particularly if I’m in an audience and people are sitting there typing in their computers.
* Some interesting comments about Harriet Miers getting a Fifth Circuit nomination, as well as speculation about who might replace her as White House counsel. [ConfirmThem]
(We second the suggestion of Rachel Brand (at right). Brand previously worked in the White House counsel’s office, before her appointment to head the Office of Legal Policy at the Justice Department.)
* From an Instpaundit correspondent: “I’m no law prof, but isn’t the presumption of innocence most useful before a pile of facts come out indicating that the accused are, in fact, innocent?” [Instapundit]
* Speaking of which, check out Best Defense, which “seeks to place the presumption of innocence front and center.” [Bag and Baggage]
* Jeez, he’s even more of a tool than we thought. Can someone please talk some sense into him about 2008? [Althouse]
* Backlash to the backlash against (allegedly) excessive executive pay. [Point of Law via Dealbreaker]
* Amen. With the exception of news aggregators, blogs are by their nature idiosyncratic, rather than comprehensive. So don’t get your briefs in a wad when we fail to write about your pet topic. [Volokh Conspiracy; Althouse]
* 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]
* DLA Piper’s Amy Schulman (at right): Leading litigatrix, or Dianne Feinstein doppelganger? [WSJ Law Blog]
* “Eugene Volokh” on Boston Legal: the mystery revealed. Congrats on the shout-out, Professor Volokh! [Volokh Conspiracy]
* We enjoyed this. Or, to do our best Instapundit impression: HEH.
* Another funny interview story, courtesy of David Bernstein. As for why he didn’t get an offer: Maybe he picked the wrong concealer? [Volokh Conspiracy]
* There’s still time left for you to vote: Who is the Paris Hilton of the federal judiciary? [ATL]
* There appears to be a void in the blogosphere where rumor-mongering about law school faculty moves ought to be. [Is That Legal?; Concurring Opinions] Note: We’re happy to try and fill that void. So send us your tips, your juicy gossip about who in legal academia might be going where. The bigger the name, the better. If we receive a regular inflow of such info, we’ll make it a weekly feature.
(Yeah, we know, today’s “Morning Docket” is coming in just in time for lunch. Sorry, we overslept…)
* Former Enron CEO Jeff Skilling is facing 20 to 30 years in prison when he’s sentenced next month — but he can still get himself into even more trouble. Impressive. [Houston Chronicle via WSJ Law Blog]
* Elsewhere in Enron-land, ex-CFO Andy Fastow is seeking leniency in advance of his sentencing next week. Did you know he built a picnic table at his synagogue? [Washington Post; WSJ Law Blog]
* Clarence Hill, the death row inmate who sought to challenge the constitutionality of Florida’s lethal injection procedure, was executed last night. The Supreme Court decided, by a 5-4 vote, not to grant him a new stay of execution. [New York Times]
* Something complicated happened in the House concerning the White House’s proposal for interrogating and prosecuting terror suspects. Parliamentary procedure can be so wacky! Let’s face it: Nothing is getting done on this until after the November elections. [Washington Post]
* Hey, that’s neat: “Eugene Volokh” is on ABC’s “Boston Legal.” [How Appealing]
The recent HP leak investigation scandal has drawn into the spotlight a legal celebrity of the first rank: Viet Dinh. Dinh represents venture capitalist god Thomas Perkins, in Perkins’s (rather tense) dealings with HP’s board and lawyers.
Dinh, for those of you visiting from other planets, is one of the highest-flying legal eagles in the country. He’s a former high-ranking official at the Justice Department, current professor at Georgetown Law, and former Supreme Court clerk (to Justice Sandra Day O’Connor).
Despite his platinum-plated résumé, Dinh is a grabby l’il guy. Here’s the lede of Anna Schneider-Mayerson’s very interesting profile of Dinh, in the New York Observer:
On the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, Viet Dinh, one of the lead architects of the controversial Patriot Act, was standing in his Washington, D.C., office, waxing poetic about Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
“Justice O’Connor, I love her so much,” the 38-year-old law professor said. “I love her so much. She’s the best.”
As if to return the compliment, her image, in the form of a photo portrait signed to her former clerk “with respect and affection,” smiled back at him.
Hugs all around!
The effusive Dinh is, according to Schneider-Mayerson, “an avid and nonpartisan hugger.” As he readily admits, “I always hug [conservative lawyer] Ted Olson and [ACLU executive director] Anthony Romero,” he said.
Does this surprise us? Not in the least. Learn why, after the jump.
* Kind of like the Great Books, but for law. Soon we’ll have a better understanding of the depths of our own ignorance. [PrawfsBlawg]
* This is not a fairy tale: the Princess and… the Prison. [Associated Press]
* “I’m your priiiiivate judge, a judge for money, I’ll do what you want me to do / I’m your priiiiivate judge, a judge for money, And any old dispute will do.” [WSJ Law Blog]
* ATL wishes Professor Eugene Volokh a speedy recovery from his LASIK surgery! (We had it three years ago, and so far, so good. But knock on wood, cross fingers, etc.) [Volokh Conspiracy]
* This doesn’t have much to do with law, but it does play into our obsession with Senatrix Hillary Rodham Clinton. (Hey, she’s a lawyer — so there, that’s our hook.) [Andrew Sullivan]
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past seven years. You can reach them by email: email@example.com.
Please note that Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney are still in Hong Kong and will stay FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK. We still have a handful of available slots for meetings with our Asia Chronicles fans. If we have not been in touch lately, reach out and let us know when we could meet! There is no need for an agenda at all. Most of our in-person meetings on these trips are with folks who understand that improving a legal practice through lateral hiring is an information-driven process that takes time to handle correctly.
Regarding trends in lateral US associate hiring in Hong Kong, we of course keep much of what we know off of this blog. Based on placement revenue, though, Kinney is having one of our most successful years ever in Asia. We are helping a number of our law firm clients with M&A, fund formation, cap markets, project finance, FCPA and disputes openings. These are very specific needs in many cases, so a conversation with us before jumping in may be helpful. As always, we like to be sure to get the maximum number of interviews per submission, using a well-informed, highly targeted, and selective approach, taking into account short, medium and long-term career aims.
Making a well informed decision during a job search is easier said than done – the information we provide comes from 10 years of being the market leader in US attorney placements at the top tier firms in Asia. There is no substitute for having known a hiring partner since he/she was an associate or for having helped a partner grow his or her practice from zip to zooming, and this is happily where we stand today – with years of background information on just about every relevant person in all the markets we serve, and most especially in Hong Kong/China/Greater Asia. So get in touch and get a download from us this week if we can fit it in, or soon in any case!
The legal industry is being disrupted at every level by technological advances. While legal tech entrepreneurs and innovators are racing to create a more efficient and productive future, there is widespread indifference on the part of attorneys toward these emerging technologies.
When the LexisNexis Cloud Technology Survey results were reported earlier this year, it showed that attorneys were starting to peer less skeptically into the future, and slowly but surely leaning more toward all the benefits the law cloud has to offer.
Because let’s face it, plenty of attorneys are perhaps a bit too comfortable with their “system” of practice management, which may or may not include neon highlighters, sticky notes, dog-eared file folders, and a word processing program that was last updated when the term “raise the roof” was still de rigueur.