We just finished watching America’s Next Top Model. So it’s quite appropriate for us to pass along this modeling montage video, which is amusingly bizarre. From a tipster:

I hate to pile it on, but you have to check out this YouTube clip of a University of Miami 1L. It’s a seven-minute clip of various glamour shots, set to the soothing sounds of flamenco guitar. I think my favorite photos involve her posing with a samurai sword.

We agree; nothing beats a samurai sword paired with fishnets. But the pics of her in a midriff-baring schoolgirl outfit, replete with pigtails, are also pretty great. As is the photo of her humping a white banister, which kicks off the whole thing.

You don’t need to watch the entire video, since the shots start to repeat after a while, but stick around at least until “Hotel California.” Enjoy!

Update (12:15 AM): Sigh. If you click on the video below, you’ll see that it has been pulled. We seem to have the anti-Midas touch when it comes to law school videos: everything we link to gets yanked. See, e.g., here (Harvard) and here (Columbia).

A little bit more, after the jump.

Please read this. Here are your study questions:

1. “How did a Goldman Sachs banker earn only $115,000?” (This one was from Professor Caron.)

2. “How can she afford to give away this much to charity — does she have a sugar daddy wealthy spouse?”

3. “So what exactly does $55,000 in secondhand clothing look like?”

(On that last item, maybe we should ask our little sibling, Fashionista.)

P.S. With respect to the title of this post: Yes, we realize that the charity in question, Housing Works, funds its programs by running a high-end thrift store — it’s not giving designer duds directly to homeless people. We’re just taking a little poetic or blogospheric license; please cut us some slack.

Tax Court: Goldman Sachs Investment Banker With $115k Salary Can’t Take $55k Deduction for Charitable Donation of Used Clothing [TaxProf Blog]

Some of you think that we list a bit too much to the right around here — that we rave about prominent legal conservatives, while mocking the liberals. We’ve heard your complaints.

For the record, we regularly poke fun at conservatives, while raving about liberals. In terms of garnering raves, as long as you’re a Supreme Court clerk, you’re generally golden.

But in a deliberate effort to be even more balanced, we’ll now provide you with an alternative viewpoint on Professor Viet Dinh, of Georgetown Law. Dinh is a leading legal conservative, a former Bush Administration official and Federalist Society celebrity, who has been previously praised in these pages (for his genius, connections, wealth, and svelteness, among other things).

Here is what one reader, who once interviewed for a job with Professor Dinh, had to say about him:

Upon meeting [Viet Dinh] and spending a few minutes with him, I graciously declined to have anything to do with the man. Please, please, don’t pump this guy up anymore.

I have been a card carrying member of the Federalist Society since my first year of law school. [Dinh] may be brilliant, but he is so consumed with his own greatness that he is abhorrent to be around. He name drops, interrupts, questions everything you say, and condescends to you. Also, he stutters profusely.

Sounds pretty bad, eh? But it gets worse:

For a man who hails from Vietnam and California, he should know that is offensive to wear cowboy boots, a Rolex, and a French-cuffed shirt, while wearing jeans.

The horror, the horror! As far as we’re concerned, that disastrous fashion combination should preclude Dinh from being Senate-confirmed to any post. Ever.

Viet D. Dinh bio [Georgetown Law School]

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Viet Dinh (scroll down)

We’ve been on a bit of a Canada kick here at ATL. What can we say, those Canadians are teh funny.

Check out this story (robe swish: Paul Horwitz of PrawfsBlawg):

Some [Canadian] Supreme Court judges seek relief from work stress in the comfort of their families. Others love nothing more than to curl up with a good book. And could it be, for at least one of them, a nude romp on the high seas was just the ticket?

The anonymous judge’s alleged unconventional vacation choice — a nude cruise — came to light in a San Francisco Chronicle travel article in the spring. It quoted a co-owner of the Bare Necessities cruise line, Nancy Tiemann, as saying that its clientele include: “actors, bus drivers, Fortune 500 CEOs, soccer moms, doctors, teachers, priests and at least one Canadian Supreme Court justice.” * * * * *

The story came to the attention of Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, who swiftly launched an investigation into which, if any, of her eight colleagues was the alleged unrobed sailor.

Can Canadian judges, like our federal judges, be impeached for violating the norms of “good behavior”? Because we agree with Ann Althouse: “[A] naked cruise? It’s just so perfectly awful.”

Alas, the Chief Justice’s investigation ended inconclusively:

Speaking to an audience at the University of Toronto law school last week, [Justice Marshall] Rothstein read a tongue-in-cheek memo which Chief Justice McLachlin circulated to her Supreme Court colleagues on May 12.

Entitled “Re. Nude Cruising,” the memo said: “I made inquiries into the identity of the judge, but was rebuffed [by the article writer] on a claim of journalistic privilege… . All this is to say, that our secret is safe.”

Judge Rothstein assured his audience that, having been appointed only in March, he cannot be considered a serious suspect in the nude-cruise inquiry.

If the justice who likes to vacation in the buff is ever discovered, we can’t really blame him or her for wanting to go au naturel. Here’s what Canadian justices look like in their ceremonial robes (also via PrawfsBlawg):

In case you’re wondering, the robes are “of bright scarlet, trimmed with Canadian white mink.”

Your Honors: Eager to supplement your judicial incomes? The West Edmonton Mall is still interviewing Santa Claus candidates. And the Salvation Army is looking for sidewalk fundraisers right now. Christmas is less than two months away!

Underneath Their Robes? The Justices of the Supreme Court of Canada [PrawfsBlawg]
Which Supreme Court Justice went on a nude cruise? [Althouse]
Did Supreme Court judge throw away briefs? [Toronto Globe and Mail]
Finally, the Naked Truth Aboot Nude Cruises [San Francisco Chronicle via How Appealing]
Aboot the Court [Supreme Court of Canada]

Earlier: Law and Order: Fashion Victims Unit
Prior ATL coverage of Canada (scroll down)

Welcome to Law and Order: Fashion Victims Unit, an Above the Law feature that we hope will catch on with fashion-forward lawyers.

FVU will be like New York magazine’s “Look Book” column — see, e.g., here — but for attorneys. We’ll put up a photograph of a lawyer with an interesting or distinctive way of dressing, then either interview that individual — if they agree to participate — or offer color commentary on their outfit (a la Gawker’s Looking at the Look Book).

This feature will require some reader participation. Here’s what we need from you: good-sized, high-quality, head-to-toe photographs of sartorially distinctive lawyers. You can send in pictures of friends, colleagues — or even yourself.

Please send us your submissions by email (subject line: “FVU”). Thanks!