* Linda Greenhouse to $300K! [New York Observer via ABA Journal]
* Duties of a law school dean: attend parties, appear at conferences, talk to alums. And don’t forget the herding of cats — aka law professors. [TJ's Double Play]
* Even law review editors screw up sometimes. “Constructive acceptance”? [Concurring Opinions]
* Who’d have thunk it? Sometimes blogging can help people. And stuff. [Legal Blog Watch]
* Ethan Leib dresses up as a giant chicken to teach Contracts, thereby guaranteeing ABA accreditation. [PrawfsBlawg]
* Orin Kerr points out online interviews “with eight of the nine current Supreme Court Justices (all but Souter) about legal writing, advocacy, and the process of deciding cases and writing opinions.” [Volokh Conspiracy]
* Ann Althouse on John McCain and being a “natural-born citizen.” [Althouse]
* Hillary to Russert: You can’t handle the truth! About my tax returns. [TaxProf Blog]
- Ann Althouse, Blogging, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Law Professors, Law Reviews, Law School Deans, Linda Greenhouse, Non-Sequiturs, Politics, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, Tax Law
* Linda Greenhouse to $300K! [New York Observer via ABA Journal]
We already discussed this news yesterday. But in our earlier post, we promised to let you know if and when Linda Greenhouse got back to us — and she kindly did, sending the following message to ATL about her rumored departure as the New York Times’s Supreme Court correspondent:
As you may know – the Times put a newsroom-wide buyout package on the table last week, in an effort to shrink the staff by 100. For someone of my seniority (40 years) the terms are very attractive, and I’ve told my bureau chief that I plan to take it. I was planning to retire in a few years, and giving up this package would have basically meant working for free – which seemed foolish, much as I love my job. I plan to keep writing about the court in various forums.
(I should note that this is not official, because the buyout window is open until March 5, after which the Times will respond to the individual volunteers – so my response to you is based on the assumption that my acceptance of their offer will in turn be accepted.)
Greenhouse also confirmed her move to the Associated Press (via WSJ Law Blog).
During her 30 years covering the Court for the Times, Linda Greenhouse has sometimes been controversial. See here, here, and here, for perhaps the most recent controversy.
It cannot be denied, however, that Greenhouse has tremendous knowledge of the Supreme Court’s history and inner workings, as well as unparalleled access to the justices themselves. Few journalists are such superstars that their comings and goings are covered by the AP.
Greenhouse leaves big shoes to fill, and it will be interesting to see how her successor fares. How much of her clout was the institutional clout of the New York Times, and how much of it was Greenhouse qua Greenhouse? We’ll find out soon enough.
Feel free to speculate about replacements for the legendary Linda Greenhouse, in the comments.
NYT’s Greenhouse Takes Buyout Offer [Associated Press via WSJ Law Blog]
Public and Private Lives, Intersecting [New York Times]
Lay Off Linda [Slate]
Far From Sober [National Review Online]
Earlier: Is the Margo Channing of One First Street Taking Her Final Bow?
Is the Margo Channing of One First Street Taking Her Final Bow?
(Or: Is Linda Greenhouse leaving the New York Times?)
We have previously compared Linda Greenhouse, the veteran Supreme Court correspondent of the New York Times, to Margo Channing, the great but aging diva of All About Eve. The comparison continues to hold.
Just as Margo Channing eventually leaves the thea-tuh, so too does Linda Greenhouse leave the SCOTUS. Ed Whelan, the former Scalia clerk with lots of Court connections, has this report over at Bench Memos:
According to a well-placed Supreme Court source, New York Times reporter Linda Greenhouse is telling folks at the Court that she has accepted a Times buyout package and will be ending her coverage of the Court at the end of the current term.
So that’s the word on One First Street. We have reached out to Linda Greenhouse for comment and will let you know if and when we hear back from her.
If this is true — and we have no reason to doubt it, since it comes from the well-connected Whelan — then Jan Crawford Greenburg is one step closer to being Queen Bee of the Supreme Court press corps. Nina Totenberg, watch your back!
Update: More from Ed Whelan at NRO Online: “On the same day that we learn of Linda Greenhouse’s imminent departure from the New York Times, Greenhouse provides further evidence of her bias….”
Greenhouse’s Departure [Bench Memos / National Review Online]
Re: Breyer’s and Souter’s Drift to the Right? [Bench Memos / National Review Online]
Earlier: All About… Jan?
- Books, Charlie Savage, Jan Crawford Greenburg, Linda Greenhouse, Media and Journalism, Neal Katyal, Parties, Pictures, Politics, Tony Mauro
“Dear Jim: Thanks for the great job you do pushing the mail cart around the office. You truly are a special person!”
[Charlie Savage signs a copy of his book for Aaron Zitner, politics editor for the Los Angeles Times.]
Earlier this week, we attended a delightful book party for Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy, by Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe. Savage won the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, based on his work on presidential signing statements.
Photos and discussion of the star-studded event — after you win a Pulitzer, everyone is your friend! — after the jump.
- Blogging, Fashion, Immigration, Judge of the Day, Linda Greenhouse, Music, Non-Sequiturs, State Judges, State Judges Are Clowns
* The best argument for immigration reform: qualified (i.e., hot) fashion models are being kept off American runways. [Fashionista]
* What rating does ATL get — e.g., G, PG, R, etc. — using this tool? To give you context, NBS is a PG-13. [Nasty, Brutish & Short]
* What blogs does Linda Greenhouse read? [My Times ("Journalist's Picks") via Romenesko]
* What blogs do judges read? [May It Please the Court]
* And what blogs should they read? [Blawg Review]
* Speaking of judges, here’s our Judge of the Day — possibly offensive, and wrong on the law too. [AP via NYT]
* The Weekly Standard’s Jonathan Last, on the Nixon Peabody non-theme-song: “Some things you just can’t un-hear.” [Galley Slaves]
- Linda Greenhouse, Media and Journalism, New York Times, Rap, Ridiculousness, Rudeness, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, Television
Linda Greenhouse has written a letter in response to C-SPAN in which she defends herself against their accusations. In it she claims that the “issue is not one of ‘open media access to public policy discussions,’” as C-SPAN’s Terence Murphy wrote in his letter, but “one of communication and simple courtesy.”
Ignoring the question of whether she received an email warning her that C-SPAN was going to be present, Greenhouse writes, ” I learned about the plan to cover the Supreme Court panel only when I showed up and saw the cameras. Prof. Gajda told me yesterday that she had only learned at 5:00 p.m. the day before that C-Span intended to cover our panel.”
Read the rest — plus a bonus Linda Greenhouse Rap!!! — after the jump.
- Linda Greenhouse, Media and Journalism, New York Times, Ridiculousness, Rudeness, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, Television
We feel better. We’re not the only folks who have been rudely dissed by Linda Greenhouse, the longtime
op-ed columnist Supreme Court correspondent of the New York Times.
From Jim Romenesko’s widely read media blog, Poynter Online:
NYT’s Greenhouse demands that C-SPAN turn off its cameras
Columbia Journalism Review
The Times’ Linda Greenhouse became upset when she realized that C-SPAN planned to broadcast a panel discussion featuring Supreme Court reporters. “I told [the event organizer] she had a choice, either she could have me on the panel speaking candidly or she could have C-SPAN there,” Greenhouse tells Gal Beckerman. “I didn’t want to have to modulate my comments for a national audience.”
C-SPAN’s programming veep is unhappy: “All the participants were notified the night before, and no one objected. Then, five to ten minutes beforehand, we were told we couldn’t cover it. Having a five-person crew unable to work for a day was a major hit on us.”
Wow. To the commenters who have questioned our characterization of Greenhouse as a diva, please reconsider your views.
So why did Linda Greenhouse throw a hissy fit over possible C-SPAN coverage? We have some (quasi-informed) speculation.
Some thoughts and some links, plus the complete protest letter sent by C-SPAN, appear after the jump.
In case you haven’t noticed, we’re kinda obsessed with Linda Greenhouse, the longtime Supreme Court correspondent for the New York Times. But we’re afraid she’s not our biggest fan.
At the recent (and excellent) ACS National Convention, Tom Goldstein of SCOTUSblog moderated a fantastic panel on covering the Supreme Court. One of the panelists was Linda Greenhouse. After the panel, we approached and introduced ourselves. Her sarcastic response: “Oh, so you’re the famous David Lat.”
(Ouch — but we loved it. Getting abused by divas is one of our favorite pastimes!)
We praised her work. La Greenhouse quipped, quasi-snarkily (you had to be there): “Do you already have what I said up on the web?”
We offered her our business card, which she finally took — after pointedly letting it hover in the air. She did not proffer hers, then strode away, capri pants flapping in the ballroom’s air conditioning.
So yes, Linda Greenhouse — we had a reason for bringing her up. Did you catch her “Supreme Court Memo” in yesterday’s Times, on Chief Justice John Roberts’s recent seizure?
We have some meta-commentary on it. Check it out, after the jump.
- Dahlia Lithwick, Fabulosity, Howard Bashman, J. Michael Luttig, Linda Greenhouse, Media and Journalism, Nina Totenberg, SCOTUS, Supreme Court
We’re loving this little dustup over our item about Nina Totenberg getting territorial over seating in the Supreme Court press gallery. It got us a shout-out in the Washington Post. And it’s generating celebrity correspondence for us, too.
Over the weekend, we heard from SCOTUS bar superstar Tom Goldstein. And then, this morning, we received this email, from one of our favorite commentators on legal affairs:
From: Dahlia Lithwick
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 10:35 AM
To: David Lat
Subject: one bigger question raised in Divagate
The Wa Po article about Nina said she was “dean” of the Supreme Court press corps.
What the heck is that about?
Is it a real position? Is it tenured?
Good questions. It reminds us of “The Tenth Justice,” a title that has been bestowed on everyone from the Solicitor General to ex-judge J. Michael Luttig to Howard Bashman (by Howard Bashman).
Also, can you run for this post of “dean”? If the SCOTUS press corps is like high school, is this like being class president? Or prom queen?
If so, we nominate Dahlia Lithwick. She’s fabulous! How many Supreme Court correspondents have Facebook fan clubs?
(Linda Greenhouse, eat your (bleeding) heart out….)
Names & Faces: Totenberg’s Courtside Seat [Washington Post]
A3G to President Bush: Pick Alito, Not Luttig [Underneath Their Robes]
Earlier: Why Is Nina Totenberg Like Judy Miller?
- Fashion, Jan Crawford Greenburg, Linda Greenhouse, Media and Journalism, SCOTUS, Shoes, Shopping, Supreme Court
And we’re not speaking metaphorically, about the remaining decisions from October Term 2006.
We’re talking about the shoes of celebrated Supreme Court reporter Jan Crawford Greenburg, of ABC News. Will a pair of Manolos fall from the sky?
So, what happened to JCG’s footwear? Was it a case of sabotage, by an increasingly threatened rival?
Go Home Already: Missed Connections [DCist]