As the Supreme Court’s October Term 2013 fades into memory, and the bickering over Hobby Lobby subsides, let’s look ahead to October Term 2014 — and beyond. We know now the identities of all the OT 2014 SCOTUS clerks, as well as a growing number of the clerks for October Term 2015.
The clerk hiring contains some bad news for Dean Erwin Chemerinsky and other liberals who want Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire before it’s too late. The Notorious RBG has picked her posse for OT 2015, suggesting that she won’t be leaving the Court anytime soon.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. First let’s look at the official list of Supreme Court law clerks for October Term 2014, starting up in just a few months….
* The criminal codes violated in Transformers: Age of Extinction. Violations of the code of good filmmaking not included. [The Legal Geeks]
* Remember the guy who turned Justice Ginsburg’s Hobby Lobby dissent into a song? It turns out he’s been recording a song a day since 2009 and that was his first hit. Congrats! Hopefully next Term Justice Alito can declare suffocating orphans constitutional so this guy can have a follow-up. [Music.mic]
* How to end an internship? The key is drunkenly denouncing all your bosses in public. Oh, how to end an internship positively? Well, then I’m going to need some advice. [Corporette]
* Fracking interests have a new plan to promote the well-being of those living in affected areas: pay them $50,000 to grant universal releases. This doesn’t make fracking sound dangerous at all. [Pro Publica]
* Hey folks taking the New York bar exam at the Javits Center! Order your lunch. [Custom Gourmet]
* Insurance companies are asking American customers to go to Tijuana for medical care. “I know you need heart surgery, but have you considered how awesome it would be to take in a donkey show after your release?” [New Republic]
* Mitchell Epner, who is basically our Donald Sterling beat reporter, has a recap of the first day of the proceedings. [mitchellepner]
* Conviction for multiple sexual assaults “can be the basis of an interim suspension of his law license.” Seems like that should be a little more definite. [Legal Profession Blog]
* One of the underappreciated challenges in state and local governance is the inability to permalink statutes. [Government Executive]
The opinions released by the Supreme Court this morning were not super-exciting. The good news, pointed out by Professor Rick Hasen on Twitter, is that “[t]here are no likely boring #SCOTUS opinions left.” (But see Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, noted by Ken Jost.)
So let’s talk about something more interesting than today’s SCOTUS opinions: namely, the justices’ recently released financial disclosures. Which justices are taking home the most in outside income? How robust are their investments?
A recent study conducted by Maya Sen, a political scientist at the University of Rochester, and Adam Glynn, a government professor at Harvard, shows that judges who have at least one female child may be more likely to rule in favor of women in certain types of cases. The report “Identifying Judicial Empathy: Does Having Daughters Cause Judges to Rule for Women’s Issues?” finds that having at least one daughter corresponds to a 7 percent increase in the proportion of cases in which a judge will vote in a feminist direction. The study further finds that having one daughter as opposed to one son is linked to a 16 percent increase in the proportion of “gender-related cases decided in a feminist direction.” The study found the “daughter effect” was more dramatic in judges appointed by Republican presidents than in those appointed by Democrats.
Sen told the New York Times in a recent interview, “By having at least one daughter, judges learn what it’s like to be a woman, perhaps a young woman, who might have to deal with issues like equity in terms of pay, university admissions or taking care of children.” Sen and Glynn consider other causal explanations for their findings, but conclude that learning is the mechanism at play. For example, they rule out the possibility that parents of daughters feel compelled to rule in ways that would protect their female children Sen and Glynn saw an effect only in gender-related civil cases, not a conservative shift among gender-related criminal cases like sexual assault.
The problem with the study is not that the data are wrong. The problem is that too often those who use data like these mean to either exempt the judgments from moral consequence altogether or to praise particular judicial motivations that they happen to like. In the first instance, they justify legal realism with data, omitting any reflection on whether the observed effects can or should be minimized. They gloss over too the overwhelming number of cases that are decided by mundane, less-subjective methods. In the second variation, they celebrate the phenomenon as “empathy” with some results, while condemning it as “bias” in others . . . .
Time for another romp through the New York Times wedding pages to survey the latest and most impressive lawyer nuptials. The height of wedding season is upon us, and this crop does not disappoint. We’ve got associates at some of the nation’s most exalted law firms! We’ve got Supreme Court clerks! Come for the romance, stay for the prestige.
On Friday, the National Archives unsealed a fifth batch of Clinton Administration presidential papers. The documents were originally released by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock. Let’s get these pesky papers out of the way before Hillary Clinton, author of a new memoir (affiliate link), launches her presidential bid.
The latest papers contain some juicy tidbits for legal nerds. For example, as noted in Morning Docket, then-Judge Stephen Breyer got dissed as a “rather cold fish” while being considered for a Supreme Court seat (the seat that ultimately went to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg).
The papers contain candid assessments of Justices Breyer and Ginsburg, as well as other fun nuggets. Here are some highlights:
* Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg may retire by the end of summer 2015, or she may retire by the end of summer 2017, or she may retire whenever she damn well pleases. For the love of God, please stop with this. [Legal Intelligencer]
* The Fourth Circuit appears to be split on Virginia’s gay marriage ban. The Tenth Circuit appeared to be split on Utah’s gay marriage ban. We’ll give you three guesses on the eventual Supreme Court outcome. [New York Times]
* Law deans lose their jobs when their schools drop in rank, and it seems Biglaw chairmen lose their titles when their firms post the worst single-year drop in revenue ever. Sorry Bingham McCutchen. [Am Law Daily]
* Ex-D&Ler Zach Warren wants to sever his case from the likes of Joel Sanders and the Steves, using a “guilt by association” argument. The only thing he’s guilty of is being too cute. [National Law Journal]
* The drama continues at Albany Law, where faculty members now face possible pay cuts or being put on unpaid leave following a “smear campaign” waged against Dean Penelope Andrews. [Albany Times Union]
* Quentin Tarantino has given up the ghost and dropped his suit against Gawker over The Hateful Eight. [The Escapist]
* The people who made stupid toe shoes have settled a big class action. [Deadspin]
* Judge Posner and Justice Scalia haven’t had a public fight in a while. So this lawyer is trying to stir one up. Thanks, buddy! [Legal Times]
* Colorado’s energy industry is suing municipalities creating a patchwork of fracking regulation. As the author notes, “for a state that has boldly snubbed federal law on marijuana policy, such arguments sound a bit hollow.” [Breaking Energy]
* Stop calling on Justice Ginsburg to retire… it’s probably too late for Obama to nominate a replacement anyway. [New Republic]
* Lawyer writes threatening letter to customer who wrote a negative review on Amazon. [Ars Technica]
* Our tipster put it best, “New Show on Bravo: ‘Lowering the NJ Bar.’” [The Star-Ledger]
* A young solicitor known as Mr. Kelly was inspired to release a rap album about how much he hated his training job at a top 10 global firm. His video after the jump…. [Legal Cheek]
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.
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: firstname.lastname@example.org.
We at Kinney Asia have made a number of FCPA / White Collar US associate placements in Hong Kong / China thus far in 2014. Most of such placements have been commercial litigation associates from major US markets, fluent in Mandarin, switching to FCPA / White Collar litigation. Some have already had FCPA experience, but those are difficult candidates for firms to find (this will change in coming years as US firms are now promoting FCPA / White Collar to their 2L summers who are fluent in Mandarin and have an interest in transferring to China at some point).
Legal Week quoted Kinney’s Head of Asia, Evan Jowers, extensively in the following relevant article here.
There is a new trend in the market, though, where mid-level transactional US associates, fluent in spoken Mandarin and written Chinese, are interviewing for and in some cases landing junior FCPA / White Collar spots in Hong Kong / China at very top tier US firms.
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.