Inconceivable Agreement

Bryan Garner has a bone to pick with his local paper, the Dallas Morning News, regarding its coverage of an event that he and Justice Scalia hosted at SMU:

I really must protest the paltry and even silly treatment of the Scalia–Garner event in the January 29 edition (believe it or not, on page 8B of the Metro section). 

Let’s forget for the moment that it was a full house of over 1,700 at SMU’s McFarlin Auditorium and that Justice Scalia (I was merely fortunate to be onstage) received a standing ovation. And let’s forget the fact that never before in history has a Supreme Court justice coauthored one or more books with anyone, much less a Dallasite—and that this is the first coverage the paper has given our second book, which appeared last June. Not even our joint appearance on Piers Morgan received mention in my hometown newspaper. All that is probably my fault: I don’t have a publicist and never trumpet such matters.

What is especially disappointing is that Tasha Tsiaperas seriously misreported the gist of the joint presentation at SMU. She quotes me as saying, “I will tell you that my political beliefs are different from those of Justice Scalia” and reports that “Garner supports gay marriage and favors stricter gun control laws.” But she fails to follow up with the only reason that mentioning these issues or the authors’ political differences is relevant: Justice Scalia and I worked through 700 cases while writing our 600-page book and have not found a single case on which we disagree about legal interpretation. The point is that judicial textualism leads to consistent results, regardless of political bent. 

I found this emboldened portion of Garner's letter to be literally unbelievable. They really went 700 for 700, without a single disagreement?

Too bad they can't get married.

E-Filers Beware

A Hearing Board of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission has reprimanded an attorney who permitted documents with unredacted personal identifying information (such as social security numbers) to be electronically filed with the Northern District of Illinois's CM/ECF system. As is common at law firms, it was actually a non-lawyer assistant who filed the documents, using the attorney's log-in credentials. Here are the stipulated facts:

1.    In 2010, Respondent, an associate attorney at the law firm of Greene and Letts in Chicago, Illinois, was the attorney responsible for all cases stemming from a contract the law firm had with the United States Department of Justice to represent the United States in debt collection cases involving student loans.

2.    In July and August 2011, at Respondent's direction, one of Respondent's several non-lawyer assistants prepared complaints and corresponding exhibits alleging that defendants were indebted to the United States for failure to pay student loans.

3.    At Respondent's direction, one of Respondent's several non-lawyer assistants logged on to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ("N.D. Ill.") Case Management/Electronic Case File ("CM/ECF") system to file the complaints and exhibits.

4.    When logging on to the CM/ECF system, one of Respondent's several non-lawyer assistants, was required to check a box that declared that the filings were in compliance with Rule 5.2(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("Rule 5.2(a)"), which required that personal identifying information be redacted from all filings.

5.    The exhibits that Respondent attached to the complaints were loan documents that contained the defendants' personal identifying information, such as social security number, date of birth, and account numbers. In numerous complaints and exhibits, defendants' personal identifying information was not redacted, which cause the defendants' personal identifying information to be available to the public and viewable on the N.D. Ill. website home page.

6.    In late August 2011, defendant Aimee Krause ("Krause") notified the Clerk of the N.D. Ill. and Respondent that her personal identifying information was available to the public and viewable on the N.D. Ill. website home page.

7.    Also, Krause notified Respondent that other defendants' named in complaints filed by Respondent's had their personal identifying information in exhibits not redacted, and thus available and viewable on the N.D. Ill. website home page. The Clerk of the N.D. Ill. also notified Respondent of other defendants with personal identifying information not redacted in the exhibits.

8.    After Respondent was made aware that defendants' personal identifying information was not redacted, Respondent or his non-lawyer assistants at Respondent's direction, filed motions to correct and replace exhibits. However, Respondent did not provide appropriate supervision to his non-lawyer assistants to ensure that Respondent's subsequent filings were redacted as required to comply with Rule 5.2(a).

A reprimand under these circumstances certainly seems appropriate. First, I am well aware of the little check-box you have to check every time you log in to the Northern District's CM/ECF system. If you don't check the box, you don't get to file. This serves as a conspicuous reminder of the duty to redact this kind of information from filings. Second, this particular attorney was engaged in debt collection, and nearly every document involved in that kind of practice is plastered with the forbidden information. So he should have known well to be careful.

But this reprimand is a useful reminder that the duty to redact this information is not to be taken lightly. It's also a reminder that good help is hard to find.

h/t: Legal Profession Blog

40 years in the wilderness? Can this be true?

Smithsonian.com has an incredible story about a Russian family that lived by themselves in the Siberian Taiga for over 40 years with no contact with the outside world.  Given the details, one is tempted to think it is a hoax but apparently it is not.  Depending on your point of view it is a testament to or indictment of the power of religion.  

Subway Sued

There is a Subway restaurant just down the street from my office. I occasionally go there for lunch. When I do, my brain says that all I need is a "six-inch" sub and a cup of water. But my body—specifically my belly—objects strenuously. "We demand 12 inches! We demand Doritos!" My belly is  like the House of Representatives, and my brain is like the Senate, you see. Although the upper chamber is dominated by sober, contemplative types, there are a few rabble-rousers up there too. Call them anarchists. They tend to argue that, in the grand scheme of things, that extra six inches and that bag of Doritos certainly isn't going to do any harm. And they will be so delicious. And they will shut up those plebeians down in the belly. The negotiations go right up to the brink, but usually President Mouth says, "I'll have a footlong ..." and Secretary Hand grabs a bag of chips. The brain gets a pittance when soda is eschewed.

This is on my mind because Subway has been sued here in Chicago (and elsewhere—this has been a feeding frenzy* for plaintiffs' lawyers) for allegedly mischaracterizing the size of its "footlong" and "six-inch" sandwiches. In fact, say the complainants, so-called footlong subs are often only 11 or even just 10 inches long, and six-inchers are actually just half of that. Here's a picture from the lawsuit:

Hitting another lawyer in the courthouse is a bad idea.

Various media outlets in West Virginia are reporting that one West Virgina attorney has been charged with malicious assault for allegedly beating up another West Virginia attorney in the Marion County Courthouse. 

You think you know somebody.

People are constantly told in the media that the Republican party is the party of small-or sometimes "limited"-government.  One might conclude from that Republicans might like government officals who don't show up to work.  After all, government is extremely limited in what it can do if no government officals show up to work.

A Triumph of Reason

With news that House Republicans have decided to cave on the "debt ceiling" brinkmanship (at least for now—but in reality forever), the Gillette-Torvik Blog's position on the Trillion-Dollar Platinum Coin has been utterly vindicated in every particular.

You may remember that in Part One of the 94-Part Series I contended that the Platinum Coin was both "illegal and ill-advised." The "illegal" part was vindicated a week ago when the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve went public with a statement that neither believes "the law can or should be used" to produce the Trillion Dollar Coin.

And now the "ill-advised" part of my post is vindicated as well. As Reader(s)™ will recall, I argued that if Obama used the Trillion Dollar Coin option, it would destroy his own very strong position against the debt-ceiling brinkmanship. Instead, I advised Obama to "fight this battle from the high ground and on the merits"—where it could not be lost.

Sure enough, this was the winning strategy, as should have been obvious to anyone with a brain. And yet many smart people—including Paul Krugman, Josh Barro, and Matt Yglesias—essentially freaked out and made fools of themselves in this affair. Krugman infamously accused the Obama people of being "hopeless negotiators" when they ruled out the Platinum Coin.

Thank goodness these people aren't actually in charge of anything. But when that glorious day comes and the Gillette-Torvik Blog is in charge, you all can rest easy.

This is Part 7 in The Gillette-Torvik Blog's 94-Part Series on the Trillion Dollar Platinum Coin idea. 

Collective bargaining rollback bill in Wisconsin hits snag—UPDATE

UPDATE:

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed the district court and upheld Act 10—otherwise known as Scott Walker's collective bargaining bill—in its entirety. The opinion is available here. A state court action seeking to invalidate the law on various bases remains pending.

ORIGINAL POST (3/30/2012):

A federal district court judge in the Western District of Wisconsin has struck down portions of Scott Walker's bill rolling back collective bargaining rights for public employees. The opinion is here.

For every topic there is someone who sees a conspiracy to cover up the truth.

There is a stereotype that professional baseball players are not very smart.  It may be that this stereotype exists because baseball players, unlike may athletes in other professional sports, do not have to attend college for any period of time.  It is not uncommon for baseball players to be drafted out of high school, play a few years in the minor leagues, and then join a major league team.

Some might say that Deadspin's recent story about Washington Nationals outfielder (and former Minnesota Twin) Denard Span is an example that proves the stereotype.  Mr. Span has apparently been watching videos on YouTube that make him question whether there is a conspiracy to cover up information related to the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown Connecticut.

Maybe one should not be surprised that there are people questioning the events around the shooting.  As P.T. Barnum supposedly pointed out, "there's a sucker born every minute."  The corollary to the statement is that this means there are an awful lot of suckers walking around. 

North America looks different at night

Recently, NPR's Planet Money podcast did a story about the challenges that Williston, North Dakota faces as it deals with an population boom caused by fracking.  Among other things, demand for housing is so high that rent for a one bedroom apartment is equal to rents in New York City.  Also, local businesses are not growing to meet demand because oil workers are not moving their families to Williston.  This leads to a lack of workers for businesses like Wal-Mart or McDonald's.  Also the piece discusses how Williston plans to make itself attractive enough that the oil workers settle there long term.

Robert Krulwich on his blog Krulwich Wonders has a post showing how the boom in Williston has altered the nighttime view of North America from space.  You should check it out.  To me, it looks like the night view of Williston has the most light of anything between Chicago and the California coast.  Mr./ Krulwich also has a picture of the nighttime view of Williston six years ago.  The difference is astonishing and gives an interesting way of thinking about the growth in Western North Dakota.