Monthly Archives: April 2006

Having blogged about a motion for a fist fight recently, I feel it’s only fair to point out last week’s ruling on a motion seeking permission to wear a hat in court. David Markus has the amusing details at the … Continue reading →

Larry Solum was live-blogging the Bloggership symposium, and had this response to my paper Blogs and the Legal Academy: Kerr’s thesis that blogs have an inherent problem which stems from the fact that blog posts are viewed in “Reverse Chronological … Continue reading →

A few readers tell me that they’re having problems finding my Thursday post on alleged surveillance at NYU Law School. I’m not sure what software bug is responsible [or, perhaps more likely, where I messed up along the way], but … Continue reading →

For a live video stream of today’s conference on law professor blogging, go here.  I’ll be at the conference all day.  The papers for today’s conference are here.

Check out this decision from the Seventh Circuit today involving a lawsuit filed by a man who was wrongly convicted of raping and murdering a little girl, and who served 27 years in prison for it before being exonerated based … Continue reading →

On Monday, I blogged about the one-page per curiam summary reversal in Salinas v. United States, and noted that it was a bit hard to guess what happened without reading the briefs.  I have obtained copies of the briefs and … Continue reading →

The Supreme Court handed down an interesting case today, Jones v. Flowers. The question in the case was how much effort the state of Arkansas needed to take to notify an absent property owner before selling off the property for … Continue reading →

Howard points out that everyone was cruising along in the passing lane in the Judiciary Committee today for the four nominees to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.  And just a few weeks ago, the Senate … Continue reading →

I’ve just finished reading one of the two new books on Supreme Court clerks, Sorcerers’ Apprentices: 100 Years of Law Clerks at the United States Supreme Court, by Artemus Ward and David Weiden  It’s kind of hard to offer a … Continue reading →

I occasionally hear stories of law schools cooking the numbers that they submit to U.S. News in order to improve their rankings.  The New York Times had a story on this last year, and bloggers such as Brian Leiter occasionally … Continue reading →

Writing in the National Law Journal, my friend (and former Scalia clerk) Brian Fitzpatrick criticizes canons of judicial conduct that instruct federal judges to “avoid public comment on the merits of a pending or impending action,” and to recuse themselves … Continue reading →

Decision of the Day points out a very interesting Eighth Circuit traffic stop decision today, United States v. Rodriguez-Lopez.   I think the decision is probably right under current U.S. Supreme Court law, with the caveat that the issue should be probable cause … Continue reading →

The Supeme Court issued a one-page per curiam opinion today in Salinas v. United States.  The Salinas opinion is a rare species at the Supreme Court: A reversal solely for the purpose of error correction from the Court’s in forma pauperis … Continue reading →

Judge Michael McConnell has written a terrific and short law review article on the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision on the Sentencing Guidelines, United States v. Booker.  You can get the article here in .pdf format:  The Booker Mess, … Continue reading →

I’ve long admired the legal scholarship of Alexander Bickel, and recently purchased a memorial pamphlet published by Yale Law School in 1975 after Bickel’s death in 1974 at the young age of 49. The back of the pamphlet has a … Continue reading →

Eugene Volokh was blogging today about the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Harper v. Poway Unified School District. Reinhardt’s majority opinion is here; Kozinski’s dissent is here. This case has the feel of a grant to me, at least if the … Continue reading →

Judges often complain that the legal scholarship appearing in mainstream law reviews just isn’t helpful to them.  It’s too theoretical, too esoteric, and simply doesn’t try to engage seriously with the problems facing courts.  I think these criticisms are quite … Continue reading →

It’s true! Check out United States v. William Eskridge, released today.  (Okay, so it’s not this Bill Eskridge, but I thought it made for a funny headline.)  Thanks to Decision of the Day for the link.

SCOTUSblog reports that the Supreme Court has ordered reargument of Hudson v. Michigan, a case I blogged about here.  Presumably this is good news for Michigan.

Today the Supreme Court heard argument in Clark v. Arizona.   Clark is a fascinating case about whether the constitution regulates the availablilty of diminished capacity defenses in criminal law. (Here is a good summary of the case.) The Supreme Court has … Continue reading →