University of Alberta Faculty of Law Blog

School Schmool

There has been controversy lately about gender proportions in higher education. Seems fair to say that one question that has been overlooked is why there is such a push for University education in the first place. Mighty high talk for a law student to be sure. But here's a piece from The Chronicle of Higher Education that shines a spotlight on just that debate.

Excerpt:

Q: At what point does the cost of going to college outweigh the benefits?

A: It depends on how much money you have.

Scalia and Brown

New York Times columnist Adam Liptak has an interesting piece recounting a contentious exchange between Justice Scalia and Justice Breyer over how Justice Scalia would have voted in the 1954 case of Brown v. Board of Education, the decision that declared school segregation unconsitutional. 

About 20 minutes into their discussion in Arizona, Justice Breyer turned to the case.

“Where would you be with school desegregation?” the justice asked with a satisfied expression. “It’s certainly clear that at the time they passed the 14th Amendment, which says people should be treated equally, there was school segregation and they didn’t think they were ending it.”

Justice Breyer, who has a more flexible view of constitutional interpretation than Justice Scalia, said the solution was to identify the value underlying the language in the Constitution and to ignore the specific understandings of those who ratified it.

Justice Scalia, in high sarcasm mode, said relying on general values was not a legitimate way to conduct judicial business, and dismissed the idea that using such a method was easy.

“Piece of cake,” Justice Scalia said, his voice dripping with disdain. “Piece of cake. Following the ‘values.’ ” He spat out that last word as though he had just taken a spoonful of anthrax.

But Justice Scalia did not give a direct answer to how he would have voted in Brown.

Liptak goes on to say that in a 2005 New Yorker profile, Justice Scalia said "he would have voted with the majority in Brown. But he did not explain why."

(via WSJ Law Blog)

Happy Birthday Big Bird and Family

Tomorrow will be the 40th borthday of Sesame Street. Here is a random clip to celebrate the event:

$700 for Court Docs?

The new British Supreme Court is charging 350 British pounds for access to the legal documenst at the Court. (h/t How Appealing) Is this a justifiable expense or a burden on the poor (and  legal academics)?

Twenty Years Ago

the Berlin Wall fell.  Needless to say, this was a great moment in World history. Many of us still remember where we were that day. I invite loyal readers to share their memories in the comments.

So you think you can judge?

Then join Josh Blackman in his Fantasy Supreme Court Fantasy League (US). As is our habit up here, we await the development of the Canadian version. Maybe the folks over at Law is Cool might step up to this challenge.

No Twitter in the Courtroom

So says an American Federal trial court. I suspect a Canadian court faced with the same issue would also rule the same way.

At some point in the future, however, I suspect this may change given the rise of the local blogger and the demise of traditional news sources. Local bloggers, such as Dave Cournoyer (and his Twitter posts), who are doing a great job covering the local issues might soon push for such instant access to courts and public hearings. Stay tuned.

It is easy being green

At the end of my morning commute to the University, which is environmentally friendly, but until the LRT south extension is completed takes too long, I am tempted sometimes to take the escalator (or worse) to the surface. Fortunately today, I was prevented from causing irreparable damage to our planet, since the escalators were not working again and the elevator was taken for the purpose of moving the cleaning equipment during the morning rush. There worst was still ahead, but when I got to the law building I was relieved to see that main elevator still inoperative too (rumour is the ancient art or repairing it has been lost forever). Choice is a dangerous thing indeed.

Reason TV interview with Rand's biographer

Jennifer Burns who has written a biography of Ayn Rand is being interviewed here on Reason TV:

h/t Josh who will be interviewing Anne C. Heller next week on his blog.

The Most Insignificant US Justice

The Article cited in the piece is David P. Currie, The Most Insignificant Justice: A Preliminary Inquiry, 50 U. Chi. L. Rev. 466 (1983). Judge Easterbrook's reply is here.

Question for you Canadian legal historians: who would be Canada's most insignificant justice of the Supreme Court?

Marc Dreier’s downfall

The story of Marc Dreier should serve as a cautionary tale for all lawyers, who let their personal ambitions get in the way of their otherwise gift for the law.

At one stage, he had one of the primo law firms in New York City. I even recall, when one of my classmates told me she had landed there how, excited I was for her. Fast forward a few years later, and it all came tumbling down.  The Canadian connection, of course, is also fascinating, because what would the world be without some Canadian content.

Larry Summers Profiled

Vanity Fair has an excellent profile of economist, former President of Harvard University, and current head of the White House's National Economic Council.

The profile covers his childhood, mariage, education, and, his tenure during the Clinton era. His Harvard presidency is also covered, but the story is more about Summers the person, including his bout with cancer early on.

One tidbit I found fascinating: he is related to Economists and Nobel Laureautes Paul Samuelson and Kenneth Arrow. That is quite the lineage!

Quick Links

That was quick, and DC court revives cell-phone lawsuit. Also, Don't harass a judge just because you don't like his rulings.   If you are an associate at a law firm, you may also not want to start a fire at a 9/11 memorial. Associates should also keep away from insider trading. [only charges have been laid, no guilt has been found yet]

Just how common is insider trading by lawyers? LB has some discussion plus some observations on the nature of the investigations surrounding this last case.

On the other hand, if you are sentenced to community service and you work at a jerk-chicken store, serving the courtroom with a tray of chicken may count as your service.

If you were a woman in 1938 and applied to Walt Disney for a job as a cartoonist, you would have received this reply back (h/t Settle it Now).

Finally, is Yoga a spiritual endeavor, and hence tax-exempt, or a sporting endeavor and hence taxable? Guess which way some cash-strapped states are going.

Malicious Prosecution at SCOTUS

In Canada, we recently had some jurisprudence develop in the area of malicious prosecution. In the US, the rule of prosecutorial immunity has been rock solid in the past. The US Supreme Court, however, will get a chance to examine the question in light some extreme facts. Interestingly enough, for me anyways, is the role reversal of the attorneys arguing the case. On the states' side is Deputy US Solicitor Neal Katyal, who scored a victory last year for Gitmo detainees, while arguing for the wrongly convicted plaintiffs is former US Solicitor Paul Clement, who argued the losing side against Katyal.

Update The Supreme Court just released its judgment Miazga v. Kvello Estate, 2009 SCC 51. I don't have time to review it, but the headnote says it all:

The Action should be dismissed [plaintiff loses]

To succeed in an action for malicious prosecution, a plaintiff must prove that the prosecution was:  (1) initiated by the defendant; (2) terminated in favour of the plaintiff; (3) undertaken without reasonable and probable cause; and (4) motivated by malice or a primary purpose other than that of carrying the law into effect. 

Law Firm Bonuses

It is law firm bonus season in the US. While many are expecting bonus levels to be much lower than prior years, no one expected them to be this ridiculous.

Mike Huckabee

Mike Huckabee, former GOP Presedential nomination candidate, is coming to Calgary on December 6, 2009. Call 403-720-2143 Ext. 3 for tickets.

 

I have no stake in this event nor am I endorsing his line of thinking; I just thought some of our readers may be interested.

Arizona court officers caught snooping

A story from Maricopa County:

Arizona Defense Attorney Joanne Cuccia was in court at the podium arguing on behalf of her client during a sentencing hearing when that client, Antonio Lozano, noticed two detention officers pilfering a document from Cuccia's fies behind her back. The incident, captured on video, interrupted the hearing, enraged defense attorneys and, unbelievably, spurred the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office to defend the officers' actions.

Duty to Rescue

Under the common law, there is no duty to rescue. Even the statutory requirements to rescue are usually reserved for professionals, such as doctors. Eugene Volokh has compiled a list of states that have imposed the duty to rescue statutorily. Are there Canadian equivalents (i.e. I am too lazy to look)?

Hawkins, big bang, and UofA

Congratulations to UofA Physics' Don Page for receiving the Killam Annual Professorship. In addition to being super-smart and winning bets with Stephen Hawking (under whom he did his post-doc), he is an active community member and a devout Christian. I have had the pleasure of meeting Professor Page at an interfaith event, and I can attest to what a wonderful guy he is. Congratulations once again.

Cartman or Walken

Who does a better job of covering Lady Gaga's Poker Face - South Park's Cartman or Christopher Walken? Listen and vote over at Josh Blackman 's blog. 

Also if you are an academic on the job market this year, here are some questions you 'should' ask the recruiting committee. OK - maybe only ask after you have one job in the bag.