Whether university legacy admissions are as big a deal as some make of it is beside the point. At best, it’s a tie-breaker for equally admissible students. Contrary to the widely shared assumption, it doesn’t mean colleges will admit the drooling idiot children of its alumni. But still, it’s hard to justify giving any weight to a legacy when deciding whether a student should be admitted. So when the Supreme Court held that it was unconstitutional for race to be considered in admissions, the backlash was that if they couldn’t have affirmative action, they shouldn’t have legacy admission.

California turned the argument into law. Continue reading →

But for Trump, it seems impossible that anyone at MSNBC would find Andrew Weissmann tolerable, no less one of their “go to” federal prosecutors for all things legal, no matter how utterly ignorant he and his cohort may be about state criminal law and civil law. These are the very same prosecutors who gave us incarceration nation, who were complicit in putting tens of thousands of black men in prison, some of whom were even guilty, and happily skirted the Constitution when it served their flavor of justice.

And yet, Weissmann is an omnipresent persona on the MSNBC tube because he hates Trump and will say whatever it takes to show how everything bad in the legal universe leads back to Trump. And he does so with gravitas because of his ascribed credibility. He was a federal prosecutor. He was general counsel of the FBI. He was part of Mueller’s team. He’s a prof at NYU law school. He wrote a book deciphering the Trump indictments. And no one, but no one, challenges anything he says. Indeed, their gushing thanks for his legal brilliance would be embarrassing to anyone with a modicum of humility. But that’s not Weissmann. Continue reading →

Rarely does something happen, like a fly on a head, that makes a vice presidential debate matter. Sure, Lloyd Bentsen took Dan Quayle to the woodshed with his “I knew Jack Kennedy” retort, but did it change the outcome of the election? Dukakis got crushed in his own right, and Bentsen’s memorable line may have been perfect, but it couldn’t un-Willie Horton the vote.

Tonight, J.D. Vance will debate Tim Walz. Vance, a Yale-trained lawyer who has more than a few debates under his belt, will debate Coach Walz, whose “aw shucks” dad vibe has pretty much encapsulated the start and finish of his campaign contribution as second to Kamala Harris. Of course, with Harris at a spry 59 years of age, it’s unlikely that she’ll be unable to complete her term such that Walz will end up as president in her stead. Thus, who really cares one way or the other? Vice president is, for the most part, a non-job, a spare, a warm body just in case. Continue reading →