I remember the first time I received death threats. I was up in Albany, about to argue before the New York Court of Appeals, and a suit I filed on behalf of my client, Troy Canty, against Berhard Goetz made the front page of the New York Post. I called the office to see if I had any messages, and my secretary told me that I had a few hundred death threats. That was 1985. I’m still alive.

I get the occasional death threat these days. It’s usually because of something I’ve written here or twitted of which someone disapproves. Sometimes it’s from someone on the right. Sometimes the left. It doesn’t concern me, not because death threats aren’t concerning, but it’s easy for to people make noise. Doing something is another matter, and it’s doubtful that anything I have to say matters enough to get anyone to do something. Continue reading →

Floaters are already out there about Joe Biden’s first 100 days, which is obviously an arbitrary timeline intended to suggest what his priorities will be. It’s like saying he’s going to do something on “Day 1,” as if he won’t be busy attending inauguration balls.

One thing that’s being floated is that he’s going to pay back the Warren supporters for their votes with a gift, fulfillment of Warren’s purchase of their love. Continue reading →

Whether you once liked them or never liked them, their decision to walk away was jarring.

This year, several high-profile writers have left left-leaning publications after running afoul of what they describe as a pervasive culture of censoriousness, groupthink and intellectual-risk aversion.

The one that nailed it for me was Matt Yglesias, who started as a blogger and wrote for such intellectual sinkholes as ThinkProgress, which made Ian Millhiser cry when it died a brutal but necessary death. The irony was that Millhiser got a new gig at Vox, the site co-founded by Yglesias. The very site Yglesias left, offering an unduly kind parting explanation. Continue reading →

I’ve sipped on the water in the People’s Republic of Cambridge, and it doesn’t taste any different than water anywhere else. But there has to be something in it to make people at Harvard lose all touch with reality.

What happened in California? Despite the state’s liberal reputation, voters there last week approved Proposition 22, a ballot initiative exempting many gig companies from state workplace laws and stripping their workers of basic, essential protections. Continue reading →

After noting that Ted Olsen, who argued Bush v. Gore for the Bush team, got together for a reunion op-ed with David Boies to state the obvious, that Biden won, some wag replied to me with utmost sincerity that we need to let the legal process play out. That struck a nerve with me, despite the fact that the myriad suits brought, and bizarre claims twitted, fail to meet the minimal requirements of plausibility, evidentiary support or adequacy to sustain the relief sought.

It’s not enough to raise questions. Is it possible that Men In Black is a documentary? I guess it’s possible, but are we willing to bet the Republic on it? I know, some of you are, but you also need to unzip your fly to count to 21. The burden of proof is on the party seeking relief, and while there is the outlier bad vote, the evidence has conclusively failed miserably to suggest any possibility of changing the election outcome. And so more claims, more outlandish claims barren of evidence, get spewed. Why? If there’s no plausible cause of action, no evidence, why not let the legal process play out? Continue reading →

Not having read Abigail Shrier’s book, Irreversible Damage, The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters, the only thing I know about it comes from its description.

Until just a few years ago, gender dysphoria—severe discomfort in one’s biological sex—was vanishingly rare. It was typically found in less than .01 percent of the population, emerged in early childhood, and afflicted males almost exclusively.

But today whole groups of female friends in colleges, high schools, and even middle schools across the country are coming out as “transgender.” These are girls who had never experienced any discomfort in their biological sex until they heard a coming-out story from a speaker at a school assembly or discovered the internet community of trans “influencers.” Continue reading →

In the scheme of catchy phrases, Deutsche Bank has come up with a good one. After all, who (but me) argues that privilege is good, something we should all aspire to and something we should wish on everyone?

As brightening vaccine prospects tease a return to pre-pandemic normalcy and employers map out when and how remote workers return to the office, analysts at Deutsche Bank are proposing a “privilege tax” on post-pandemic work from home to subsidize lost wages for low-income workers.

Deutsche argues that remote workers contribute less to the economy’s infrastructure while still receiving its benefits, and says that a 5% tax on individuals levied against their wages on days they decide to work remotely would “leave them no worse off than if they had chosen to go into the office.”

Continue reading →

For many, the mere mention of COVID brings a harangue about how Trump failed a nation, between the idiocy of ingesting bleach to the choice to reopen as if it was just like the common flu. But as much fun as it is to blame Trump, it contributes nothing toward addressing the totally anticipated spike now happening. What happens now?

I am the president-elect, but will not be president until next year. COVID-19 does not respect dates on the calendar, it is accelerating right now. Urgent action is needed today, now, by the current administration.

— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) November 14, 2020

Continue reading →

Our Friday Funny boy man turned 40 this week. As 1 Corinthians 13:11 says:

When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

Finally, they’s (that’s still your preferred pronoun, right Chris?) two beautiful children (the paternity remaining something of a mystery according to Dr. S.) will get to play with their Christmas presents this year without “dad” demanding his turn on the Big Wheel. After all the laughs he’s given us, both of which were pretty okayish, the least a few of his friends and family could do is pay him back in kind. Continue reading →

When Allan Bakke claimed he was the victim of reverse discrimination, the Supreme Court held that affirmative action, using race as one of many factors to achieve the overarching pedagogical good of having a diverse student body, a compelling state interest as was expressly held in Fischer, was not unlawful. Not because it was reparations for past discrimination, and not a quota.

At the time, it was highly controversial, enough so to cause a fractured plurality opinion, but the use of race as a consideration, among others, seemed on the right side of a line that prohibited discrimination based on race. Back then, the argument that discrimination favoring an “oppressed” race was itself a favored goal. The idea would have been considered ludicrous and unlawful. But Bakke never drew a real line between the use of race as a “plus” factor and unlawful discrimination. Continue reading →