For all the ridiculousness of the op-eds that pass muster at the New York Times, one writer held firm from falling prey to the hysteria. While shriekers like Linda Greenhouse would attack the justices of the Supreme Court as cynical tools of their political masters, doing everything she could to undermine the integrity of the least dangerous branch of government, there was still a voice of reason* at the Times who didn’t scream the sky is falling with every decision that didn’t comport with Greenhouse’s feelz. There was still Adam Liptak.

And now he’s gone.

How Conservatives Weaponized the First Amendment

When constitutional rights are reduced to “weapons” because they get in the way, it says nothing of the right and everything about the desired outcome. Sometimes it serves one tribe. Sometimes it serves the other. And when it serves the other, it’s “weaponized”? For fuck’s sake, Liptak. Continue reading →

Last Thanksgiving was spent at a friend’s house in the Hamptons, where he threw a huge dinner for his many friends and relatives. Afterward, we went out back to smoke cigars, drink scotch and talk about cabbages and kings, which naturally meant Trump. Some of us had personal knowledge of the guy. None of us were more than one degree of separation from him.

Like most New Yorkers who were familiar with Donald Trump, we couldn’t understand how he could have been elected dog catcher, no less president. It wasn’t that he ran as a Republican, though we knew that was a lie he used to scam the unwary. The only party he belonged to was the Trump party, which stood for nothing but what was good for Trump.

Every person there was a Democrat, and had never voted for a presidential candidate from any other party. No one voted for Trump. Had Trump run against a dead, rotting corpse, no one would have voted for Trump. Some of us agreed that politics was a paralyzed, divisive wreck and needed a damn good shaking up, Continue reading →

It’s really quite sweet that the New York Times is willing to give of its precious real estate to the sad musings of children, though this particular one involves a word in its headline that few have ever heard before, and fewer still have reason to mention.

Taken literally, the term “hoejabi” refers to women who see themselves at the crossroads of being “hoes” and “hijabis.” If you’re not a Muslim woman, don’t even think about using it. https://t.co/Vkv46VLjWL by @romaissaa_b

— NYT Opinion (@nytopinion) June 29, 2018

Is it fair to call this peak New York Times, a headline that includes a word that no one else is allowed to utter? Continue reading →

As those of you who follow me on the twitters may be aware, I chide Jon Haidt’s love-child, Heterodox Academy, for not letting me be a member of the club. Of course, it’s a club of academics, so why would they? I’m no prof, and what could I possibly do to aid in their mission to provide cover to diversity of thought in academia?

My joke is that they need a Vulgarian Auxiliary (for the unwashed, that’s a play on the “Ladies Auxiliary” to men’s clubs of old) with my being a practitioner rather than a scholar, hence vulgarian. If you don’t get the joke, i can’t help you. Or at least I don’t want to, you joyless tool. But if you insist on reading further, at least try to grasp that it’s humor.

The @HdxAcademy held its first ever conference recently. It was attended by some of the most brilliant voices promoting diversity of thought around. I was not invited. I wasn’t asked to sit on a panel. I wasn’t asked to sit in the audience. I’m pretty sure they had a guard at the door to make sure I couldn’t slip in, even if I wore a tweed jacket with leather patches on the elbows. Continue reading →

It was outrageous enough when a school administrator decided that it was a good idea to shake out 13-year-old Savanna Redding’s bra to search for demon Ibuprofen, but zero tolerance for drugs means the stupidest thing to do makes sense to grocery clerks. And the Supreme Court’s wimpish, near-apologetic message, that maybe, just maybe, vice principals should not strip search kids absent really good reason, may not have been sufficiently clear.

During a sixth-grade choir class, an assistant principal allegedly ordered a mass, suspicionless strip search of the underwear of twenty-two preteen girls.

What possible exigency could have demanded such extreme action? A murder? A heroin overdose? A threat of a school shooting? Continue reading →

The felony-murder doctrine will surprise some people. It’s a fairly common refrain on the criminal defense side, “but I didn’t kill anyone.” And you don’t have to in order to be charged and convicted of murder.

While the specific parameters of the rule vary between jurisdictions, the general idea is that if a death results from the conduct of committing a felony, everyone involved is guilty of murder for the death. Usually, there is a requirement that it be reasonably foreseeable, at least to accomplices or co-conspirators if not the actual killer, but that’s more a matter of coming up with a good explanation for chaos theory connections than reality.

The upshot is that if a felony is committed, resulting in a death that may never have been intended or even known, tough nuggies. That you didn’t mean for anyone to die doesn’t change that someone did die as a result of your actions. And few would argue the virtue of the felon whose choices resulted in a needless death. But is it murder? Continue reading →

Supreme Court associate justice Anthony Kennedy’s announcement sent shockwaves through much of the legal community. For years now, he has been the X Factor in the legal system, the swing vote in 5-4 rulings, for better or worse. While not so much this past term, Kennedy did more to shape the outcome of the Court than any other justice. And now, poof, he’s gone.

And heads exploded. From the anti-Oracle of legal opinion, Mark Joseph Stern shrieks at Slate

Anthony Kennedy’s retirement ensures the Supreme Court will allow states to outlaw abortion.

Others with less moderate views see Kennedy’s retirement as the end of America, the world, life as we know it. The primary cause of the Apocalypse is that Darth Cheeto will get to appoint Kennedy’s replacement, but the secondary cause awaits the nomination itself. Continue reading →

In the scheme of the worst thing ever that will end the world, the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME owned it for maybe an hour. Having already explained why public sector unions shouldn’t exist at all, my antipathy toward them means I will cry no tears for the hardship Janus will cause.

The Janus ruling threatens to diminish them further. State and local public-sector workers in collective bargaining states are unionized at a rate of 53.7 percent, but the decision could end up reducing union membership by 8.2 percentage points.

Workers will have to reconstruct this countervailing power and find new ways to build solidarity. We’re going to have to get bold again.

Continue reading →

Christina Hoff Sommers called it “fainting couch feminism,” the allusion being to fragile Victorian women swooning at a breach of civility. While calling themselves strong, fierce, brave and bold, they do nothing to earn these glowing adjectives. Indeed, they demand protection of their every sensitivity.

But they’re oppressed, having “survived” bad dates, their chosen college studies that provide  no access to useful occupations and rude jokes, and demand that others stop erasing their lived experiences of misery. They could have said no, chosen STEM and either shrugged off words that upset them or, if they were truly fierce, told off their oppressors. But they preferred to faint.

At a meeting of the National Association of College and University Attorneys, Rodney A. Smolla, dean of Widener University’s Delaware Law School, explained the shift in speech that has gone in lockstep with the shift in female sexual fragility. Continue reading →

Not that “Justice Editor” at somewhat lefty ThinkProgress, Ian Millhiser, is prone to hyperbole, but the headline of his post on the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Hawaii, gives some insight into his expectations of the Court and lawfare:

Chief Justice Roberts just proved why the courts won’t save us from Trump

What? You didn’t know that was Roberts’ job, to undo the election because the deplorables of America voted for this vulgar, ignorant, amoral, self-aggrandizing fool? Ian’s opening is similarly unflattering toward C.J. Roberts.

Chief Justice John Roberts is either a very stupid man, or he believes that the rest of us are very stupid. Continue reading →