The argument is a fairly obvious extension of the rationalization for in rem asset forfeiture, to “take the profit out of crime.” It’s a great slogan, given that crime is bad and profit is its motive. When the money seized was the cash in a traveler’s pocket, seized not because there was any particular basis to believe that a crime was committed or that money snatched was either derived from or used in crime, but just cash that cops could grab, however, the slogan rang hollow.

But that was cash, and there was more money to be had. And much like drug dealers might carry suitcases filled with cash, bad dudes might use banks to hold, launder and pay for bad purposes. Something must be done, activists cried. And so something was done. Continue reading →

It may have surprised you. It surprised me. And I suspect it surprised President Biden to see the numbers of young progressives protesting on behalf of the Palestinians. What percentage of the polity they reflect isn’t clear, but what is clear is that they are angry and they come from Biden’s side of the voting booth.

Continue reading →

A few years ago, a phrase suddenly appeared in our lexicon that took on a somber and serious tone, “credibly accused.” People, particularly in the media, began using it to make an unproven but possible accusation sound ominous. He could have done it. So? It’s not burden of proof, not even one as low as probable cause. It’s just a phrase someone made up and got traction because some people needed a way to create the impression of guilt without any of the nasty burdens like evidence. And yet, there it was, repeated regularly and taken seriously.

There’s a new phrase in the offing, “humanitarian pause,” that’s suddenly ubiquitous. It has now found its way into a New York Times editorial. After four paragraphs of strongly worded factually sound characterizations of what Hamas did to Israel, the Times editorial board basically tries to get its readers’ heads out of their collective butts to see reality through the fog of failed ideology. Continue reading →

Prefatory note: The following is part 2 in the latest series of Sheriff Roy stories. For Part 1, please see “A Car Story.”—CLS They/Them

Sheriff Roy dialed a number for Kollision King in Dismal Seepage, Arkansas. It was a phone tree, which the Sheriff despised greatly. After punching a few numbers in and listening to a couple of menus, a woman with a slightly nasal tone to her voice reminiscent of Fran Drescher* answered.

“Kollision King, where your Car reigns supreme. How can I help you?”

“I’m calling about getting my wife’s hood latch fixed.”

“Okay, we can help with that. What’s your name, sir?” Continue reading →

In an excellent column, David French provides a sound and easily understood description of three areas of law at particular issue on campus in the current iteration of the culture wars. One issue involves free speech.

Critically — and this might be counterintuitive — this right to engage in provocative speech can even include endorsing violence. For example, in a 1969 case, Watts v. United States, the Supreme Court reversed the conviction of a young man who publicly stated at an antiwar rally, “If they ever make me carry a rifle, the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J.” Continue reading →

It began with an open letter from students at Columbia University and Barnard, which neglected to mention the terrorism perpetrated by Hamas on October 7th, but placed the blame entirely on Israel. It was poorly received by some, who rented trucks to shame the signatories to the letter.

This gave rise to a faculty open letter which condemned the “harassment” of students and proceeded to justify the students’ position that Israel brought the raping of women, beheading and roasting of babies, cutting off of a mother’s breast, gouging out of a father’s eye, cutting off the feet of a daughter and fingers of a son, before eating their meal, upon itself. Continue reading →

Back when the effort was to end discrimination in bail and sentencing decisions by removing the decision-making from judges and introducing empirical factors, it seemed like a great step forward. Until, that is, it turned out that the use of the Sentence-O-Matic 1000 was just as “bad,” if not moreso, than judges. As reliance on empiricism failed to fix disparate outcomes, but rather further embedded them and gave cover to judges who could no longer be blamed, a fix was demanded.

The argument was that the same factors being used for empirical decision-making were the factors giving rise to disparate outcomes in the first place. The fix was simple: tweak the factors to produce the desired outcome. The only problem, of course, was that it was no longer empirical, but manipulated to create the impression of empiricism while producing the “right” outcomes. Continue reading →

There have been many videos of people tearing down posters of people kidnapped by Hamas, from Palestinians to Jewish students to an NYU SBA president to a dentist to a Broadway producer.

This is Anna Epstein. Anna is a student at Boston University and is seen here ripping down posters of kidnapped and missing Israelis. While fellow Jews are being beheaded, raped, and kidnapped by Hamas, Anna believes this is merely propaganda.

Like us, you’re probably wondering… pic.twitter.com/sohITW7d9F

— CAMERA on Campus (@CAMERAonCampus) October 23, 2023

Continue reading →

“It’s not about Jews” has been a constant retort to assertions that the progressive left wing, including many Jewish Americans who carry the banner of Palestinians, who desperately seek to distinguish hatred of Israel and Zionism from support for Hamas, hatred of Jews and terrorism happening here. But it is about terrorism and is, whether they want it to be true or not, about Jews, as the students at Cornell University learned yesterday. Continue reading →

Over and over, I think of the words of Lyrissa Lidsky.

Nevertheless, I know that in the war of generations, the younger always wins.  I just wonder what victory looks like.

The answer is beginning to emerge. Continue reading →