Former EDNY Judge John Gleeson was an enigma. A hard-nosed federal prosecutor who did the undoable, took down the Teflon Don, he was rewarded by a bench and robe. But then, Judge Gleeson became one of the foremost critics of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, a voice of compassion and understanding toward defendants in a system that was as callous as society demanded it be. What happened?

In a letter to the editor, Judge Gleeson explains how the tough federal prosecutor became the voice of reason. Continue reading →

Still embroiled in the Trap House idiocy, chronicled as it got worse and word by David Lat, the last thing Yale Law School needed was the re-emergence of another scandal of “equity.”  After all, this is YLS, the other school where leaders of the future of America are bought and sold. But then, critical race theory is, at its roots, a legal theory that can only be truly appreciated by the very smartest among us, so it makes complete sense that YLS would take the lead in taking a swan dive into the cesspool.

Two unnamed Yale Law School students filed a complaint Monday against three Law School administrators and the University for allegedly “blackball[ing]” them from job opportunities after they refused to endorse a statement in the ongoing investigation against law professor Amy Chua. Continue reading →

More than a decade ago, the phrase “work/life balance” was all the rage, people seeking the time and opportunity to spend with family and friends rather than in the office (or the courtroom, as the case may be). It was a quaint notion, that one could earn that sweet paycheck and just not show up when junior had a baseball game, and the boss would be cool with it because nobody says on their death bed they didn’t spend enough time in the office.

Are we over that now?.

Since the start of the pandemic, Americans have been talking seriously with friends, family, and themselves about the shortcomings of their modern-day work lives. Millions of people have joined the “Great Resignation,” and many, especially the college-educated, have vowed to follow their passion and embark on a different career.

Continue reading →

What happened in the video was shocking. In itself, reason to believe that for all the protests, all the criticism, all the challenges of the public to the manner in which police dealt with people, cop culture really hadn’t changed.

Esqueda told USA TODAY that he’s become a pariah among his coworkers since July 2020, when he shared with a television reporter footage from January of that year showing how officers treated a handcuffed Black man in medical distress. Officers slapped Eric Lurry, restricted his airway and shoved a baton in his mouth hours before his death.

This starts with what was done to Lurry. Continue reading →

It’s bad enough that there was nothing legally controversial about the cops making a pretext stop of a guy whom they considered a “person of interest” in a recent shooting, But the Whren Court said anybody in a car was fair game, and so Dubuque police stopped a car on Christmas Day 2019 to speak with a passenger, Earnest Hunt Jr. Don’t let the fact that the “person of interest” was a passenger cause you to furrow your brow, as he, too, fell within the officers’ sphere of safety under Mimms. And it spiraled down from there.

An officer observed Hunt seeming very nervous and feared he might have a gun, so the officer placed him in handcuffs and patted him down over his clothing. Continue reading →

As day follows night, pundits masquerading as news reporters hook up with hitherto unknown law profs whose passionate theories mattered to no one whenever a high-profile case doesn’t go the way they believe it should. This time, there are two happening simultaneously, and if two outliers don’t prove a pervasive problem in need of fixing, what does?

The Kyle Rittenhouse and Ahmaud Arbery cases raise intriguing legal questions about people who take the law into their own hands and then claim self-defense when someone dies.

Continue reading →

I’ve seen the argument. I’ve made the argument. When it’s applied to a specific set of facts, a particular individual, it’s a damn fine argument. But as a general proposition, it doesn’t work.

Growing up on the South Side of Chicago, I’ve seen my classmates carry firearms to keep themselves and their families safe from harm. And I later represented some of those same individuals in court—being prosecuted for firearm possession—when I started work as a public defender.

Continue reading →

“I’m exhausted,” the email began. I knew his pain. All those keys. All those letters. All those words. Writing his Friday Funny had finally taken its toll on Chris Seaton, who decided on sheer impulse to shave his head, buy a saffron robe at the Dollar Tree and become an acolyte of the Dalai Lama.

I mean, who cares about grown-ass men in tights pretending to be wrestlers? What the fuck does “roll tide” even mean?

Oh crap. This is serious. Continue reading →

Some kids are smarter than others. Some kids work harder to learn than others. Some kids have the benefit of parents who read to them, make them study, help them to learn and instill in their children the value of education and knowledge. And schools have long used a grading system to distinguish between those who achieve competence, those who achieve mastery and those who don’t. The former rise to the top of their class. The latter become judges find other ways to fulfill their dreams.

Is that fair to the kids who fail? Continue reading →

The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse has been fairly interesting for lawyers, particularly given the decision to put the defendant on the stand given that the trial had been going quite well for the defense and there is nothing more risky than having a defendant testify. No matter how well prepped, how sincere, how innocent (or guilty), it’s a crap shoot. One never knows what will come out of a defendant’s mouth under the stress of courtroom testimony. Even the best defendant can implode on the stand.

But the notion of a public trial includes not only the defendant’s interest in not being railroaded behind closed doors, but that the public has faith in the legal system reaching a fair verdict by hearing with its own ears, seeing with its own eyes, the testimony proffered, the arguments made, the instructions given, so that the public understands how a verdict was reached. How’s that going? Continue reading →