It was 2015 when Columbus Day took its last gasp. There were many reasons why it was a really poor choice of holiday, why Columbus was unworthy of celebration, from his not having discovered anything except from the European colonialist perspective, to his having raped an island native when he arrived. Some decided it was better to use the day to celebrate the indigenous people who suffered as a result of his arrival in the New World, their world.

The New York Times has decided to similarly correct the history of Thanksgiving.

Not to rain on our Thanksgiving Day parade, but the story of the first Thanksgiving, as most Americans have been taught it, is not exactly accurate.

Continue reading →

Conor Friedersdorf is a name often mentioned here, both because I think he’s exceptionally smart and occasionally too kind, generous to a fault to people who might not be worthy of his largesse. I now add my name to the list.

For more than a decade, the criminal-defense attorney Scott H. Greenfield has been writing about American law and culture at Simple Justice. Among the site’s readers are lawyers, law professors, judges, civil libertarians, and advocates of criminal-justice reform. What keeps me coming back is his zealous advocacy for a consistent set of principles no matter how unpopular their application might be in a given instance.

There may be no better compliment than to characterize what I attempt to do here as “zealous advocacy for a consistent set of principles no matter how unpopular their application might be in a given instance.” It’s never entirely clear that I live up to that description, and many would, and have, questioned my views for their consistency. Continue reading →

It’s almost impossible to consider the nature of the offense without retching. It is a horrible thing to do to any girl. Female genital mutilation is disgusting.

The federal statute at issue states: “Whoever knowingly circumcises, excises or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person” under the age of 18 shall be fined or imprisoned for up to five years, or both.

It’s been outlawed in more than 30 countries and 27 states, as well as under 18 U.S.C. § 116. District Court Judge Bernard Friedman takes no issue with the horror of the procedure, but that wasn’t the issue before him. Continue reading →

In that peculiar way that only comes about when someone argues vehemently against the very point they otherwise claim to believe, the mantra “but it’s not a criminal trial” was born during the tumultuous Senate confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh, reflecting one of the worst displays of politicizing confirmation for the Supreme Court possible.

In that case, the absence of any meaningful process in Kav’s “trial” for crimes committed against Christine Blasey Ford decades earlier was rationalized away as a “job interview.” It was far from an analogy, but it wasn’t entirely off base. It served to rationalize a misbegotten grasp of what was being done by those who, under most other circumstances, would bemoan the deprivation of due process.

Since they hated Kavenaugh, they needed some means to overcome their hypocrisy, and latched onto the “but it’s not a criminal trial” excuse. Anything to beat the unpleasantness of cognitive dissonance, or compel an unwilling but passionate individual to suffer the burden of thinking. Continue reading →

Every Thanksgiving, someone writes a post about how to argue with your crazy uncle. Sometimes the uncle is characterized as angry, or deplorable, or some other unpleasant word, but there are two components that never change. It’s always an “uncle,” because not even the woke want to argue with daddy, who pays for their iPhone and Cheetos, and it’s always the brilliant, reasonable and completely righteous youngster informing their idiot elder of how he’s destroying the universe.

While this is a daily occurrence for many of us, as I am deluged with law students and baby lawyers informing me how wrong I am about everything because they’re all the best and brightest Lake Wobegon has to offer, it takes on a special meaning for Thanksgiving, when young people are compelled by the evil forces of family to spend time with relatives they despise. They may attack an Old like me out of choice, but they are forced to sit next to their uncle who doesn’t even use Axe Body Wash or manscape. Continue reading →

It’s bad enough, both for substantive as well as factual reasons, that the Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe held that sex offender registration was not punitive, but civil, and therefore beyond the reach of the Ex Post Facto Clause. Not only was it grounded in utterly baseless statistics of recidivism, but it indulged in the fantasy that rhetoric was an adequate substitute for inquiry before destroying the future of an entire class of people.

In other words, this categorical group known as “sex offenders” was so deserving of a life of misery, prohibition and shunning for the putative safety of the community that there was a rational basis for civil rules to make them societal outcasts. Where they can live, work, exist for decades, if not the rest of their lives, was constrained to the point of impossibility. And should they mess up compliance with any detail, back they go to prison.

But it’s not criminal. It’s civil. For no better reason than legislatures say it’s not punitive, but for the safety of the children, Even though it’s punitive. Extremely punitive. Continue reading →

How many times have lawyers tried to tell the passionate believers in videotaping the cops that there are still laws that apply, even to them? This video, taken at the Babylon, New York Long Island Rail Road station, is a fascinating example of a fellow who believed a little too much in his invulnerability and the righteousness of his cause.

Smoking is prohibited on LIRR platforms. The guy taking the video was smoking a cigarette. Had he not been, he would have been fine taking video, but he was. And that means he’s subject to a summons, which means the cop is authorized to demand identification so he can write the ticket. Continue reading →

Aisha Fraser Mason was stabbed to death in her home in Shaker Heights. Who could have seen this coming? Well, anyone who cared to look.

Mason in August 2014 punched his then-wife 20 times and slammed her head against the dashboard of his car five times, breaking her orbital bone.

The couple’s children were in the back of the car when the attack occurred.

At the time, Lance Mason was called “judge.” Before that, he served in the state legislature. After his release from prison, serving nine months of a two year sentence, he was hired by Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson as a minority business development director. Not only did he hold positions of trust and power before and after, but he held them despite the harm he inflicted on his wife and children and the indicia of other “issues” that arose following his arrest for the brutal beating. Continue reading →

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced that he’s giving an additional $1.8 billion to Johns Hopkins University. This comes on top of $1.5 billion that he’s given over the years. And it’s great. Great that he can do so. Great that he chooses to do so, as this is his money and this is his choice of what to do with it.

But as much as he deserves the kudos he seeks by making a big splash of his generosity, does his rationale bear up to scrutiny?

Here’s a simple idea I bet most Americans agree with: No qualified high school student should ever be barred entrance to a college based on his or her family’s bank account. Yet it happens all the time. Continue reading →

Among the more controversial aspects of the proposed Title IX sex adjudication regulations is that colleges, though not required to provide an appeal process, must make appeals available to both accuser and accused should they decide to offer it at all.

We propose adding section 106.45(b)(5) stating that a recipient (college) may choose to offer an appeal. If a recipient offers an appeal, it must allow both parties to appeal. In cases where there has been a finding of responsibility, although a complainant may appeal on the ground that the remedies are not designed to restore or preserve the complainant’s access to the recipient’s education program or activity, a complainant is not entitled to a particular sanction against the respondent.

This implicates the concept of “double jeopardy,” that a finding in favor of the accused at the hearing doesn’t conclude the matter, but that the accuser gets a second bite at the apple of guilt. Note the word “concept,” as the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy doesn’t apply. It’s a limitation on criminal prosecution and this is an administrative proceeding, even if it’s quasi-criminal in nature and constructed to circumvent constitutional mandates. Continue reading →