Let’s get the obvious out of the way. The only reason the New York Times is calling for the end of the electoral college is that its candidate lost. Had Hillary Clinton won, there would be no cries, no sad tears, no editorial. But disingenuous motives don’t change the merit of the argument.

By overwhelming majorities, Americans would prefer to elect the president by direct popular vote, not filtered through the antiquated mechanism of the Electoral College. They understand, on a gut level, the basic fairness of awarding the nation’s highest office on the same basis as every other elected office — to the person who gets the most votes.

Cool links, but neither supports the proposition for which it’s included. Americans love platitudes, as they eliminate the need for deeper thought or greater understanding. Smart people, and make no mistake, the nice folks on the editorial board at the Times are smart, use that to their advantage, to manipulate the understanding of their lessers. An ironically popular platitude is “one man*, one vote.” Continue reading →

As is the SJ end of year tradition, nominations are open for the most prestigious award in all of the criminal law blawgosphere, the 8th Annual Jdog Prize for the best blawg post in criminal law.

The prize recognizes and honors the effort and thoughtfulness of criminal law blawgers with our annual Best Criminal Law Blawg Post, which has been dedicated to the memory of our dear friend, Joel Rosenberg. Continue reading →

One of the vexing problems in trying to compare sentences imposed on defendants by race is that it’s essentially impossible to do an apples to apples comparison. No two people are the same. No two crimes are the same. But they could be sufficiently similar, if only there was a way to quantify those similarities to make a valid comparison.

The Sarasota Herald Tribune did some heavy lifting in an effort to accomplish this feat.

Half a century after the civil rights movement, trial judges throughout Florida sentence blacks to harsher punishment than whites, a Herald-Tribune investigation found.

They offer blacks fewer chances to avoid jail or scrub away felonies.

They give blacks more time behind bars — sometimes double the sentences of whites accused of the same crimes under identical circumstances.

Florida lawmakers have struggled for 30 years to create a more equitable system.

Points are now used to calculate sentences based on the severity of the crime, the defendant’s prior record and a host of other factors. The idea is to punish criminals in Pensacola the same as those in Key West — no matter their race, gender or wealth.

But the point system has not stopped discrimination.

Continue reading →

Buck Ryan learned the hard way.

The University of Kentucky has punished me in a “sexual misconduct” case, in part, for singing a Beach Boys tune covered by Alvin and the Chipmunks.

Under Administrative Regulation 6:1, Discrimination and Harassment, UK’s Title IX coordinator ruled that the song, “California Girls,” included “language of a sexual nature” and was somehow offensive, though no victims were identified.

Those nasty Beach Boys. Sure, they can use “boys” in their name, but that’s because they weren’t marginalized and enjoyed Boy Privilege. But girls?* Ryan used this song, replete with “language of a sexual nature,” in what some might consider a humorous fashion. Continue reading →

When Elie and I were hashing out the problem of whites not showing sufficient concern for black problems, I made a point about the numbers. He was outraged at the fact that white voters didn’t care about black voters.

You have the privilege of disliking “political correctness” because the politically incorrect statements are never directed at you. You can be selfish because your human rights don’t rest on the whims of your former oppressors.

It must be nice. It must be nice to care only about what a candidate will do for you, and not have to worry about what he’ll do to you.

His complaint was about white selfishness, that it was wrong for white voters to not put the interest of black voters before their own, or any other interests. It was a curious view, “you’re so selfish for not making my concerns the center of your universe.” In the coming apocalypse of November 8, one reaction dealt with the failure of identity politics, the division of America into discrete interest groups, their capture of the Democratic party, and the zero-sum-game outcome. Continue reading →

There hasn’t been a person named by president-elect Donald Trump to any position who hasn’t been lambasted by the New York Times as the worst, most dangerous, choice for that position ever.  That goes for the Attorney General pick, Jeff Sessions.

It would be nice to report that Mr. Sessions, who is now 69, has conscientiously worked to dispel the shadows that cost him the judgeship. Instead, the years since his last confirmation hearing reveal a pattern of dogged animus to civil rights and the progress of black Americans and immigrants.

Based on his record, we can form a fairly clear picture of what his Justice Department would look like:

For starters, forget about aggressive protection of civil rights, and of voting rights in particular. Mr. Sessions has called the Voting Rights Act of 1965 a “piece of intrusive legislation.” Under him, the department would most likely focus less on prosecutions of minority voter suppression and more on rooting out voter fraud, that hallowed conservative myth. As a federal prosecutor, Mr. Sessions brought voter-fraud charges against three civil rights workers trying to register black voters in rural Alabama. The prosecution turned up 14 allegedly doctored ballots out of 1.7 million cast, and the jury voted to acquit.

What’s surprising about this, beyond arguing about “the years since” and relying upon the years before, is that they couldn’t find far worse stuff to say about Sessions. He’s a senator. He’s written tons of op-eds, spoken at a great many hearings, and that’s it?  Continue reading →

It’s surprising, and unsurprising, that the Arizona lege signed on to an advocacy position in law enforcement. As a political move, there’s nothing wrong with picking a team, as that’s how politicians get elected. But as a law-making body, the choice was odd.

When the Arizona Legislature adopted a resolution in 2014 supporting Start by Believing, it became the first lawmaking body in the nation to do so. Three other states have since followed — as have Arizona communities including Fountain Hills, Surprise, Apache Junction, and the Prescott Police Department. Several colleges around the state have signed up. In March, the Arizona State University Police Department renewed its support for the initiative; the year before, it became the first campus police force in the state to support it. According to theStart by Believing website, more than 130 communities in the United States and internationally have adopted the program.

What’s the “Start by Believing” program? It’s hard to nail down, as it’s comprised of many words that don’t actually say much.  The upshot of the message, as described, is to treat women alleging that they’ve been sexually assaulted “with compassion and respect and communicate a message of belief and understanding.” All kind words, so what could be wrong?

The characterization of the message says two distinct things: Continue reading →

I read this. You should too. Remember when people used to say reasonable minds may differ? That was then. This is now.

It would have been thoughtful, if not wise, for 24-year-old Robert Scheuerer’s drinking buds to take his keys, tell him that he’s too drunk to drive. But then, they were his drinking buds and likely shit-faced too. And like Scheuerer, they too were cops.

[Suffolk County DA Tom] Spota said Scheuerer and other officers spent hours at a bar near the Third Precinct in Bay Shore, where he is assigned. Scheuerer got there about 10 p.m. and left at 2:49 a.m., the district attorney said.

During that time, he allegedly drank ten pints of beer, plus a margarita. Continue reading →

Update: It appears that the claim that Colorado’s regs require disclosure of the item purchased is not accurate, and that I’ve fallen victim to, and am perpetuating by repeating, false information. If so (and I believe now it is), I apologize to every person I made stupider. Mea culpa.

Remember when you used to actually have to go to a store (pronounced, “/stôr/”) to buy stuff before you had the internet? Good times, right? But with the shift to online buying came the bane of a bureaucrat’s existence, loss of sales tax revenue. Without funds, they have no fiefdom can’t make your world wonderful.

And despite sales tax being terribly regressive, it’s beloved by governments everywhere, as it’s collected when your wallet is already out by someone else, who suffers your ire even though they only collect, not charge, it. But the shift to online shopping, combined with the Supreme Court’s Quill decision, stood to choke the life out of state and local governments. All that money changing hands, and they couldn’t get any of it.

Sure, they could pass laws requiring residents to keep track of their own purchases, calculate the sales tax and pay it as a “use tax,” but there was a problem: nobody would do it.*

Colorado, not satisfied with having a Rocky Mountain high, sought to make an end run around Quill. While the Court held that states could not compel out-of-state sellers with no in-state presence to collect and remit sales taxes, it didn’t hold that the state couldn’t require sellers to tell them stuff so they could find out which of their citizens were cheating the state out of its loot. Continue reading →