“A good lawyer will make a living. A great lawyer will make a difference,” Zack said. “Your law degree means that you have the ability to right a wrong wherever you find it. And when you do that, you truly will be a great lawyer.”"Unfortunately most of you will be neither," he added.
Unfortunately, the delays these nominees are encountering on Capitol Hill are equally unprecedented: earlier this month, the Senate left for its August recess without considering 20 eminently qualified candidates, 16 of whom had passed through the bipartisan Senate Judiciary Committee completely unopposed, a development the Washington Post called “not only frustrating but also destructive” in an editorial published yesterday.I know I know -- your anecdotes about how slow things seem at the federal courthouse and one time you saw a judge leave work early trump all these stupid "statistics" and "data" so problem solved.
The victims of these delays, of course, are the American citizens who are being denied the fair and timely judicial proceedings they deserve because of the chronic shortage of federal judges on the bench. Stephen Zack, president of the American Bar Association, told Senate leaders in a recent letter that the abundance of vacant federal judgeships “create strains that will inevitably reduce the quality of our justice system and erode public confidence in the ability of the courts to vindicate constitutional rights or render fair and timely decisions.”
Outgoing American Bar Association President Stephen Zack keeps a list of Buddhist sayings near his desk, as well as several silver gelding knives given to him by former clients.
To this day, Zack keeps a binder with Cuba's 1940 Constitution - first suspended by a 1952 coup and later thrown out after the 1959 revolution.Hmm, evidently a smart and successful lawyer needs to make sure every item near her desk conveys an important message or signifies something that you want people to know about you.
"I keep a copy near my desk to remind me that the words alone are not enough."
Thirty-eight of the present vacancies have existed for so long and created such untenable workloads for the remaining judges on the courts that the seats have been declared judicial emergencies by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. As lawyers who practice in federal courts across this nation, ABA members know firsthand that long-standing vacancies on courts with staggering caseloads impede access to the courts and create strains that will of the courts to vindicate constitutional rights or render fair and timely decisions. In Arizona, for example, the Speedy Trial Act has been temporarily waived, and criminal defendants wait up to 6 months for a trial, while businesses and individuals wait up to 2 years before their cases are heard.So far so good (I mean bad).
We realize that the aging of our federal judiciary has contributed to the growing vacancy crisis.Hey now!
According to Department of Justice estimates, 60 new vacancies will be created through attrition each year for the next decade. Obviously, progress toward reducing vacancies requires a confirmation rate that outpaces the attrition rate; at present, it is barely keeping abreast of it.So I believe what Steve is saying is we either need to develop new methods of preserving and extending the lives of our aging federal judges -- perhaps through alien intervention, cloning, cryonics, or sophisticated and groundbreaking time-travel technologies that are currently beyond our scientific capabilities -- or we just need to confirm some of these nominees.
Here’s my question to Mr. Zack: “Hey Steve, when you were coming over here from Cuba, how many southbound rafts did you see?” Oh, and then there’s this: “We cannot fight to establish the rule of law around the world and watch it jeopardized in this country. When 80 percent of poor people, mostly women and minorities, have no access to the court system, we do not have the rule of law.”Hmm, I only practice logic irregularly, but isn't this a classic argument by anecdote (there's also some argument by personal experience).
Will somebody tell me what that even means? I go to court every day. I’ve been going to court every day for the last 25 years. I don’t know how many millionaires I’ve seen in there, but it’s not too many. When I go to court, I see mostly women, poor people, and minorities in there. Where is this 80 percent coming from? Is he kidding? Nobody, in 25 years, has said to me, “Gee, I tried to get into court on this, but they turned me away because I live below the povery (sic) level, and I’m a minority.”
Argument by anecdote is when you prove a point with a story. It is a very compelling argument, because people like stories about other people more than they like cold, hard facts. Too often, though, the argument by anecdote is used when the facts are stacked heavily against a position. If you don’t have the facts, tell a story. People will believe the anecdote because it demonstrates what they themselves believe to be true. That’s why you’ll find more arguments by anecdotes proffered by those on the losing end of the “facts” battle.I did exactly 23 seconds of Google research, and came across this March 16, 2011 ABA publication, "The Growing Crisis of Underfunding State Courts," which has very few personal anecdotes but lots of pesky things called "facts":
The ABA’s Task Force on the Preservation of the Justice System, co-chaired by David Boies and Theodore B. Olson, has been investigating the under-reported but increasingly serious problems resulting from the underfunding of the nation’s courts. Today, as part of that on-going effort, we are releasing an informal survey of American Bar Association members that helps quantify the problems experienced by citizens and all persons seeking justice in jurisdictions around the country. The systematic underfunding of the country’s courts causes delays in court proceedings, loss of staff and reduction of services. It prevents court cases from being heard and leads to delayed justice.So the ABA has a whole task force studying this issue -- who knew?
[A] world-wide survey unveiled Thursday morning . . . ranks the United States lowest among 11 developed nations when it comes to providing access to justice to its citizens -- and lower than some third-world nations in some categories.
Particularly when it comes to access to and affordability of legal counsel in civil disputes, the U.S. ranks 20 out of the 35 nations surveyed, below not only developed nations but also such countries as Mexico, Croatia and the Dominican Republic.
The results are from the World Justice Project's new "Rule of Law Index", which assesses how laws are implemented and enforced in practice around the globe. Countries are rated on such factors as whether government officials are accountable, whether legal institutions protect fundamental rights, and how ordinary people fare in the system. The index will expand from 35 countries to 70 next year.
The lowest-ranking countries in this year's survey included Liberia, Kenya, Nigeria and Pakistan.
The U.S. didn't lead the world on any of the rule-of-law measures, ranking near the bottom of the developed world on most -- including even fundamental rights. But the most striking findings related to access to justice for ordinary people.So we beat Nigeria and Pakistan!
But one firm that completely eliminated its summer associate program in Miami now regrets it — especially since business has picked up. Jim Miller, litigation chair at Akerman Senterfitt, said the firm had no summer associates in Miami this summer but is already planning to resume the practice next summer.Yep. Who in the world knew Providence would guide one of the world's worst environmental disasters right through our solid oak front doors?
“You don’t want to have summer associates unless you plan to hire them,” he said. “But we regret not doing it.”
We’ve written about the Law School Transparency project before. It’s an organization asking entirely legitimate questions. LST wants law schools to provide accurate statistics about employment outcomes for graduates. It’s hard to understand why law schools aren’t willing to support the Law School Transparency group, other than a base desire to keep prospective law students in the dark about their post-graduate employment options.Even incoming ABA President Steve Zack, in an otherwise full-throttled endorsement for going to law school, raised the question of transparency:
What advice would you give someone entering law school now, or thinking about going for a law degree?
So dear young ones, do enjoy the free lunches, the law firm "mixers," in addition to the desperate back-stabbing, rumor-mongering. brown-nosing, and win-at-all-costs mentality of your peers.I tell them that they are lucky to be in our profession because the law is going to change more in the next ten years than it has in the last 200 years. When I started practicing law, we hung up a shingle. Today, graduates register a domain name. The one area that I have real concern about is the cost. I think it’s time for there to be--and this will probably be pretty controversial--some truth-and-lending documents that go to applicants to law schools. There’s not enough information given to people considering the legal field.
The trick to capturing Pepper’s thick Southern accent is to puff the cheeks, according to Zack.Oh man, don't tell us your secrets!
Nurik carries the Dreier sentencing memorandum in his briefcase.Hey, that is so weird -- so do I!
``Silliest thing. There was loose gravel over a road. My left leg slipped. I tried to catch myself with the right leg and I fell on it. When I heard the pop, I knew it wasn't a good day.'' He's using a wheelchair and crutches, and expects to have a plate put in to help the bone heal straight and stabilize the ankle.Kids, now this one's a keeper!``Last time I broke an ankle was 40 years ago, playing tennis. It seemed to hurt a lot less.''
Meanwhile, he's using audio-visual conferencing to conduct business.
Florida’s bizarre “law” was passed more than 30 years ago during the anti-gay hysteria of Anita Bryant’s Save Our Children campaign. The ban on gay adoption was borne out of prejudice, plain and simple. It had no scientific predicate. Its backers were nothing more than lynch-type rabble rousers.On an unrelated note, people are still writing angry letters about George L. Metcalfe's "ad" in the Florida Bar News.
“If the law supposed that,” said Mr. Bumble, …”the law is an ass …” (Dickens, Pickwick Papers, [1836-37]).Indeed.
The Iqbal court quoted the language from Twombly, that plaintiffs must "nudge[] their claims across the line from conceivable to plausible." I am moved to say that the court's pleading standard has gone from ridiculous to preposterous.
Of course, there is no practical difference between "conceivable" and "plausible," just as there is no real difference between "ridiculous" and "preposterous."
It only took me two minutes to find an opinion where the Court used "conceivable" and "plausible" interchangeably.
Not too long ago there was a case where the Supremes reversed a DC Circuit decision that Congress had violated equal protection with respect to a portion of the Cable Act. Here is F.C.C. v. Beach Communications, 508 U.S. 307, 313-14 (1993):
In areas of social and economic policy, a statutory classification that neither proceeds along suspect lines nor infringes fundamental constitutional rights must be upheld against equal protection challenge if there is any reasonably conceivable state of facts that could provide a rational basis for the classification. See Sullivan v. Stroop, 496 U.S. 478, 485 (1990); Bowen v. Gilliard, 483 U.S. 587, 600-603 (1987); United States Railroad Retirement Bd. v. Fritz, 449 U.S. 166, 174-179 (1980); Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471, 484-485 (1970). Where there are "plausible reasons" for Congress' action, "our inquiry is at an end." United States Railroad Retirement Bd. v. Fritz, supra, at 179.
And then there’s the concurrence:
I continue to believe that, when Congress imposes a burden on one group, but leaves unaffected another that is similarly, though not identically, situated, "the Constitution requires something more than merely a `conceivable' or `plausible' explanation for the unequal treatment." United States Railroad Retirement Bd. v. Fritz, 449 U.S. 166, 180 (1980) (STEVENS, J., concurring in judgment).
Is there any reason why “conceivable” and “plausible” are synonyms with respect to the rational basis test but not with respect to the pleading standard?
To sum it up, kids, is the Court’s wordplay laughable or risible?
What has landed on the slag heap of style is the old three-button power suit: slickly conservative, oversize and overpriced, worn with a boxy white shirt and a wide silk tie. It was all, as GQ’s creative director, Jim Moore, put it, “too big and too bold in all the wrong places.” Not so long ago, that ensemble blared of Wall Street success. Now, with public sentiment against financial institutions still high, racks of expensive Italian beauties languish in shops across the country."Too big and too bold in all the wrong places" -- I'm pretty sure that's a South Florida trademark.
[I]t represents a refinement of trends that men have picked up on in the last three or four years. Slim suits. Oxford cotton shirts. Skinny wool ties. Fine-gauge cardigans. Seersucker. Madras.Madras? Skinny wool ties?
“Fashion didn’t stop this year, and it didn’t change,” said Tommy Fazio, the men’s fashion director of Bergdorf Goodman. “It’s the preppy chic these guys have been into, and they’re just refining it, with the right madras, the right pair of khakis, the right cotton sport jacket.”
Upon arrival at the hotel, resort or cruise ship, a traveler should read the check-in documents closely. If there is a choice of forum clause, simply draw a line through that clause and initial the document. It is highly unlikely that the hotel will turn anyone away at the last minute, especially in today's economy.Oy. Details details, I just want to get to the clothing-optional beach.
As an attorney, I see cases all the time where people are stopped for ``driving while black.''But Mike, in the State's defense, it was a really big check.With this law, police no longer will need a reason to stop us, claiming that they wanted to see if we are wearing our seat belts. That is why this law failed to pass so many times in the past. It appears that getting $35 million is more important than civil liberties.
U.S. Circuit Judge Jay Bybee knew, or should have known, that the torture he sought to justify was illegal and immoral, and that his legal opinion was fixed to reach a predetermined, plainly unlawful conclusion.I think that's the charitable view. If he wrote that dreck irrespective of the desired outcome, we are in worse trouble than I thought.
Now, eight years later, many of us seem to have forgotten the 9/11 victims whose lives were snuffed out by terrorists who hated our country and our way of life. How insane is it to use the Constitution that those murderers abhorred to protect their rights?Yep, truly insane.
I also am concerned about access to the courts. The rule of law is based on access to the courts.True, but Steve did you know the ABA has waded into the proposed Arbitration Fairness Act?
“I was appalled,” said Lehner, director of the Miami-Dade chapter of the Florida Association for Women Lawyers. “It’s mind-boggling. It’s a total and complete mystery how anyone can constitute a commission, which is supposed to be selecting candidates for federal office, with such a gross disparity and inequality toward women.”Here's another:
Lehner said there have been problems with diversity on the state judicial nominating commissions, pointing to Gov. Charlie Crist’s request in December for a more diverse list of candidates to fill a Florida Supreme Court vacancy. “This is a pandemic. The state JNCs are abysmal,” she said.She's right.
“How do the guys do it? What’s the secret handshake here? What are we missing?” she said.I don't know -- let's ask Steve Zack:
Zack, like other JNC members contacted, said he had no comment on the number of women on the commission.No comment?
Back to the JNC -- I would say that if the Panel is not reconstituted, they will have a hard time recommending an older white guy to replace Judge Hurley or Judge Gold when he takes senior status.According to an article by Tom Jacobs on the website of Santa Barbara's Miller-McCune Center, recently completed research at the University of South Florida indicates that, at least among a select group of students there, those who found the hockey mom more attractive also judged her less competent, less intelligent and less capable.
This didn't seem to have much impact in Palin's 2006 primary upset victory and statewide election as the largest state's first female governor.
But the finding, being published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, does conform with previous research that found attractive women in high-status jobs were perceived as less competent.
Both outcomes would seem to strongly indicate there's more to the glass ceiling for females than the actual glass. No news to them.
Cuban American Bar Association president Roland Sanchez-Medina has fired off an angry letter to U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, complaining about the lack of Cuban-American Democrats on a newly named federal judicial selection commission as well as a lack of consultation.Come on -- that shouldn't be too hard. Just get all five in the room and talk.
The Democratic Party has “been the road less traveled” for generations of Cuban-Americans, which means some of the most dedicated members are Cuban-Americans willing “to swim against the tide,” Sanchez-Medina wrote the senator Wednesday in a letter obtained by the DBR. “I was hopeful that some day those of us who persevered … would finally enjoy our day in the sun, and after this past election, I finally believed that day had come; that we would have a clear and unambiguous voice in the political process. Unfortunately with the stroke of a pen, you have damaged even my indefatigable spirit.”
Sanchez-Medina complained not only about a lack of representation but said that Nelson made his selections for the Judicial Nominating Commission without any consultation with local Cuban Democrats.
