Defensive Justice: Inside the mind of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito

On Monday, May 16, 2011, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court Samuel A. Alito spoke at a function sponsored by the Bar Association of Metropolitan St. Louis. I attended because I was curious about his thought process; what was going on in his mind? I had no idea what Justice Alito was going to discuss until he began to speak. I recorded his speech on a small recorder and I took some notes. Alito is part of a Supreme Court majority that has repeatedly written opinions that have wrested power from average citizens at the expense of powerful corporations. Yet Justice Alito began his talk by proudly reciting an inscription on the walls of the United States Supreme Court: "Equal Access to the Law." That’s a strange line to recite by a judge who has voted to bar ordinary citizens from having meaningful access to courthouses (see AT&T v Concepcion) and barred them from having meaning access to democracy itself by unleashing an ocean of money into the electoral process (see Citizens United and see here). [caption id="attachment_18157" align="alignright" width="300" caption="Image: Creative Commons"][/caption] Alito titled his talk "The Top 10 Things You Might Not Know about the United States Supreme Court." Because Alito is often touted as an “intellectual,” I assumed that the talk might be intellectually challenging, but it was a self-absorbed and disingenuous talk delivered in a humorless tone. Alito’s talk was also highly defensive, as described below.  His talk was especially disappointing in light of Alito’s claim that he has given this same talk to other audiences on many other occasions. That would presumably would have given him the opportunity to hone some inspirational messages into his talk, but I felt no inspiration.  Feel free to disagree with me after listening to Alito’s entire speech here. Without further ado, here are Samuel Alito’s "top ten things” along with my reactions to these “things.” Topic one: "Most cases are not about the Constitution." I never assumed otherwise, and I suspect that most audience members (all most all of them practicing attorneys) never assumed otherwise. It was curious is that Alito mentioned Brown versus Board of Education as one of the great cases coming out of the United States Supreme Court. Brown was a case in which the court was looking out for the little guy, something the current court has not shown much interest in doing. Therefore, one might wonder how the majority on this court would have reacted in such a case had this majority been sitting on the bench back in 1954. If this sounds harsh, give me one reason to think otherwise. Brown pitted the Court against legislators; it was inconvenient decision for those in power. It was a decision driven by a desire for “social justice,” an alien concept for the current court. Topic two: "Most cases are governed by precedent." [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingDefensive Justice: Inside the mind of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito

Barack Obama didn’t forget to pardon Bradley Birkenfeld today

Today, Barack Obama pardoned eight people. They included people convicted of drug offenses and a woman accused of evading bank reporting requirements. Bradley Birkenfeld, an American banker who formerly worked for UBS, Switzerland's largest bank, was not among the eight people pardoned.   The information Birkenfeld voluntarily provided to the federal government in 2007 led to the government's "uncovering the biggest tax fraud in U.S. history."  Perhaps Birkenfeld (photo here) was intentionally overlooked because pardoning him would remind the public that he is sitting in prison for no good reason, after attempting to report tens of thousands of rich tax cheat to the federal government. Birkenfeld's problem is that he is not a celebrity, or wealthy or a sport star or a politician, like many of the thousands of tax cheats he tried to bring to the attention of an uninterested federal government. Birkenfeld continues to sit in prison in Schuylkill Pennsylvania, while the United States continues to wage its war on whistle-blowers (and see here).   Several additional links on whistle-blower abuse here.

Continue ReadingBarack Obama didn’t forget to pardon Bradley Birkenfeld today

“Retard” and other disability-insults.

The word "retard" possessed dual meanings for a long time. First used as a term for intellectual disability in 1788, the word took on a pejorative sense in the 1970s. For thirty years the two meanings curiously co-existed. Universities had "Mental Retardation and Developmental Disability" Departments and students who drunkenly called one another 'retards' for lobbing bad beer-pong balls, and the two existed in tandem. But once medical and social service experts finally disavowed the word 'retard', it vanished from official usage with amazing swiftness. The Special Olympics ceased using the 'r-word' in 2004, initiating the trend. In 2006, the (former) American Association of Mental Retardation changed its name to the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. By 2008, Special Olympics turned the abolishment of 'retard' into a full-time effort and launched R-word.org. The site protested the derogatory use of 'retard' (including a protest campaign against the 2008 film Tropic Thunder, which featured a lengthy discussion on 'retard' roles in film). Special Olympics and R-word.org also pushed for their fellow disability-service organizations to drop the term. In 2010, 'retard' was legally banished from the professional lexicon. On October 5 of last year, Obama signed "Rosa's Law", which banned the use of "retard" in all federal health, education, and labor policy. "Intellectual disability" and "developmental disability" became the approved nomenclature. Non-federal organizations followed hastily: in Ohio, Google directs you to the "Department of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities", but the website itself has already been scrubbed of the R-word(even if the url still has the dreaded 'r' in it). It's official: 'retard' has no place in formal usage. Once a medical term for someone with an intellectual disability, it lives now only as an insult. One that means, roughly, unintelligent. Like moron, which began as medical terminology for one with a mental age of 8 to 12. Or imbecile, which meant 'a mental age of 6 to 9'.

Continue Reading“Retard” and other disability-insults.

Copyright bottom-feeder on the prowl

From Threat Level, we learn about a big business called Righthaven picking on little people and non-profit organizations who run blogs. If you are running a blog, there are two options. A) Register as a DMCA takedown agent with the U.S. Copyright Office (which I am now in the process of doing) or B) Prepare to travel to Las Vegas federal court to defend yourself against this copyright troll, based (usually) on a commenter's use of copyright material. Here's an excerpt from the Threat Level article:

Founded in March, the Las Vegas-based Righthaven has begun buying out the copyrights to newspaper content of the Las Vegas Review-Journal for the sole purpose of suing blogs and websites that re-post, or even excerpt, those articles without permission. The company has settled about 60 of 160 cases for a few thousand dollars each, and plans to expand its operations to other newspapers across the country. Many of its lawsuits arise, not from articles posted by a website’s proprietors, but from comments and forum posts by the site’s readers.
How-to instructions are provided at Threat Level.

Continue ReadingCopyright bottom-feeder on the prowl

44 Senators: We won’t support a CFPB that has any real power

Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama and 43 of his fellow Senators are leading the charge to strip the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) of any meaningful authority. My prediction: The big banks will completely defang or defund the CFPB.

Continue Reading44 Senators: We won’t support a CFPB that has any real power