May 23 roundup


  • The real problem with the 30year old eviction case is that the courts had to enforce it. The right to exclude is one of the most meaningful sticks in the bundle of sticks that constitutes property rights.

    If you have to go to court to ask “Mother, may I?” in the context of a private relationship (i.e., not commercial leasing), then it’s not really a right, is it?

    There have been disturbing reports around the country of squatters taking possession of a home and the authorities not doing anything about it. That, of course, is unacceptable.

    The Skagit Tribe decision on Monday is also disturbing for its lack of respect for property rights. If the Indians don’t have to respect private property and states are powerless to deal with it, that is an invitation to anarchy.

  • Wouldn’t [the lady suing Laura Kipnis] first have to establish the (likely) existence of Prof. Kipnis’ “axe-to-grind” before suing her publisher for failing to anticipate its existence?

    • At the motion-to-dismiss stage, which is the one reported here, I believe many elements of a claim can be alleged without necessarily “establishing” them as might be necessary later at trial.

  • Several of the items have in common a perfidious belief that all inequities can be fixed by legal fiat. Sports are the most egalitarian of all endeavors. It doesn’t matter if anyone likes you, if you went to the right school, or what color you are: if you can run faster than anyone else, you win. If you can dunk better, you get a big paycheck. It is of course “unfair” that all of us can’t be pro basketball players. The disabled are just a special case of this unfairness. Not only is it not possible, but some “fixes” can bankrupt (the theatre case) or remove services for everyone (the suits about the internet). They also lead to absurdities, like demanding that a shop allow a deaf person to man the cash register or that after-hours drive up also serve a blind person on foot (yeah, real safe, blind person in the dark on foot at the drive through), or that someone who is unable to control their temper and throws dishes in the kitchen be “accomodated”. My local grocery has 10 or so retarded people (all men by the way) bagging groceries and retrieving shopping carts. Good. But these people can never do something complex no matter how you try or what you demand. Likewise how could you have a blind person even doing these jobs? Send them out in the parking lot to get the carts? We all have limitations and judges cannot fix them all by issuing an order.

    • Not disagreeing with your entire point but just one small piece. A Publix in my town has a deaf woman working the cash register. It took me a couple of times to realize it because she didn’t say anything like, ‘Have a nice day.’ She does a fine job and I actually hate when the cashiers make comments about my purchases.

      • Don’t confuse him with facts.

  • Pity the parents had to resort to the courts, but now they have a court order for the Sheriff to enforce.

  • •“Theatre Must Provide Captioning For All Live Performances Says Federal Judge”

    In how many languages? Not everyone is an English speaker or reader.