Gina Cobb (Nov. 20) and many other bloggers are appropriately angry about the prominent New York Democrat’s proposal to reintroduce draft conscription. I have one relatively small point to add, which is that no one who respects the English language should ever again refer to Congressman Rangel as “pro-labor”. Someone who proposes to take away the individual’s right to decide for himself or herself for whom to work, and at what calling, is an enemy of the rights of labor, not a friend. (Maybe “pro-union” still works, as a description.) More: Angry Bear.
Author Archive
When a judge sues for defamation, cont’d
Reacting to the recent case in which a jury awarded Illinois chief justice Robert Thomas $7 million against a suburban newspaper, the Kane County Chronicle (Jun. 22, Jul. 19, Nov. 3, Nov. 7, Nov. 14, Nov. 19). the New York Times recalls a 1983 case in which “a Supreme Court justice in Pennsylvania sued The Philadelphia Inquirer for defamation. The case was finally dismissed this summer — a full 23 years after it began. … [Reporter Daniel R.] Biddle, who is now an editor at The Inquirer, said he had learned through lawyers that some of the biggest law firms in Philadelphia declined to represent the paper, in part ‘because they were afraid’ that fighting a Supreme Court justice might jeopardize their other clients.” (Katharine Q. Seelye, “Clash of a Judge and a Small Paper Underlines the Tangled History of Defamation”, New York Times, Nov. 20). More: Mar. 16, 2004. The Times piece also discusses a lawsuit’s silencing of the Alton Telegraph, which once was an outspoken voice in Madison County, Illinois; Ted covered that episode on Point of Law Dec. 28, 2004.
Welcome Brad Messer listeners
I was just a guest on his popular radio show on KTSA 550 in San Antonio, discussing recent stories on this site.
“FDA ends ban on silicone breast implants”
“The government on Friday rescinded a 14-year ban on silicone gel implants for cosmetic breast enhancement, a decision praised by some for providing women with a better product but criticized by others who still question their safety. … After rigorous review, the [Food and Drug Administration] can offer a ‘reasonable assurance’ that silicone implants are ‘safe and effective,’ said Donna-Bea Tillman, director of the FDA Office of Device Evaluation.” (Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar and Daniel Costello, Los Angeles Times, Nov. 18). Silicone breast implants, available to consumers in most other countries, were driven from the market after a campaign of speculation and misinformation by trial lawyers and allied “consumer” groups, particularly Dr. Sidney Wolfe’s Public Citizen Health Research Group. The campaign resulted in billions in legal settlements over nonexistent autoimmune effects from the devices, none of which had to be repaid even after more careful scientific studies dispelled the early alarms. Chapter 4 of my book The Rule of Lawyers, which tells the story of the silicone litigation episode in detail, isn’t online. The New York Sun has an editorial drawing some of the appropriate conclusions (“Now They Tell Us”, Nov. 20)(& welcome Above the Law readers). More: Second Hand Conjecture channels Virginia Postrel (via InstaPundit).
Boston mayor: Sony should pay for PlayStation 3 riots
Another way videogames are responsible for violence? “A furious Mayor Thomas M. Menino vowed yesterday to bill Sony Corp. for the chaos that swirled around the release of its PlayStation 3 machine after Boston police had to quell crowds grown frenzied and unruly by the hype surrounding the coveted consoles.” (Marie Szaniszlo, “Lucky few got game: Crowds go after PS3s, mayor goes after Sony”, Boston Herald, Nov. 18)(via Cutting Edge of Ecstasy, who comments).
A constitutional right to drink?
An Indiana court in 1855 discerned a right to imbibe alcohol to be among the fundamental liberties of the citizen, and that wasn’t the only court decision holding early liquor-prohibition laws to be unconstitutional. Eugene Volokh has details (Nov. 16).
Verizon Wireless class action settlement
Great moments in food labeling law
From Wales:
A spicy sausage known as the Welsh Dragon will have to be renamed after trading standards’ officers warned the manufacturers that they could face prosecution because it does not contain dragon.
The sausages will now have to be labelled Welsh Dragon Pork Sausages to avoid any confusion among customers.
Jon Carthew, 45, who makes the sausages, said yesterday that he had not received any complaints about the absence of real dragon meat.
(Simon de Bruxelles, “Sausages affected by draconian trade laws”, Times Online, Nov. 18).
Update: Great 1998 Tobacco Robbery
Per Jacob Sullum (Nov. 14),
Yesterday a federal judge in Louisiana rejected a motion to dismiss [the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s] lawsuit challenging the Master Settlement Agreement that established a government-backed cigarette cartel for the benefit of state treasuries, trial lawyers, and the leading tobacco companies. The judge’s order is here [PDF]. CEI’s complaint and various other documents related to the case are here.
(see Aug. 4, 2005).
Also, Stanford economist Jeremy Bulow has published another in his series of always-excellent papers on the great tobacco robbery. As the Milken Institute’s Oct. 20 press release puts it, Bulow argues that
the public was conned: the tobacco companies passed on more than 100 percent of the cost to smokers, many states were locked into terrible financial settlements and billions in fees were set aside for trial lawyers.
“Few people trust tobacco companies, trial lawyers or politicians,” he writes. “But somehow when the three groups got together and spoke with one voice they were able to convince most people – particularly nonsmokers who benefit from higher cigarette tax revenue – that the settlement had achieved a noble public health goal. In reality, the settlement preserved tobacco companies’ profits, while it gave the trial lawyers an incredibly large ongoing source of income gouged from the hides of smokers, and handed state politicians bragging rights as Davids to Big Tobacco’s Goliath.”
(“The tobacco settlement: when trial lawyers meet tobacco execs”, Milken Institute Review, December)(reg). For more from Bulow, see PoL, Nov. 18, 2005, and Jan. 20 and May 18, 2006.
The 1998 multistate tobacco settlements were a central theme of my 2003 book The Rule of Lawyers and have been covered in depth on this site, including Aug. 4, 2005 and links from there, Sept. 11, 2005, and Jan. 3, 2006, as well as at Point of Law: May 17, Jul. 20 and Jul. 26, 2004, Oct. 6 and Oct. 14, 2005 and Mar. 20, Mar. 29 and Apr. 12, 2006.
Update: “Brockovich’s Medicare-billing lawsuits tossed”
Glamor proved no substitute for legal merit as U.S. District Judge Thomas Whelan in San Diego dismissed two lawsuits by the highly publicized Brockovich against major hospital chains, alleging that the chains should refund to Medicare sums spent on treating injuries caused by earlier hospital negligence (see Jun. 22). The suits “made no specific claims of patient injury” but instead proffered studies estimating the nationwide incidence of negligent patient injury in hospitals. The judge termed the claims “speculative allegations” intended to allow Brockovich and the lawyers for whom she was fronting to “begin a fishing expedition”. “The judge also noted that Brockovich, 46, was not eligible to receive Medicare benefits, was never treated at any of the Scripps or Sharp hospitals, and was never injured by hospital staff misconduct.” (Keith Darcé, San Diego Union-Tribune, Nov. 16). For more on Brockovich’s activities generally, follow links from Nov. 3, 2005.