NJ.com, Radley Balko and David Rittgers have some of the first details. The gun-possession case aroused wide interest among blogs; we covered the story here, here and here.
Author Archive
“Not all tragedies are preventable”
That’s something Congress should remember, notes the Economist, before it passes more laws named after victims, such as the Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act of 2008, under which the Department of Transportation is in the process of mandating rear cameras on cars so as to reduce back-over accidents in family driveways.
Smoking bans and heart attack “miracles,” cont’d
After much uncritical reportage of claims that heart attacks in this or that community fell immediately and precipitously after a smoking ban went into effect, a larger and more careful study finds no evidence for any such miraculous effect [Jacob Sullum, Reason] Earlier here, etc.
Ted Frank on the Dukes v. Wal-Mart class action
The problem, Ted writes in the Examiner, isn’t that the class action is “too large” — even very large classes can sometimes fit the law’s requirements that each claim be identical in nature and capable of standing or falling together.
But the theory of the Dukes lawsuit is exactly the opposite: the plaintiffs claimed that Wal-Mart’s central office did not exercise enough authority over each of its 3,400 stores; each of the individual managers’ discretionary employment or promotion decisions–whether made by male or female managers–was, on average, discriminatory; and thus Wal-Mart was responsible for a policy that “fosters or facilitates” discrimination. …
The discrimination laws permit Wal-Mart to defend itself by demonstrating that the challenged job decision was made for a reason other than gender. For example, looking at Betty Dukes, the named plaintiff, alone, we learn that she had a female manager and that she was repeatedly disciplined for returning late from lunch breaks. …Wal-Mart is stripped of its defense because the individualized defense would be inconvenient to trying the case as a class action. …
If the Supreme Court rules in Wal-Mart’s favor later this year, it will not be to protect business, but to protect due process.
We have “to fight environmental oppression, environmental genocide, environmental slavery”
Advocates of “environmental justice” rally at the White House, and are given the ear of no fewer than five cabinet officers as well as other high Obama Administration officials. [Carter Wood/ShopFloor, more]
December 20 roundup
- Texas Gov. Rick Perry may urge the state to take a step toward loser-pays [NJLRA]
- “FCC push to regulate news draws fire” [The Hill]
- Could litigation on behalf of Madoff victims get more than all their money back? [Salmon, more, NYT, Above the Law]
- “Chevron Says Documents Show Ecuador Plaintiffs Worked With Government” [Dan Fisher/Forbes, more]
- Organized trial lawyers expect to fare less well in next Congress, but prospects for actual liability reform remain slender [Joseph Weber/Wash. Times, Matthew Boyle/Daily Caller]
- Mount Laurel rulings in New Jersey (towns given quotas to build low-income housing) described as “libertarian”, I express doubts [Hills, Prawfsblawg]
- Criminal law’s revolving door: “prosecutors turn up the fire and then sell extinguishers” [Ribstein, TotM]
- The wages of unconstitutionality: a Utah attorney’s curious fee niche [five years ago on Overlawyered]
(Fictional) law of super-heroes
It’s the subject of an amusing new blog entitled Law and the Multiverse, whose posts consider how the doings of superpower-endowed heroes and their super-villain adversaries might implicate (e.g.) the Second Amendment, the ADA, RICO, and insurance coverage law [via Lowering the Bar]
“To get the check, you’ve got to medicate the child”
“RuneScape devs refuse to cave in to patent trolls”
A UK game developer spent “tens of millions” successfully resisting a broad patent claim over online multiplayer gaming. [BoingBoing, GamaSutra]
“It is exceedingly unfortunate that the U.S. legal system can force a company with a sole presence in Cambridge, UK to incur a seven-digit expense and waste over a year of management time on a case with absolutely no merit,” [said company CEO Mark Gerhard] in a statement. “This anomaly, which could easily break smaller studios, doesn’t happen in the UK since you can pursue frivolous litigants for the costs of such claims,” he added.
CPSC vs. drop-side cribs
Lenore Skenazy: “As for cribs, one reason the drop-side models seem so ‘dangerous’ is because they are so popular. When you have millions of people using anything, no matter how safe, the odds of an accident go up because the odds go up with the numbers. … These products are not deadly. There’s a difference between a deadly product (cyanide) and a product that sometimes results in death (a grape). We keep obscuring that difference, and congratulating the folks who act as if it is only a lack of vigilance that allows anyone to die of anything other than old age.” More: Nick Farr, Abnormal Use; Rick Woldenberg.