Ann Althouse detects aesthetic, rather than paternalistic, origins (Dec. 9). More: Steve Chapman, “New York’s food police ride to the rescue”, syndicated/Chicago Tribune, Dec. 11; and more Althouse.
Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Lavely & Singer nastygrams
We’ve been entertained by these for some time (e.g., Jan. 12), and now they’re the subject of a Peter Lattman WSJ front-pager in today’s paper. One blogger admits that the firm does successfully bury some stories.
Non-economic damages for animals (again)
The Vermont Supreme Court is considering the issue, which we’ve repeatedly covered (Dec. 29 and links therein); in a Fox News report, person after person argues that such damages should be available to deter animal cruelty, each of whom disregards the availability of punitive damages for intentional torts. The main effect of such “rights” would be to make pet care largely unaffordable for the poor so that a handful of wealthy pet owners would be able to collect larger damages awards from veterinarians.
Stephanie Mencimer is predictably in favor of more litigation (singling out “Ted Frank and his Overlawyered buddies” for some reason, though there is only one Walter Olson), but her reasoning is unusual. Mencimer tells the tale of her battle with a next-door neighbor pet spa, and complains that there is a shortage of kennels, which, she says, causes sub-par care of dogs. Lawsuits, she concludes, would fix this problem. That she thinks raising the cost of providing a service will solve the problem of a shortage of service providers bespeaks a certain economic illiteracy that perhaps explains her reflexive opposition to liability reform.
UK: Great moments in citizenship law
“A ‘high risk’ child rapist is to receive thousands of pounds in damages for ‘unlawful detention’ while held pending deportation to Somalia, a High Court judge ruled yesterday. The failed asylum seeker, who cannot be named and is referred to only as ‘A’, is threatened with removal after serving an eight-year prison sentence for attacking and sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl. But yesterday Mr Justice Calvert Smith ruled that there was a period between Dec. 3 2004 and July 20 2006 when the 31-year-old’s detention became unlawful, entitling him to compensation.” Deportation from the UK to Somalia has been difficult to accomplish until recently because airlines refused to transport deportees, and “A” refused to get on a plane voluntarily. (“Rapist wins pay-out over unlawful detention”, Daily Telegraph, Dec. 8; “A failed asylum seeker jailed for child rape receives £50,000”, Dec. 8).
Academic freedom update: Loftus suit argued before California Supreme Court
Elizabeth Loftus dared to write an article in the Skeptical Inquirer critically examining questionable claims of recovered memory abuse (Aug. 26, 2004); justices seemed skeptical of the argument Nicole Taus shouldn’t be allowed to sue for Loftus’s alleged misrepresentations to obtain information, which scares media lawyers: “Although journalists generally identify themselves truthfully, ruling for Taus would ‘create a motive’ for news sources unhappy about their portrayals ‘to belatedly contend that the reporter obtained the information by misrepresentation,’ lawyers for the media argued.” Loftus denies lying, but, at the dismissal stage, the Court assumes the allegations of the complaint are true. Whether Veronica Mars would be sued into next week is left as an exercise for the reader. (Maura Dolan, “High court considers privacy issue”, Los Angeles Times, Dec. 6).
“Is caffeine addictive? A review of the literature”
AEI’s incomparable Sally Satel prescribes a soothing decaf for some of the public-health agitators who are beginning to rattle their cups about Starbucks and Big Cola enslaving our children and the like. (American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, Dec. 6). See Aug. 18-20, 2000, Jun. 1, 2004, Dec. 5, 2005, May 29, 2006.
Imams: we want to “hit [US Airways] where it hurts, the pocketbook”
Six imams (who had just attended a private conference on imams and the media and politics) were waiting for US Airways Flight 300 and decided to act rather provocatively: they shouted “Allahu Akbar!” loudly while praying in the waiting area, refused to take their assigned seats (instead squatting in the front row of first class and the exit rows—consistent with trying to control the entry and exit areas of the plane), demanded use of a seatbelt extension for the morbidly obese despite being only moderately overweight (and then placed the heavy-buckled potential weapons under their seats instead of on their seatbelts), and started speaking to one another in Arabic (which a fellow passenger translated as angry denunciations of America). They succeeded in the attempt to draw attention to themselves; the captain asked them to leave the plane, they refused, and were then arrested; the plane then underwent a 3.5-hour search for bombs.
“They should have been denied boarding and been investigated,” former air marshal Robert MacLean said. “It looks like they are trying to create public sympathy or maybe setting someone up for a lawsuit.”
Sure enough, the victimizers are now playing victim and threatening to sue under the auspices of the Muslim American Society (which was previously in the news for demanding that Muslim cab-drivers be permitted to refuse rides to passengers carrying alcohol) and the litigious Council on American-Islamic Relations (Apr. 25). The provocation, helped along by new Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), also appears to have its desired effect: “The Minneapolis airport plans to add a prayer room for Muslims, and Democrats plan to hold hearings on Muslim profiling.” (Audrey Hudson, “How the Imams Terrorized an Airliner”, Washington Times/Front Page, Nov. 29; Arizona Republic op-ed, Nov. 29; Debra Burlingame, “On a Wing and a Prayer”, Wall Street Journal, Dec. 6; LGF blog, Nov. 21; “Tale of Fibbing Imams”, Investors Business Daily, Dec. 4 via Powerline blog, Dec. 6).
Social hosts and mistletoe II
What I find so amusing about Dahlia Lithwick’s suggestion of a lengthy warning for Christmas parties isn’t so much the warning itself (others have done that funnier, not to mention the real-life examples), but that Lithwick doesn’t recognize that she’s part of the culture that encourages such ludicrous warnings: in 2003, Lithwick pooh-poohed as “extreme” the need for legislative intervention to prevent courts from going after food providers in obesity lawsuits because, after all, Big Food could survive by “posting warnings.”
Repeal Day
It’s a proposal for a new national holiday on Dec. 5 marking the end of Prohibition. (WaiterRant, Dec. 5; Jeffrey Morgenthaler, Nov. 7). Nice idea, but what makes anyone think that a nation hurtling in the opposite direction — toward bans on every unhealthy but pleasurable form of food and drink that public-health busybodies see fit to target — would even wish to pay lip service to the principles of individual liberty at stake in Repeal?
For ideas on what comes next after NYC Mayor Bloomberg’s ban on restaurant use of trans fat (PoL Dec. 5, etc.), see Michael J. Nelson, “Protecting You From You”, Dec. 5. More: “So you can’t cook with Crisco anymore? That’s crazy! Is there no respect for tradition? Of all the elitist regulations, this one takes the cake. And the pie crust.” (Althouse, Dec. 6; also Oberwetter, Mangu-Ward).
Site housekeeping: feeds in, newsletter out
I’ve been cleaning up and simplifying the organization of the site, specifically the sidebar on the front page. Many readers already follow Overlawyered posts by subscribing to feeds, and I’ve made that easier by enlisting in the popular FeedBurner service. If you’re currently using a different feed method, we encourage you to give FeedBurner a try.
For years I’ve been publishing a short periodic newsletter summarizing highlights of recent posts. It’s a lot of work, however, and at my present level of commitments I’m obliged to conclude that it’s not a wise use of my time, especially with the feed option providing a similar but richer service in real time (rather than days or weeks later). So for the time being I’m going to officially declare the email newsletter dormant; at some point maybe it’ll be worth reviving in some new format.