Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Election roundup: the White House

Speaking only for myself and not for Ted (and obviously not for anyone else either), I’m among those who believes George W. Bush doesn’t merit re-election, though I supported and in fact actively advised his campaign the first time around. For some of the reasons, check the links in this Oct. 5 post. Foreign policy and defense blunders aside, the last thing I wanted was an administration combining aggressive social conservatism with uncontrolled spending and big new government programs.

Some Bush strategists have seemed confident that secular-minded supporters of small government and individual liberty — a rather important constituency, historically, within the Republican Party — would have nowhere to go this fall, since it’s not as if the record of Sen. John Kerry inspires confidence. But there are places to go, if not especially attractive ones. Prof. Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago School of Law, whose scholarship has inspired so many of us, says he plans to vote for the Libertarian nominee (true, as Megan McArdle points out, the nominee in question appears to be a barking moonbat, but the point of a Libertarian vote is to send a well understood protest message that stands apart from personalities). My favorite syndicated columnist, Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune, is actually planning to cast a Democratic presidential ballot for apparently the first time in his life (“Why I’m voting for John Kerry”, Oct. 24). Chapman quotes Cato’s Dave Boaz making perhaps the strongest argument that can be made for the Democrat on domestic policy: “Republicans wouldn’t give Kerry every bad thing he wants, and they do give Bush every bad thing he wants.” The Detroit News, meanwhile, editorializes in favor of none of the above. Finally, for balance, here’s a link to Coyote Blog, run by a small businessman who says he’s going to support Bush as a “single-issue voter” motivated by the subject matter of this website, that is to say, the need to reform the litigation system.

Pixar’s “The Incredibles”

The latest offering from the ruling geniuses of animation (Toy Story, Finding Nemo, etc.) is a little bit different, as we reported Feb. 24. Notes the New York Times:

The buzz out of early screenings is that “The Incredibles,” set to be released Nov. 5, carries a considerably more middle-American sensibility than the usual fare from Hollywood, where liberal shibboleths often become the stuff of mainstream movies.

The new movie’s hero, Bob Parr, a k a Mr. Incredible, after all, has been driven into middle-aged retirement and the Superhero Relocation Program by a flood of lawsuits brought by personal-injury lawyers representing people Mr. Incredible has saved but who later complain of things like neck problems.

Mr. Incredible’s 10-year-old son, Dash, is blessed with super speed but is forced to conceal it from his unknowing peers at school — until, that is, he complains that he is being held back by the “everyone is special” ethic, which holds that kids should receive a trophy just for showing up on the playing field.

Writer-director Brad Bird demurs when asked whether the movie is meant to be critical of trial lawyers:

“I just always wondered when a superhero broke through a wall, who was going to pay for that wall?” he said with a smile. “In the small-minded world we live in, that deed is not going to go unpunished.”

(John M. Broder, “Truth, Justice and the Middle-American Way”, New York Times, Oct. 20).

A right to assistance pets

Under established disabled-rights law, store owners and other business people very seldom have a right to exclude the “service animals” that accompany blind and deaf visitors. Relatively few inconveniences ensue, in part because such animals tend to be few and extremely well trained. However, the idea has begun to catch on that persons disabled in other ways also have a right to the company of assistance animals; California regulators issued such a ruling as to dogs two years ago. Now a rapidly rising number of San Francisco residents are applying for tags for assistance dogs; the city has issued 658 tags for them. “‘The bottom line is that we’re seeing a lot of people come down here with notes from their doctors saying they need a companion dog to improve their quality of life,” said Carl Friedman, director of the city animal control agency. ‘Now we’re seeing a lot of people applying for the tags who have psychological issues.”’ Landlords and restaurants are not allowed to enforce no-dog policies against a registered animal. As for the pets’ required “training”, that “can be done by the owner and can be as simple as teaching the dog to wag a tail and lick a face if that’s what it takes to make someone with a diagnosed depression feel better.” (Rachel Gordon, “‘Assistance dog’ designation opens doors for pooches”, San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 19). We were on to this trend very early: see Jul. 9, 1999.

Welcome New York Sun readers

I’m quoted and this site is mentioned in an article on the ever-expanding enforcement ambitions of New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer (William F. Hammond Jr., “Spitzer Cements His Reputation as One to Watch”, Oct. 21)(more on Spitzer from Point of Law). More: For a more benign view of Spitzer than the one I take, see Daniel Gross’s Oct. 21 profile in Slate. Yet more: Martin Grace points out that the multifaceted AG has a blog.

“It’s always recession-proof”

Such happy news for Florida law firms, and such unhappy news for the rest of us: “‘Litigation is the No. 1 growth area. It’s always recession-proof,’ said Peter Prieto, executive partner of the Miami office of Holland & Knight, in an interview.” (Harris Meyer, “Legal Market in Florida ‘Flourishing'”, Miami Daily Business Review, Oct. 11).

Ninth Circuit: marine mammals don’t have standing…yet

There’ll always be a Ninth Circuit: “The world’s whales, porpoises and dolphins have no standing to sue President Bush over the U.S. Navy’s use of sonar equipment that harms marine mammals, a federal appeals court ruled yesterday. A three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, widely considered one of the most liberal and activist in the country, said it saw no reason why animals should not be allowed to sue [emphasis added] but said they had not yet been granted that right.” (“Court Says Whales, Dolphins Cannot Sue Bush”, Reuters/PlanetArk, Oct. 21). For more on giving animals standing to sue (= giving human lawyers standing to sue on their claimed behalf) see our animal rights archives and specifically May 14-15 and Apr. 29-30, 2002. More: Legal Reader has a link to the opinion (PDF), and Martin Grace also comments. More: Jeff Chorney, “Call Me Ishmael — and Call My Lawyer!”, The Recorder, Nov. 1.

RFK Jr.’s “Crimes Against Nature”

I’m in Sunday’s New York Post with a review of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s new volume on environmental policy, “Crimes Against Nature”. It’s fair to say I didn’t much care for the book; in fact, I found it staggeringly bad (“the book affords the fun of a pratfall on every page, most of them occasioned by Kennedy’s epic self-righteousness and astounding disregard for conventional accuracy”). (“Crimes of Ego”, Oct. 17). For more on RFK Jr., see Oct. 5, Apr. 19-21, 2002 and links from there (& welcome Instapundit, Volokh Conspiracy readers)(bumped Oct. 18).

Stifling archaeology, the tribal way

Colorado Republican Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell is attempting to insert broadening language into the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act “so that any ancient skeleton can be claimed by modern American Indian tribes even though they have no known connection to the remains,” thus reversing the disposition of such cases as the Kennewick Man controversy (see Aug. 9, Aug. 2 and links from there). Such a step “could significantly reduce — and perhaps cripple — legitimate scientific inquiry into the origins of human settlement in the Western Hemisphere. The retiring Campbell apparently hopes that one of his last acts in Congress will be to undermine the sort of vital study that is undertaken in virtually every other region of the globe.” (“Campbell’s assault on science” (editorial), Rocky Mountain News, Oct. 13)(via Moira Breen, by way of Jim Henley). More: Tim Sandefur comments at Panda’s Thumb (Oct. 4).