speaking truth
the rainy season’s crack
of thunder
translated by D. Lanoue
alma mater that free speech often comes at a cost — as does sticking to one’s principles. Howard
responds to news that HLS plans to start barring military recruiters, in the wake of the 3rd Circuit’s
decision yesterday overturning the Solomon Amendment.
Rather than losing federal funding, Harvard Law School has been allowing military recruiters on campus,
despite the anti-gay policies of the military. As Howard points out, in words worth quoting in full:
“Harvard Law School at all times (including now) has had the right to ban
military recruiters from campus notwithstanding the existence of the Solomon Amendment
– the university simply had to pay the price in loss of federal funding. Dean Kagan’s statement
suggests that now that the price to be paid will soon be zero dollars, Harvard Law School can
afford to exercise its right of association in the manner it prefers. On this very point, to the extent
that the Solomon Amendment causes a law school to “speak” in any manner, it seems to me
that a law school is forced to reveal that it finds the continuation of federal funding to have
a greater value than the evenhanded application of the school’s anti-discrimination policy.
This ’speech’ — which reveals that the exercise of rights sometimes comes at great cost; even
at a cost that may be too great to bear — would seem to teach law students a valuable lesson
about how the real world often operates.” (emphasis added)
If Harvard Law School can’t afford to give up federal dollars in order to take a principled stand, who can?
speaking truth
the rainy season’s crack
of thunder
translated by D. Lanoue
alma mater that free speech often comes at a cost — as does sticking to one’s principles. Howard
responds to news that HLS plans to start barring military recruiters, in the wake of the 3rd Circuit’s
decision yesterday overturning the Solomon Amendment.
Rather than losing federal funding, Harvard Law School has been allowing military recruiters on campus,
despite the anti-gay policies of the military. As Howard points out, in words worth quoting in full:
“Harvard Law School at all times (including now) has had the right to ban
military recruiters from campus notwithstanding the existence of the Solomon Amendment
– the university simply had to pay the price in loss of federal funding. Dean Kagan’s statement
suggests that now that the price to be paid will soon be zero dollars, Harvard Law School can
afford to exercise its right of association in the manner it prefers. On this very point, to the extent
that the Solomon Amendment causes a law school to “speak” in any manner, it seems to me
that a law school is forced to reveal that it finds the continuation of federal funding to have
a greater value than the evenhanded application of the school’s anti-discrimination policy.
This ’speech’ — which reveals that the exercise of rights sometimes comes at great cost; even
at a cost that may be too great to bear — would seem to teach law students a valuable lesson
about how the real world often operates.” (emphasis added)
If Harvard Law School can’t afford to give up federal dollars in order to take a principled stand, who can?
It’s a list of the ten words that have been looked up the most at the M-W
Most webloggers will take special notice, I’m sure, that the word “blog” was came in at
#1. In fact, as TalkLeft notes, “blog” will be a new entry in the 2005 version of the
Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition. Here’s the M-W definition:
Blog noun [short for Weblog] (1999) : a Web site that contains an online
personal journal with reflections, comments, and often hyperlinks provided
by the writer
I’m sure there will be plenty of quibbling over the definition, but I plan to stay out of
Of course, I need to preserve my customary objection to the adoption of that ugly
little word. Click here for a brief history of the word “blog” (and my plea that we
do better from now on as we create our online and technological Language Legacy).
I have a different observation: M-W’s Top Ten List gives a remarkably good sketch
of the events of 2004 — an outline of words on the minds of many Americans. In addition
to “blog,” here’s the list:
There are still 31 days left in 2004. I wonder what events in America or
around the world could change this list, as we go online to better understand the words
that are important to be well-informed citizens, students, parents, and human beings.
looking up, wrinkles
looking down, wrinkles…
a cold night
drawing words
in an old tray’s ashes…
winter cold
It’s a list of the ten words that have been looked up the most at the M-W
Most webloggers will take special notice, I’m sure, that the word “blog” was came in at
#1. In fact, as TalkLeft notes, “blog” will be a new entry in the 2005 version of the
Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition. Here’s the M-W definition:
Blog noun [short for Weblog] (1999) : a Web site that contains an online
personal journal with reflections, comments, and often hyperlinks provided
by the writer
I’m sure there will be plenty of quibbling over the definition, but I plan to stay out of
Of course, I need to preserve my customary objection to the adoption of that ugly
little word. Click here for a brief history of the word “blog” (and my plea that we
do better from now on as we create our online and technological Language Legacy).
I have a different observation: M-W’s Top Ten List gives a remarkably good sketch
of the events of 2004 — an outline of words on the minds of many Americans. In addition
to “blog,” here’s the list:
There are still 31 days left in 2004. I wonder what events in America or
around the world could change this list, as we go online to better understand the words
that are important to be well-informed citizens, students, parents, and human beings.
looking up, wrinkles
looking down, wrinkles…
a cold night
drawing words
in an old tray’s ashes…
winter cold
Surf serendipity sent me from Legal Reader’s blurb yesterday on lawsuits
in China, to other exotic ports of call, and then back to my neighborhood
Underground cafe, where Evan Schaeffer wonders about the optimal size
Civil suits in China increased 7-fold in just two years, while 
the number of lawyers in Shanghai grew almost 50%. Maybe we should
there were 1,084,504 active lawyers in the USA at the close of 2003. The
biggest percentage growth was in Virgin Islands, Utah, and Indiana, while
Vermont, South Carolina, Rhode Island, and Maryland had fewer lawyers in
2003 than in 2002. You can find a lot more lawyer and law school stats
& Careers poll, say they wish they had never taken the Bar exam; and,
don’t tell Carolyn, but almost twice as many wish they had gone to a
BigLaw firm than say they would have chosen a smaller firm.
was presented by the Pre-Law and Law School Admissions office. If anyone
has a clue what this piece is saying, please let me know. Meanwhile, I was
edified by this nugget of information (emphasis added).
When asked what skills they expected law school graduates to
tbring o a firm, hiring coordinators listed in order:
- oral communication skills
- written communication skills
- legal analytic ability
- library and computer skills
- sensitivity for ethical skills.
Is it any wonder that law firms now need to hire in-house legal counsel, and
that “Lawyers representing lawyers find unique challenges” (see BostonBizJ,
Please don’t forget poor old North Carolina, which is suffering from severe LSD —
too few law schools.
Finally, if he can stand a large dose of bigotry, Evan Schaeffer might want to check out
standardized test results. At the site we learn, among many similar tidbits, that
“The first thing Americans must understand is that, by design, lawyers are STUPID people.
They score lower on the Graduate Record Exam than most of all other majors, scoring
slightly higher than average score for blacks and slightly lower than the average score
or women, but more than 200 points lower than Asian engineering majors.
“Many lawyers are divorced, are paying “child support” and alimony to ex-wives (or
two or three ex-wives) which makes their ability to understand the Holy Bible or draft
a simple agreement, much less understand human nature, highly suspect.”
ethicalEsq and Prof. Yabut no longer feel bad about anything we’ve ever said about lawyers. As
we never took the GRE nor filed for divorce, we are happy not to have made the statistics any
worse than they are.
boom! boom! ka-boom!
so many duds…
fireworks
heading for where
hunting birds are few…
the fox
Surf serendipity sent me from Legal Reader’s blurb yesterday on lawsuits
in China, to other exotic ports of call, and then back to my neighborhood
Underground cafe, where Evan Schaeffer wonders about the optimal size
Civil suits in China increased 7-fold in just two years, while 
the number of lawyers in Shanghai grew almost 50%. Maybe we should
there were 1,084,504 active lawyers in the USA at the close of 2003. The
biggest percentage growth was in Virgin Islands, Utah, and Indiana, while
Vermont, South Carolina, Rhode Island, and Maryland had fewer lawyers in
2003 than in 2002. You can find a lot more lawyer and law school stats
& Careers poll, say they wish they had never taken the Bar exam; and,
don’t tell Carolyn, but almost twice as many wish they had gone to a
BigLaw firm than say they would have chosen a smaller firm.
was presented by the Pre-Law and Law School Admissions office. If anyone
has a clue what this piece is saying, please let me know. Meanwhile, I was
edified by this nugget of information (emphasis added).
When asked what skills they expected law school graduates to
tbring o a firm, hiring coordinators listed in order:
- oral communication skills
- written communication skills
- legal analytic ability
- library and computer skills
- sensitivity for ethical skills.
Is it any wonder that law firms now need to hire in-house legal counsel, and
that “Lawyers representing lawyers find unique challenges” (see BostonBizJ,
Please don’t forget poor old North Carolina, which is suffering from severe LSD —
too few law schools.
Finally, if he can stand a large dose of bigotry, Evan Schaeffer might want to check out
standardized test results. At the site we learn, among many similar tidbits, that
“The first thing Americans must understand is that, by design, lawyers are STUPID people.
They score lower on the Graduate Record Exam than most of all other majors, scoring
slightly higher than average score for blacks and slightly lower than the average score
or women, but more than 200 points lower than Asian engineering majors.
“Many lawyers are divorced, are paying “child support” and alimony to ex-wives (or
two or three ex-wives) which makes their ability to understand the Holy Bible or draft
a simple agreement, much less understand human nature, highly suspect.”
ethicalEsq and Prof. Yabut no longer feel bad about anything we’ve ever said about lawyers. As
we never took the GRE nor filed for divorce, we are happy not to have made the statistics any
worse than they are.
boom! boom! ka-boom!
so many duds…
fireworks
heading for where
hunting birds are few…
the fox
Zen garden
a dry leaf sticks
in the ripples
Alzheimer’s ward
again father counts
the afghan squares
credits: “alzheimer’s ward” - bottle rockets II:1
“Zen garden” - bottle rockets I:1
under nana’s afghan -
dreaming homemade
bread and meatballs
one-breath pundit
Pay More to Help A Legal Aid or Solo Attorney?” We’ve left comments at MyShingle today
in response. Have you? By the way, the Editor doesn’t think a State should pay any more
for assigned counsel than it takes to get an adequate supply of competent lawyers.
Our other frequent commentor, Mike Cernovich, a/k/a Fed84, starts an indepth, four-part series today on the Interstate Wine Shipment Cases, over at Crime & Federalism. You’ll find him neither dry nor fruity. I cannot vouch for his bouquet.
Zen garden
a dry leaf sticks
in the ripples
Alzheimer’s ward
again father counts
the afghan squares
credits: “alzheimer’s ward” - bottle rockets II:1
“Zen garden” - bottle rockets I:1
under nana’s afghan -
dreaming homemade
bread and meatballs
one-breath pundit
Pay More to Help A Legal Aid or Solo Attorney?” We’ve left comments at MyShingle today
in response. Have you? By the way, the Editor doesn’t think a State should pay any more
for assigned counsel than it takes to get an adequate supply of competent lawyers.
Our other frequent commentor, Mike Cernovich, a/k/a Fed84, starts an indepth, four-part series today on the Interstate Wine Shipment Cases, over at Crime & Federalism. You’ll find him neither dry nor fruity. I cannot vouch for his bouquet.
Two of the biggest lawyer groups in Massachusetts are “challenging a ruling that allows judges in Hampden County
to force attorneys to represent the poor in criminal cases.” This is one more episode in a consitutional crisis that began when assigned counsel for indigent criminal defendants (called “bar advocates”), started illegal group boycotts in July seeking higher fees. (AP/Boston Herald, Legal groups challenge judges’ right to force them to take cases, Nov. 29, 2004)
The Massachusetts bar advocates are continuing to put their own financial interests above the law, their ethical duties and the needs of their clientele: — click here to read this entire post and here for a summary of the Editor’s argument that the boycotts are illegal and unethical violations of the antitrust law –
the mountain moon
gives the blossom thief
light
in the misty day
no window can be seen…
a prison
- haiku of Kobayashi ISSA, translated by D.G. Lanoue
Two of the biggest lawyer groups in Massachusetts are “challenging a ruling that allows judges in Hampden County
to force attorneys to represent the poor in criminal cases.” This is one more episode in a consitutional crisis that began when assigned counsel for indigent criminal defendants (called “bar advocates”), started illegal group boycotts in July seeking higher fees. (AP/Boston Herald, Legal groups challenge judges’ right to force them to take cases, Nov. 29, 2004)
The Massachusetts bar advocates are continuing to put their own financial interests above the law, their ethical duties and the needs of their clientele: — click here to read this entire post and here for a summary of the Editor’s argument that the boycotts are illegal and unethical violations of the antitrust law –
the mountain moon
gives the blossom thief
light
in the misty day
no window can be seen…
a prison
- haiku of Kobayashi ISSA, translated by D.G. Lanoue
autumn day
the empty pillow
glows white
windowless office
a fly buzzes against
my glasses
autumn evening
also nowhere to go
skittering leaf
(Brooks Books, 2000)
a mostly-cloudy sampler
of blues, grays and whites
– driving alone
[Nov 29, 2004]
one-breath pundit
Patience Pays and Saves: NYT reports that prices for flat-panel TVs will fall greatly
throughout 2005. But, “We do not want to talk about predictions of price drops,”
said Lee Simonson, the director of Best Buy’s television division. “We want people to buy now.”
Carolyn Elefant has Commented thoughtfully on our disagreement over mandatory
pro bono and solos. At MyShingle today, however, we learn that — while opposing
mandatory pro bono — she favors forcing “each senior lawyer to train a fixed number of
junior lawyers” and paying the junior lawyers, to help them establish solo firms. Go figure.
selling case on antitrust law. We note that the Mass. Bar Advocates have been arguing
their group boycott can’t violate federal antitrust law because it has no impact on interstate
commerce. Raich could help settle that issue. And, see Kerr and Fed84 on NYT and federalism.
autumn day
the empty pillow
glows white
windowless office
a fly buzzes against
my glasses
autumn evening
also nowhere to go
skittering leaf
(Brooks Books, 2000)
a mostly-cloudy sampler
of blues, grays and whites
– driving alone
[Nov 29, 2004]
one-breath pundit
Patience Pays and Saves: NYT reports that prices for flat-panel TVs will fall greatly
throughout 2005. But, “We do not want to talk about predictions of price drops,”
said Lee Simonson, the director of Best Buy’s television division. “We want people to buy now.”
Carolyn Elefant has Commented thoughtfully on our disagreement over mandatory
pro bono and solos. At MyShingle today, however, we learn that — while opposing
mandatory pro bono — she favors forcing “each senior lawyer to train a fixed number of
junior lawyers” and paying the junior lawyers, to help them establish solo firms. Go figure.
selling case on antitrust law. We note that the Mass. Bar Advocates have been arguing
their group boycott can’t violate federal antitrust law because it has no impact on interstate
commerce. Raich could help settle that issue. And, see Kerr and Fed84 on NYT and federalism.
. . . no, they’re not Santa’s gifts for naughty weblog editors. We’ve got a much better present
for you: a pair of haiku from Rebecca Lilly (use our search box to find more):
First snow
the white mounds of coal
beside the closed station
Cold autumn twilight
the garden slope’s stepping stones
edging out of line
credits: “First snow” — Brussels Sprout 9:3
“cold autumn twilight” — Modern Haiku XXXI: 2
finally touching
her face - “are your fingers
always this cold?”
one-breath pundit
“Web logs are referred to in Chinese as bo ke, which is phonetically similar to the
word ‘blog’, but also has a literal meaning of rich or abundant traveler.”
Hmm, why didn’t they come up with terminology that sounds like barfing? Such elitists!
(
Asia Times article on weblogs in China, July 22, 2004).
pro bono rules, that ”Solos can’t delegate their pro bono obligation to other lawyers, so why
should biglaw attorneys have that ability? “ As I have mentioned on other occasions to
Carolyn, she seems to leave her lawyer skills behind when advocating for solos, and instead
sounds like the mother of a juvenile delinquent or like a whiny adolescent, for whom it is always
unfair when someone else gets to do something they can’t do. Seems to me:
Being a solo is not like being born into a caste from which one can never escape. Indeed,
Carolyn’s shtick is mostly as a cheerleader pointing out the advantages of being a solo, as
compared to being in a BigLaw firm. Here in the real world even Good Things have downsides.
What would we say if BigLaw partners complained they should not have to be responsible for
monitoring the behavior of associates, because solos don’t have similar ethical obligations?
Or, they shouldn’t have to pay the bar or CLE fees for any employees, since solos don’t have to?
Do some rules here on Earth affect the poor differently than the rich, and the big differently than the small?
Of course, they do. I’d suggest using traditional equal protection analysis to see whether the differences
are malicious, undue or unfair before crying foul — and before crying wolf so often no one cares to listen.
It just came to my attention that a Google Search today for “yabut generation” yields no results. 
This weblog did, however, come in at #3 and #4 for the quote-mark-less search yabut generation>.
As the home of Prof. Yabut, we are happy to use the phrase first right here — “yabut generation”.
However, there are so many generations that deserve the appellation, that it is impossible to
choose one. The But-Boomers. Brokaw’s Gratest Generation. Generations Y-But and X-But, etc.
. . . no, they’re not Santa’s gifts for naughty weblog editors. We’ve got a much better present
for you: a pair of haiku from Rebecca Lilly (use our search box to find more):
First snow
the white mounds of coal
beside the closed station
Cold autumn twilight
the garden slope’s stepping stones
edging out of line
credits: “First snow” — Brussels Sprout 9:3
“cold autumn twilight” — Modern Haiku XXXI: 2
finally touching
her face - “are your fingers
always this cold?”
one-breath pundit
“Web logs are referred to in Chinese as bo ke, which is phonetically similar to the
word ‘blog’, but also has a literal meaning of rich or abundant traveler.”
Hmm, why didn’t they come up with terminology that sounds like barfing? Such elitists!
(
Asia Times article on weblogs in China, July 22, 2004).
pro bono rules, that ”Solos can’t delegate their pro bono obligation to other lawyers, so why
should biglaw attorneys have that ability? “ As I have mentioned on other occasions to
Carolyn, she seems to leave her lawyer skills behind when advocating for solos, and instead
sounds like the mother of a juvenile delinquent or like a whiny adolescent, for whom it is always
unfair when someone else gets to do something they can’t do. Seems to me:
Being a solo is not like being born into a caste from which one can never escape. Indeed,
Carolyn’s shtick is mostly as a cheerleader pointing out the advantages of being a solo, as
compared to being in a BigLaw firm. Here in the real world even Good Thing