« An Open Invitation to Legal Publishers to Answer the Question "What Does LAW.GOV Mean to You?" | Main | The Mindset Divide: Distinguishing Between Traditional and Non-Traditional Legal Information (Professional Services) Vendors »
August 16, 2010
Short Takes On The News
- Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the UC Irvine Law School and noted constitutional law scholar, opined in the Los Angeles Times yesterday that conservative principles may prevent an appeal of the recent federal court decision overturning Proposition 8 in California. He sites several decisions by the Supreme Court that denied intervenors the option of appealing an adverse decisions. California state officials have the option of appealing and have indicated that they will not. The article from the LA Times is here. It would be an anticlimactic conclusion to the case if Chemerinsky is right.
- Gmail from Google is more than a free email system that trades massive amounts of convenience in web mail for the opportunity to market to its users (not as if Hotmail and other never did that, huh?). It's now a game. Find details and a link to the game on the GMail blog. Be warned, playing requires an HTML5 compatible browser. Click on the link otherwise asks the question, "have you tried Google Chrome?"
- The Supreme Court acted today in denying a motion for relief from a fine issued by a federal judge. Orly Taitz had filed suit in federal court on behalf of Captain Connie Rhodes, who was protesting deployment to Afghanistan on the groups that President Obama was not authorized to be commander in chief by virtue of (allegedly) not being a valid U.S. citizen. The trial judge denied the relief. Taitz filed a motion for rehearing and labeled the first ruling an "act of treason." The judge slapped Taitz with a $20,000 fine for filing a frivolous lawsuit aimed at advancing a political agenda. First Clarence Thomas, and now Samuel Alito denied review of the fine.
Funny how when Obama criticized the Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC during the State of the Union address, the members of the Court present expressed some offense at the notion. Then two of the Court's more conservative members reject the appeal of the fine. Whoops, they must be in on the whole thing (note: a light form of sarcasm expressed here, not a belief in the actual statement). More is in CNN.
- Remember when Congress got mad at ACORN and cut off it's funding? That move was inspired, oddly enough, by edited videos from Andrew Breitbart. He's the same guy that did a number on Shirley Sherrod at the Department of Agriculture, also with edited videos. A trend, perhaps. Anyway, a federal judge ruled that Congress acted to punish the organization and ordered the funds restored. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision, saying that Congress had the authority to treat ACORN the same way it treated any other federal contractor accused of mishandling funds. The Huffington Post (no bias in it's report...nah) has the story with links to the opinion. [MG]