Law Roundtable

The Times has an article about the link between muscles and crime.  A couple of really smart guys comment here and here.

As they note, people with more muscle are able to commit more crimes.  But that doesn't mean muscles cause cause.  Criminals will use whatever means they ...

In a recent speech, the Pope Benedict urged young people to create "a new age in which hope liberates us from the shallowness, apathy and self-absorption which deaden our souls and poison our relationships."  Who can argue with that?

I recently looked into credit-card practices while researching a potential class action.  I was astounded at my ignorance.  Even my cynicism wasn't prepared for what credit card companies get away with.

Middle America is being squeezed by credit card companies in really sleazy ways.  Here is a brief summary of ...

Today the Ninth Circuit granted habeas relief based on a Batson claim.  Green v. LaMarque, No. 06-16254 (9th Cir. July 21, 2008) (opinion).  According to the panel, a prosecutor discriminated against African Americans during jury selection:

While selecting a jury for a criminal trial in Alameda County, California, the prosecutor used ...

Conservatives claim that they are pro-life because they care about children.  Yet they are also the first people to fight efforts to prevent infant mortality.  How does that make any sense? 

This essay from George Lakoff explains the contradiction.  If our brains are computers, the metaphors we live by ...

I haven't verified this, but it sure does sound like him.  Then again, I can do a pretty good written impersonation of Spence.  Always talk about fear.  Begin everything with, "I'm afraid."  Not mocking the guy; but that is his style.  And fear is a big part of what ...

Paul Gowder wants to know: "What's the most destructive Supreme Court case that's still good law?" 

Be careful what you post online.

The Ninth Circuit recently published a very interesting post Hartman* case.  Beck v. Upland, No. 05-56901 (9th Cir., May 28, 2008) (opinion).

Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250 (2006) (holding that action for retaliatory prosecution exists only where officers lacked probable cause for arrest).

Adam Liptak, writing for the Times, is arguing against the exclusionary rule.  He notes:  "In the United States, by contrast, evidence against criminal defendants is routinely and automatically suppressed where police misconduct is found."

That's some statement, isn't it?

In a major metropolitan public defender's office, if you win a suppression ...