The Good ol’ Days, Corrected
One of the "Americans {seeking} respite from the Nation's economic troubles," 1939
The New York Times has an interesting article which inadvertently highlights cultural prejudice.
“Roberts Seeks More Judicial Confirmations” tells the story of the Chief Justice’s appeal to the other branches of government to solve “the persistent problem of judicial vacancies.” No problem with that.
Roberts’ Year-End Report begins, however, with a wistful vignette of depression-era America. I’m always incredulous when I see a writer reminisce about an era when the U.S. was a de facto police state which denied basic human rights to many Americans. I therefore present:
The Chief Justice’s Year-End Report, par. 1, corrected
Proposed Q&A site for lawyers, law librarians, law students, and others searching for primary sources, other than at the “big two”.
I’m a law student and I’m appealing to the Internet for a donated, used Android phone so I can develop legal apps for it. Up until now, I’ve only developed iphone and web apps. I need an actual device to test the software, and I can’t afford a phone just for this. I’d love to make the jump to Android development, and if someone can me, they’d be helping the Android community get more legal apps. I’d also take their feature and app requests very seriously. 
About me: I have a track record of making innovative, public service apps for attorneys and law students. I’ve also got years of Linux and Java development experience, and will be able to hit the ground running.
Here are some links to show that I’m serious about following through:
Screenshots of iPhone legal app
(Originally posted on under my id dogweather on reddit)
I believe that on most issues, reasonable people can disagree. We can do it civilly if, for example, we Assume Good Faith. And so I wonder about the civility or lack of it in court opinions. Does incivility have a negative effect on norms such as following and respecting the law?
In older Supreme Court dissenting opinions, it’s common to read “I respectfully dissent”, or “with respect, I dissent.” But what about today’s justices? Some seem to relish writing dissents which are indistinguishable from Internet flames. Here’s a quick little bit of research:
How often do the current and retired Supreme Court justices use the above phrases in their dissents?
| Dissents | “Respectful” | Percent | |
| Souter | 127 | 119 | 93.70% |
| Thomas | 177 | 147 | 83.05% |
| Sotomayor | 8 | 6 | 75.00% |
| O’Connor | 181 | 123 | 67.96% |
| Stevens | 969 | 619 | 63.88% |
| Breyer | 172 | 108 | 62.79% |
| Scalia | 249 | 147 | 59.04% |
| Ginsburg | 106 | 40 | 37.74% |
| Roberts | 89 | 13 | 14.61% |
Methods
LexisNexis on 11/11/2010. Two searches for each justice, e.g.:
DISSENTBY(thomas)
DISSENTBY(thomas) and DISSENT(respect! w/s dissent)
This analysis is fairly superficial; something I did while procrastinating on my actual work. It should, though, provide a little food for thought.
I’m fascinated by new tricks that spammers try to pull and scams in general. In the past, I’ve tried some creative techniques for dealing with them. Here’s the latest one to hit one of my sites; a blog about late-night places to study:
The first comment reads, “Helpful blog, bookmarked the website with hopes to read more!” An odd but friendly comment without a link to any website; seems benign. But now that two have appeared, the pattern is clear: They are (1) friendly posts that (2) praise the blog (3) using odd English phrasing, (4) without saying anything specific about the content and (5) are sent from the same sub-network. Google shows 25,000 similar posts on other sites.
I’m not sure what the spammer is after, but my guess is: First become an “approved commenter” on the target sites, then return later to post actual spam.
