An interesting discussion of recusal, timeliness, and the social relationships between judges and lawyers and their families.
The president is still pushing the idea of using taxpayer money to reward Capitol rioters, contradicting the attorney general nominee's assurance that it won't happen.
During his confirmation hearing, the attorney general nominee repeatedly misrepresented the nature and scope of the sweeping immunity deal he approved.
Contradicting a federal judge, the acting attorney general, who blessed that cozy arrangement, insists it was not a product of collusion or self-dealing.
Trump’s nominee for attorney general has repeatedly subverted justice to benefit his boss.
U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams concludes that the case never presented a true "case or controversy" because both sides were controlled by the president.
The DOJ's unilateral abandonment of the Anti-Weaponization Fund "makes it crystal clear that these parties were never adverse," the former judges argue.
The sweet deal that resolved the president's fatally flawed lawsuit against the IRS was business as usual at the DOJ, his attorneys told a federal judge.
The president himself has repeatedly contradicted that claim.
"Article III life tenure is not a shield for misconduct in chambers. It is a constitutional trust conditioned on good behavior."
Blanche is happy to pervert justice in service of the president's personal agenda. No wonder Trump wants to keep him as attorney general.
An addendum to the president's "settlement" of his lawsuit against the IRS shields him and his family from liability for any federal offenses they committed prior to May 19.
The Justice Department signals a retreat from defending the blatantly corrupt scheme, which provoked vigorous objections from Republican lawmakers.
One order temporarily blocks money for the president's "Anti-Weaponization Fund." The other asks whether the agreement is a fraudulent "product of collusion."
The professional-ethics implications of making court confidences public.
with cameo appearance by out-of-jurisdiction counsel's citation of non-existent cases.
The magistrate judge is not amused.
"After the lawsuit was filed, Desbordes' [Druski's] counsel sent Plaintiffs' counsel evidence, including debit card records and phone records, showing that it was virtually certain that Desbordes was in Georgia at the time of the alleged rape, and thus could not have participated in the assault." "Yet, at the hearing on the motion for sanctions, Plaintiffs' counsel expressly stated Plaintiffs 'have no desire to dismiss Mr. Desbordes' from the lawsuit."
The alleged incident goes to the heart of the objections raised by critics who worry about Bove's respect for the rule of law.
The federal judge rightly rejects the request.
An interesting new study on how state bar requirements may affect the quality and quantity of legal services.
"The judge soon learned that, in a recorded conversation between defense counsel and the defendant, the attorney had referred to the age, race, political affiliation, and gender of the court's judges, and suggested that the court 'should look a little bit more like the people that are in front of them.' The attorney also suggested that the defendant would not receive a fair trial from the court's judges, who are a different race and gender from the defendant. Finally, the attorney used a pejorative term, drawing on racial and gender stereotypes, to refer to the complainant."
Activists and politicians look for almost any excuse to claim that judges should withdraw from cases. Their calls for recusal may be frivolous, but it gives them an opportunity to criticize judges they don't like.
The conservative culture war boycott against Bud Light was actually a great time to buy stock in a successful company, even if you don't like Bud Light.
Are law professors too quick to sign their names on briefs submitted to courts? Is this a problem?
"Lawyers in litigation may be expected to assume the risk of a certain amount of rough-and-tumble. Their families do not. In preying on the families of opposing counsel, Mr. Manookian crossed the Rubicon."
"he might want to consider hiring an attorney to represent him in this case."
Some candid remarks at the University of California at Berkeley
The relationship between scholarly amicus briefs and scholarship
The provisions seem sensible, though there are legitimate concerns about enforcement.
The matter involves a Wall Street Journal interview of Justice Alito, which didn't discuss the case in which one of the interviewers is a party.
My amicus brief to the Third Circuit argues that the district court appropriately sanctioned the Philadelphia D.A.'s Office for making misleading representations about whether they had conferred with a crime victims' family.
Celebrate your independence with a subscription to Reason magazine, your most trusted source of honest, insightful news and analysis.
