Leakgate Media Roundup

The past day has been my most hectic press day since Trump left office. I recorded four television interviews, four radio interviews, two podcasts, and gave more than a dozen interviews to reporters, which yielded quotes from Reuters, Politico, the Washington Times, and others. (Not everyone who interviews me, or uses my material, ends up quoting me.) Plus I wrote eight blog posts here at the Volokh Conspiracy. My day was booked in fifteen-minute interviews, as I jumped from one call to another.

Here are some video and audio highlights.

 

Comments

[DaivdBehar]

I disagree with Josh. That release was totally appropriate. Secret court proceedings are the crime. I would prosecute the Justices for their Star Chamber proceedings, not the leaker.

I like his mullet, however.

[KeithK]

What secret court proceedings? The case was tried publicly. You're basically suggesting that judges should have cameras on them in chambers. Pretty silly.

[DaivdBehar]

These Justices are horrible, Ivy indoctrinated people. They are delusional. They cannot read the simple English of the constitution. They need total surveillance and severe consequences for their horrifying and toxic wrongheadedness. I want their sick conversations in urinal conferences made public, that vile lawyer talk, that sick supernatural thinking, their corrupt deals with each other.

[Don Nico]

Behar cannot help it.
It is part of his Chatty Cathy, preprogrammed screed.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

As KeithK asks, do you really want to carry that to its logical outcome, where their computers can be monitored in real time as they type, every single keystroke? Shared cloud documents visible to the public?

The leaked document was a draft. Aren't drafts immune to Freedom of Information requests?

[DaivdBehar]

Yes. These Justices are sicko criminals and traitors. The more the surveillance the better. They are our enemies. You want to know what your enemy is doing at all times.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

I've never seen anyone who likes to hear themselves talk about their own perceived accomplishments with such a complete lack of self-awareness or shame than Hackman.

I don't know why this blog has lost many of the authors who used to participate, but I'd trade Hackman for any of them straight-up.

At least we can be grateful that his career will dead-end at the disaster of a school at which he allegedly "educates."

[DaivdBehar]

Jase. Stop talking like an angry Democrat. It is annoying.

[Krychek_2]

Jason, I almost never comment on a Blackman post because I don't want to feed the troll, but I'm going to make an exception to point out that *any* comment on *any* of Blackman's post is just that, feeding the troll. It is my fervent wish that people would just stop responding to him. That makes it far more likely that he'll eventually go away (or be shown the door) than a dozen people pointing out what a bore he is.

[DaivdBehar]

KryKry. Jason is a good guy. He is very knowledgeable. He is less worse as a lawyer scumbag. He is also not Ivy indoctrinated. Ivy people are all just awful, horrible human beings, and arrogant despite their being the stupidest people in the country.

[David Welker]

Oh wow. You finally found a lawyer you like?

You are clearly being assimilated.

Soon, you will be going to law school.

Resistance is futile.

[DaivdBehar]

I already attended lawschool. The turn of every page was like the shower scene from Psycho, shocking, horrifying, disgusting. Psycho was based on a true story, which was 100% the fault of the lawyer profession for streeting that guy.

[Doug Heffernan]

You must enjoy at least some of his low-effort "Today in Supreme Court History..." posts. Just because the same posts are recycled year after year doesn't make them any less gripping. Sometimes they'll even get a couple of comments.

[David Nieporent]

That makes it far more likely that he'll eventually go away

Do you see Blackman participate in the comments sections at all, like some of the other Conspirators? He talks to hear himself talk, not because he wants people to respond.

[loki13]

Ding ding ding!

I did appreciate the Kerr drive by, though.

[Kazinski]

Well looking at the number of media invites he got it seems other people like to hear him talk too. He does a pretty decent job on camera, unlike a lot of legal talking heads.

You'd have a point if this was his only outlet, and he was posting snippets from his YouTube channel with 50 subscribers, but those are actual media appearances and he's getting oped's in the WSJ, NYT, WaPo, etc.

[Commenter_XY]

Kaz....That is where it is at for me = Professor Blackman is getting an awful lot of media invites. He scored a few legal victories during the pandemic (specifically thinking of NYC cases).

Yes, Professor Blackman is...(ah, how shall I say this in a positive manner)...very assertive in self-promotion. Professor Blackman has his opinions and he contributes to the marketplace of ideas. If he were completely full of shit, media would shun him. They aren't. They invite him to speak, instead. He is doing something right. 🙂

One point where I believe Professor Blackman 'crosses the line': his treatment of Chief Justice John Roberts. Either argue for impeachment (Blackman does not argue for that), or maybe consider turning down the 'rhetorical fire-eating' wrt the Chief Justice. I don't think the way he writes about him (personalizing it) is right to do. Professor Blackman can disagree with the Chief Justice on policy without personalizing the disagreement.

[Dan Schiavetta]

"If he were completely full of shit, media would shun him." I'm not saying this applies to Josh, but this is not a true statement.

[Commenter_XY]

well.....Alright, yeah ok, I see your point. It's true. There are plenty of people completely full of shit who talk to the media regularly. I mean, you're right about that part, captcrisis.

[bernard11]

I think the media business, at as far as TV goes, feeds on itself. The producer needs to line someone up in a hurry, after all, so they go with someone who is easy to reach, will quickly respond, and whose name they recognize from somewhere.

"Who can we get for the evening news to talk about this?"

"What about that guy at South Texas. Here's his number."

Not to mention the self-promotion aspect.

[loki13]

That's exactly it. Do you realize how ... much ... media ... there is? Print, tv, radio, blogs/other internet written, podcasts, and all the different streaming options?

That's why you often see the same talking heads circulating 'round and 'round. Often, when you examine the qualifications of any given person, you find find them lacking. Because the primary needs are usually, in order-

1. Availability.
2. Availability.
3. Availability.
4. An ability to actually speak in short bites.
5. An opinion, which is usually strong and/or wrong enough to be notable and newsworthy without going full "I can't believe they put the editor of Stormfront on the air to talk about affirmative action."
99. Actual and real knowledge of the subject matter that is considered first-rate within the field.

[Don Nico]

Once again you are 100% correct.

[Sarcastr0]

This does build up a resume that probably helps you get bigger and bigger markets.

[Chris Baker]

Which in turn generally produces greater events, results, and refuels the cycle. Lot of people bashing him, but by most yardsticks -- the guy is pretty darn successful.

[LawTalkingGuy]

And for the first three, that’s typically a conscious choice of what to make yourself available for. You can make yourself available for media appearances or…for important and useful stuff. Like office hours for students, representing clients, or having friends.

[Dan Schiavetta]

As someone who has taught a number of CLE courses, often on subjects I know little about, due to the fact that I immediately say “yes” whenever I’m approached, and this leads to me being approached more often, I can definitely testify to this!

[Stephen Lathrop]

Commenter_XY, I think you may have reversed cause and effect. Media producers aren't subject-matter connoisseurs. They think in terms of, "both sides." Stuck with a legal story they don't know heads or tails about, they Google, and who comes up? Maybe the guy who spams his way to the top of the search results.

Blackman seems intent on building by press agentry a public-facing legal career. Among broadcast media, vulnerability to press agentry is an everyday hazard. The worst of them sell out completely, to save money on news gathering.

[Bob from Ohio]

"career will dead-end at the disaster of a school"

He's going to be a federal judge next GOP prez.

How's your career?

[LawTalkingGuy]

Lynn Hughes is a federal judge too. Just because you’re an article III doesn’t mean you’ll be respected or good at your job. Sure his career will “advance” but everyone is going to recognize he’s a joke who’s out of his depth. When you’re a trial court judge you actually have to manage litigation and interact with real humans. Can you imagine Blackman trying to manage a contentious discovery dispute? Or a hearing? Do you think someone who routinely gets basics about law wrong in blog-posts is going to rule on hearsay objections correctly? Do you think this insulated weirdo who likely hasn’t interacted with anyone below the poverty line is going to sentence people well? Can you imagine how those hearings would go? Forty minute speeches each time on why Apprendi was wrong or something while he tries to sentence someone for cashing their deceased moms social security check to pay for their kids dental needs.

If he’s going to be a GOP federal judge, that shows what a joke your party is. And if you think that’s a good idea, it further solidifies my belief that you are wholly unfit to practice law.

[SimonP]

That might be his angle, but he has enough rot out there that it won't be hard to find writing that makes him look intemperate and whackadoodle.

[Bob from Ohio]

"intemperate and whackadoodle."

So what. As long as there are 53 GOP senators it doesn't matter.

[SimonP]

So... that can be a problem for some GOP senators, as we saw during the Trump administration?

Like, Barrett hardly had a record to speak of. That's the kind of nominee the GOP is looking for. Reliably outcome-driven, but can't pin a thing on them in the hearings.

[Purple Martin]

The past day has been my most hectic press day since Trump left office...as I jumped from one call to another. Here are some video and audio highlights.

Josh, no one asked.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Did someone ask for your comment?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Speaking of asking . . . How many American law schools are ranked lower than South Texas College of Law Houston?

Is it still six?

Lots of invitations, but none involving the faculty of a.half-decent law school.

[DaivdBehar]

Rev, did you attend a Top Tier? It turned you into an America hating dumbass, yet arrogant in your unjustified confidence. You now belong to the stupidest, most failed, most poisonous occupation in the country. Your death would be a net gain to the economy. Yet, you feel superior for some unknown, unjustified reason. You and your occupation are mired in Medieval, supernatural doctrines plagiarized from a Church, you dumbass. You believe in mind reading, in forecasting years ahead, in fictitious characters. Did you even know that? Was that ever mentioned in your Top Tier education? You stink.

[David Nieporent]

Kirkland is so terrible as a human being and dishonest as a commenter that he can actually evoke sympathy for Blackman. Blackman is a professor at a 4th tier school, and yet Kirkland still manages to misrepresent the facts.

[DaivdBehar]

David. Aren't you a lawyer? STFU. Law schools should be tiered by the average income of their alums, the value placed on them by society. Where does your Top Tier land by that measure? The Rev will not answer that question. That US News survey has no validity whatsoever. It is garbage.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Last I checked -- and published the information at this blog, within the past year, with links -- there were roughly 200 ranked American law schools and six (or maybe it was five, or seven) were ranked below South Texas College of Law Houston.

Do you have evidence that questions that information? Which fact(s) did I misrepresent?

I tentatively assess that in this context -- unless you identify more than a handful of schools ranked below South Texas College Of Law Houston in the ranking on which I relied -- the lies are yours, Mr. Nieporent.

It wouldn't be the first time.

[David Nieporent]

Which fact(s) did I misrepresent?

For the umpteenth time: as you well know, the fourth tier schools aren't ranked among themselves. By saying "there are about 200 schools and only about 6 are ranked below it," you are trying to deceive people into thinking that it's ranked about 194th or so. But it is not. It is ranked anywhere between roughly 150th and 194th. There could be 50 schools below it. The rankings don't provide the information to distinguish.

[Chris Baker]

Ranking is pretty immaterial to the education; it's even more immaterial to lawyer performance. Heck, they barely teach people how to be a lawyer in law school as it is. As it stands, I've seen Havard grads dumpstered in court by a Cooley grad. What's it mean? Nothing. That dude going to harvard meant nothing there and the cooley grad meant nothing either. One person was just a better advocate than the other.

[Chris Baker]

When I take the bar in July and pass it - I'll be happy to say that I went to school on youtube, quimbee, and studicata lol.

[Doug Heffernan]

To say "no one" is very insulting to Blackman. You're forgetting about his biggest fan.

[Da5id]

This personal brand building and self aggrandizement is off-putting. And pretty embarrassing too.

And the sad thing is I agree with some of your points. But your approach makes me wish I didn't.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

And do you think adding another pointless comment to another pointless post is somehow more useful?

[Da5id]

Pot, kettle?

[Intelligent Mr Toad]

Congratulations on your increase in TV time.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

And you on your increase in comment time.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

It's funny how many people claim to detest Josh's posts, lambast him for tooting his own horn, and do so by tooting their own horn.

It's fun to read these PR posts and laugh at the comments, a fun way to kill time during otherwise-useless idle periods.

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, the problem is not the cringey masturbator, it's the ones pointing out the cringey masturbation.

[Brett Bellmore]

Speaking of cringey...

[Sarcastr0]

That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means

[loki13]

Weirdly, that's not just the subtitle of Blackman's next law review article (co-authored with S.B. Tillman, part 23 of 38), it's also the opening to Louis C.K.'s new standup routine.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

Yes, the problem is not the cringey masturbator, it's the ones pointing out the cringey masturbation.

You mean, the ones who keep stopping to watch the cringey masturbator so they can complain about it.

[David Nieporent]

Um, he keeps doing it in front of us. And when we walk past, he rushes up and does it again.

[David Welker]

I mean, you have to admit that Blackman's need to prove his significance by talking about media interviews is cringe.

And also completely clueless.

[Kazinski]

Can't have too much content on the internet. It's easy to ignore If you don't like it.

I think most of the sniping is just because a lot of people can't stand to see a conservative with a platform on the internet.

There is a long history of sniping on Volokh at the perceived most conservative poster, it's been EV himself back about 10-15 years ago, in fact there was a almost a canned response EV would get when when posting on something controversial 'why are you posting on this subject, you should find another topic. James Lindgren for a time would get as much sniping as Josh on every post, but his posting wasn't as frequent. And of course there has always been an element who thinks David Bernstein is too conservative to be allowed to post here, although it's kinda funny he gets a lot of pushback at Instapundit because he isn't considered conservative enough.

[Leo Marvin]

Some of that's valid, but for purposes of this thread it's also an evasion. Do you really not see what's cringe about the OP? If you don't, you may be among the ones blinkered by partisan bias.

[Dan Schiavetta]

That Josh has become a media star, given the shallowness of his opinions and his outsized ego, is depressing. But then again, the same thing happened with Trump.

[DaivdBehar]

Exactly. Josh's critics are all just dirty Commies.

[Yatusabes]

I never cared for short, white young guys. But Josh is kinda cute, though the mullet is sooooo gay. Butch it up, Josh. Dont make our team look nelly

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

given the shallowness of his opinions

Pot..kettle...

[John F. Carr]

This post made me play the song "Popular Girl" off Survivor's Vital Signs album.

She's getting what she wants, she's a popular girl, setting those hearts on fire...

[Dan Schiavetta]

When my daughter was about 15, she told me, "I used to want to be popular, but then I realized the popular girls were idiots."

[DaivdBehar]

The popular girls have no time to themselves, and have to keep up. It is too much hard work.

[David Welker]

It is a total waste of time to focus on the leak to the practical exclusion of the likely decision.

Oh, and also, no one cares about your media interviews.

[DaivdBehar]

David, you are a male feminist running dog. Am I right?

[loki13]

Eh. I might be in the minority that both thinks that the newfound fascination by some with leaks is stupid and off-putting, as well as believing that it is, in fact, kind of a big deal.

Look, JB is an idiot that is overhyping everything, as usual, and is almost a parody of Inspector Javert when it comes to Chief Justice Roberts.

That said, whether it was the ACA or Dobbs, there shouldn't be leaks from SCOTUS. And there needs to be ramifications for those leaks, especially if it is coming from law clerks. If it is was a knowing and deliberate leak, then I hope and expect that the individual will not be allowed to continue the practice of law- because I do view that type of ethical and professional breach as one of the most damaging that can be done.

But that's a matter that should be handled separately. As you correctly note, the practical effects of Dobbs will be massive and long-lasting (assuming the final decision is somewhat close to the original draft). It does seem that there are people much more interested in flaming the fans of the leak than in reckoning with the scorched-earth rhetoric of the decision, which doubtlessly sounds familiar and normal to people versed in that language but sounds pugnacious, off-putting, and insulting to others who did not grow up steeped in that mindset.

[Bob from Ohio]

"no one cares about your media interviews"

The number of comments here say otherwise.

[Leo Marvin]

Caring about the public spectacle of someone persistently embarrassing himself isn't the same as caring about the subject matter with which he does it.

[LawTalkingGuy]

This is obviously silly self-aggrandizement but at least it’s about a matter anyone can fake an opinion about. Much less ridiculous than when they ask him about actual legal issues. Or when he tried to explain how KBJ (a much more accomplished lawyer than he’ll ever be) didn’t measure up in her career like other justices.

[SimonP]

Another 22 lines for your CV, then.

For the number of times you appear on camera, Josh, you ought to consider getting a stylist, losing some weight, and figuring out your camera/lighting situation. You look like a frog under a mop, in the midst of transitioning to living as a woman, in these.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Josh has a side-hustle. He posts as an expert on internet self-presentation. Really.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Make it a point to notice Blackman's TV interlocutors: One looks self-engaged; one looks alarmed; two may be courteously attentive; four look stupefied, or actually asleep.

[M L]

Funny comment thread. I picture the people moaning about Blackman's boisterous self-promotion, posting even more comments about his posts than the prolific posts themselves, as sitting in their mahogany academic offices with furrowed brow during the down times of their 2.5-hour work week. 🙂 It would seem they have not yet encountered the behavior of a hundred million Americans on TikTok, Facebook and Instagram or else this wouldn't phase them so much.

[starlord1988]

Shouldn't this post just read "I am awesome. Look at all the awesome things I have done. Did I mention I am awesome?