Lessons for Law School Deans Regarding Catholics in Political Life

Let me again extend my appreciation to Deans Kearney and O’Hear for the opportunity to serve as December’s guest alumnus blogger of the month, and to all of you who joined the conversation in the comments section. I’ll be right there with you starting tomorrow. 🙂 Let me also take advantage of my month’s unique position on the calendar to wish you all a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

My final post is, in fact, the abstract of a piece I have just posted to SSRN. Earlier this year, you may have seen that Fordham’s law school received some heat from Edward Cardinal Egan, Archbishop of New York, for its decision to confer an award on pro-abortion Justice Stephen Breyer.  The story led me to do some investigating, drawing in part on my own experiences as a Marquette student, and voila, an essay emerged. I hope to begin shopping it around to law reviews in the spring submission season.

Continue ReadingLessons for Law School Deans Regarding Catholics in Political Life

The Limitations of “Rot”

I was going to do this as a comment to Jessica’s post on Frank Pasquale’s post on the rot in America’s financial system, but it got a bit long, so I decided to make it a post.

Jessica cites to a post on Concurring Opinions which relies, to some extent, on a comment in response to a post that I wrote on Prawfs. It’s a small blogosphere after all.

There is much to be said in response to the Pasquale post (which I agree is provocative), but I want to focus on one part that Jessica highlights:

Can anyone doubt that our economy is exposed (with each passing day) as more Sicilian in its “winners’” casual acceptance of fraud, more Russian in its oligarchic tendencies, more Brazilian in its inequality?

Well, I think I can.

Continue ReadingThe Limitations of “Rot”

Good Result for the Wrong Reason

I am not the right guy to play Scrooge this time of the year, but why is the resolution of the Republic sit down strike something to be applauded. I understand the plight of the employees. State law entitled them to notice and pay that they were not about to receive.

But this is hardly the fault of Bank of America. BOA has been politically pressured to make a loan that will never be repaid.

You may say “who cares?” BOA is a big bank and 1.75 million dollars is barely a crumb in its cookie jar. But, as the old saying goes, a million here and a million there, and pretty soon we are talking about real money. Neither BOA nor any other bank can survive by making, not merely a poor – but an insane “loan” in response to political pressure. In a free economy, businesses fail and various stakeholders – shareholders, employees and creditors – will be hurt by it. We can’t expect banks – even those who have had an influx of federal capital – to insure against it.

The Republic employees acted boldly and certainly benefited from being from the President-elect’s hometown. Maybe (although I would oppose it) the government should guarantee obligations under the plant closing laws. But shifting the costs to a firm’s lender based upon who can and cannot exert the requisite political pressure seems irrational and even dangerous.

I suppose that those who are committed to a greater collectivization of losses and gains, this is a fumbling step in the right direction. My own view is that, if you want to assume community responsibility for private obligations, it ought to be done directly so the community can assess the costs and benefits.

Crossposted at Shark and Shepherd and Prawfsblawg.

Continue ReadingGood Result for the Wrong Reason