Best of the Blogs Part II: Drugs, Immigration, and the Hotel “Death Ray”

If that title doesn’t increase readership of my posts, I don’t know what will.

My contribution this week to our “best of the blogs” feature (which I have taken license to interpret as “best of the blogs and other news read online…”) is even more random than usual.

First, the drug-related story that caught my eye in the relatively recent past.  The Daily Beast Cheat Sheet reported on September 27th about a Cato Institute study showing that since Portugal decriminalized drug possession in 2001, drug use among adolescents has fallen, HIV infection rates fell, and addicts have increasingly sought help to overcome their addictions.  The full story was in Time, here. An excerpt:

Continue ReadingBest of the Blogs Part II: Drugs, Immigration, and the Hotel “Death Ray”

More on An Ethic of Professional Satisfaction

I rather liked Rebecca Blemberg’s post on lawyer happiness and virtue ethics and would like to extend the discussion. I agree that one of the mistakes a lawyer can make is to follow the lure of a consequentialism that is divorced from her knowledge of herself and what that tells her about the way in which she should practice law.

We normally associate this with pursuit of the shimmering rewards of legal practice such as money or glory. Rebecca is right to suggest that these things, in and of themselves, will not make for a happy career. I know plenty of lawyers who love the practice while making tons of money and winning lots of cases, but their happiness as lawyers (and perhaps their success) has another source.

But it seems to me that one can become unhappy in the law by pursuing what might be seen as selfless objectives as well. Thus the picture of Al Pacino as Milton in The Devil’s Advocate.

Continue ReadingMore on An Ethic of Professional Satisfaction

Supreme Court Takes New First Amendment Public Employment Case

4United States Supreme Court 112904 Not exactly Garcetti II, but the United State Supreme Court yeserday granted certiorari in a case involving a ruling affirming a jury verdict for a police chief claiming retaliation under the First Amendment’s Petition Clause.  The case is Duryea v. Guarnieri (No. 09-1476).  (Here is the Third Circuit opinion below and the petition for writ of certiorari).

Although the Borough argues that this case should be handled like other free speech cases and be dismissed because the dispute does not meet the Connick “matter of public concern” test, the police chief argues that there should be different standards applied for Petition Clause claims as opposed to free speech claims.

Interestingly, a similar argument arises over whether the Connick/Pickering/Garcetti framework should apply in association claim cases under the First Amendment. 

Continue ReadingSupreme Court Takes New First Amendment Public Employment Case