pageok
pageok
pageok
If I'm Not Mistaken,
these comments by D.C. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh create a 1-1 circuit split between the D.C. Circuit and the Ninth Circuit on the relevance of Howard Bashman.
Brad D. Bailey (mail):
So, is anyone preparing a petition for cert. to get SCOTUS to settle the circuit split?
11.6.2007 11:35am
Anderson (mail):
I think we can predict that the Ninth Circuit will enjoy its usual level of success on appeal.
11.6.2007 12:01pm
GMUSL '07 Alum (mail):
Souter probably thinks that blogging is a punishment for disobedient sailors.
11.6.2007 12:03pm
Robert Ahdieh (mail):

Orin is being unduly modest. In his remarks, Kavanaugh also highlighted his attentiveness to Orin's postings on questions of criminal procedure...
11.6.2007 12:06pm
CrazyTrain (mail):
As Judge Kavanaugh put it, "Howard Bashman is the Matt Drudge of the legal profession."

Am I the only one who noticed the irony* of Brett K citing Matt Drudge. Anyone remember how Drudge got his name? Remember where Brett K was a senior official at the time? Remember that the office where Brett K was a senior official was leaking like the Titanic to Matt D? More evidence for why this guy -- the principal author of the greatest piece of government funded pornography of the 20th century -- should never have been nominated or confirmed.

*I am not sure that is the correct use of the word but can't think of a better one to use.
11.6.2007 12:53pm
SaneTrain (mail):
CrazyTrain,
Could you elaborate on your post about Judge Kavanaugh and Drudge? I don't know any of K's history, so you're post is a bit hard to follow. Do you mean Judge K worked for Kenneth Starr in the impeachment scandal, and actually was the "principal author" of Starr's report? (I'm not doubting your veracity, I just don't know anything about this and am interested.)
Could you say more?
11.6.2007 1:17pm
Sean M:
But one thing is clear: Even though he is a fine appellate advocate, Howard should hire a SCOTUS specialist to prepare and brief his appeal.

Sorry, Bashman, can't take this one all the way yourself.
11.6.2007 1:23pm
CrazyTrain (mail):
SaneTrain (nice name) -- the answers to your questions are yes and yes. As an aside, note how leaky the independent counsel's office was during the Starr era, and compare to what a tight ship the special prosecutor's office ran in the Plame investigation. Every sordid detail, including the stained dress, was leaked to Drudge 8 or 9 months before Starr issued his dime-store pornreport. With Fitzgerald, the press got nothing out of him, and were repeatedly wrong about what he was going to do.

Ethics are a great thing for a prosecutor.
11.6.2007 2:05pm
SaneTrain (mail):
Thanks, CrazyTrain. Very interesting. And the comparison with Fitzgerald is indeed telling.
11.6.2007 2:57pm
alias:
Either a circuit split or just a disagreement between a judge and one of his former clerks...

Perhaps Judges Kavanaugh and Kozinski might agree that most of the work of the legal academy is irrelevant. Judge Kavanaugh probably speaks for many judges when he says that "[l]aw review articles that help clarify the interstices of the law are especially welcome," but the articles that do this or attempt to do this are few and far between and looked down upon (my general impression, not a proven fact) by much of the academy.
11.6.2007 3:01pm
DJR:
I don't know that Kavanaugh speaks for the CADC any more than Koz speaks for the 9th. Now if it were Posner or Easterbrook, one might fairly impute their view to the entire circuit. The 1st Cir. barely has enough Judges to make a panel, so the opinion of any one of them counts almost as much as an en banc decision.
11.7.2007 8:51am
OrinKerr:
DJR,

Um, like, it was a joke.
11.7.2007 3:42pm