A Personal Blog
by Michael Froomkin
Laurie Silvers & Mitchell Rubenstein Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Miami School of Law
My Publications | e-mail
All opinions on this blog are those of the author(s) and not their employer(s) unelss otherwise specified.
Who Reads Discourse.net?
Readers describe themselves.
Please join in.Reader Map
Recent Bluessky Posts- People focus on the ABA's friendliness to DEI, but a much more consequential thing has been its demand for more clinical and experiential learning. This is commonly a right-wing demand (less theory! more skills!) so we'll see if this move changes anything in that respect. Might make it greater... January 18, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- This headline was a mild surprise. I had not contemplated that the thoroughly corrupt FIFA leadership had any capacity for shame. I suspect they just didn't like the bad PR of being so tightly associated with Trump. www.theguardian.com/football/202... January 18, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- "Never waste a crisis." January 17, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Would they consider Florida instead? January 17, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Reads like the news from Iran, doesn't it? January 17, 2026 Michael Froomkin
Recent Comments
- Michael on Robot Law II is Now Available! (In Hardback)
- Mulalira Faisal Umar on Robot Law II is Now Available! (In Hardback)
- Michael on Vince Lago Campaign Has No Shame
- Just me on Vince Lago Campaign Has No Shame
- Jennifer Cummings on Are Coral Gables Police Cooperating with ICE?
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 51 other subscribers
Categories
Listening
Follow
- Subscribe via RSS
- Comments RSS
© 2003-2024 A. Michael Froomkin. Unless otherwise stated, or copyright by others is indicated, textual content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 United States license. This permits non-profit reproduction so long as credit is given to the author and any resulting work is shared under the same or similar license. Links are appreciated. Library photo in header © 2008 Alex Nikada.
Jotwell- How to Avoid Trumping the Legal History of Removal January 16, 2026 Edward Rubin
- Can You Hear Section 7 Now? January 15, 2026 Anne Marie Lofaso
- Small Gifts, Big Problems January 14, 2026 David Horton
- Sponsoring Torts: Reconceptualizing Platform Liability January 13, 2026 Gregory Keating
- Equality Before Law: Just Zionism, Political Liberalism, and the Question of Palestine January 12, 2026 Samy Ayoub
- Tech Elites Don’t Just Evade the State, They Change It January 9, 2026 Ignacio Cofone
Blenderlaw- eu commissioner didier reynders to visit miamilaw february 23, 2023 February 8, 2023
- a ukrainian student at miami law in her own words June 3, 2022
- canefunder for ukrainian students April 15, 2022
- george bermann on international arbitration and eu law February 25, 2022
- peter lederer August 10, 2021
- comments on carbon border tax proposals July 30, 2021
On the first article, one might note that they’re was no clear and present danger about having knives on planes (!) Before 9/11 either. In fact, I once had a United crew laugh at me because I reported that the guy across from me was carving fruit with a knife. Clear and present dangers are almost always in hindsight. That’s what makes the phrase so insidious in it’s usage. (And do you also support Reason’s stance on no masks for children?)
Your second citation is just a one paragraph opinion made by someone who knows advisory nothing about military retrograde motions. They’re was very clearly no cogent plan, and everybody knew the Afghan government would fall. It has already been collapsing all over the rest of the country for months. It’s the Afghan way. It’s the cultural way that tribal societies work and always have in that region. To say there was a great plan, but that it could not account for that obvious contingency is to admit that there was NO plan worth having.