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- I'll be virtual. Immunocompromise, alas. April 8, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Are you clean sheeting or working in shadow of equal sufferage clause? papers.ssrn.com/abstract=379... April 8, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Looking forward to this! Have very much enjoyed past editions. April 8, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Jotwell Crim: Maartje van der Woude, Bordering on Indifference: The Moral Work of Immigration Enforcement, JOTWELL (April 8, 2026) (reviewing Irene Vega, Bordering on Indifference: Immigration Agents Negotiating Race and Morality (2025)), crim.jotwell.com/bordering-on.... April 8, 2026 Jotwell
- Jotwell Librianship: Kristina Niedringhaus, Can your AI Think Like a Lawyer?, JOTWELL (April 7, 2026) (reviewing Lee F. Peoples, Artificial Intelligence and Legal Analysis: Implications for Legal Education and the Profession/em>, 117 Law Lib. J. 52 (2025).), lex.jotwell.com/can-your-ai-.... April 7, 2026 Jotwell
Recent Comments
- KK Ho on Introduction
- 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
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- Fairer Housing in the Face of Frequent Floods April 9, 2026 Andrea Boyack
- Bordering on Indifference: The Moral Work of Immigration Enforcement April 8, 2026 Maartje van der Woude
- Can your AI Think Like a Lawyer? April 7, 2026 Kristina Niedringhaus
- Lady Whistledown…and the Legal Academy? April 6, 2026 Leah Litman
- Modern Analytical Jurisprudence April 3, 2026 Sean Coyle
- Dynamic Inventorship April 2, 2026 Laura Pedraza-Fariña
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.