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- How can the people in charge of all this cruelty live with themselves? www.miamiherald.com/news/local/i... September 21, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Liar vs Liar September 21, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- "Major television networks agreed to suspend their pooled coverage of the president on Monday as CNN, MS NOW and Politico filed a legal challenge against President Trump’s order barring them from the White House grounds." Didn't think they had it in them. Gift link: www.nytimes.com/live/2026/09... September 21, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Jotwell T&E: Adam Hirsch, Muddled Charity Law, JOTWELL (September 21, 2026) (reviewing Nancy A. McLaughlin, Donor Standing to Enforce Charitable Gifts in the 21st Century, 60 Real Prop. Tr. & Est. L.J. 207 (2025)), trustest.jotwell.com/muddled-char.... September 21, 2026 Jotwell
- Keeping in mind official costs usually understate long term effects on wounded veterans and many other things, this still equals over $325 per US household. And counting. www.nytimes.com/2026/09/18/u... Cf Edwin Starr, youtu.be/3Y3y5BSBtQA?... September 20, 2026 Michael Froomkin
Recent Comments
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 53 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- Assessing DEI-Related Risk – and Reward – in the Corporate Boardroom September 22, 2026 Deborah Widiss
- Muddled Charity Law September 21, 2026 Adam Hirsch
- Different Kinds of Differences in Kind September 18, 2026 Rebecca Crootof
- Could Tax Unit Reform Improve Labor Supply, Raise Revenue, and Increase Welfare? Yes, Say Macro-Economists! September 17, 2026 Emily Satterthwaite
- Architecture Reveals Property’s Power September 16, 2026 P. T. Babie
- Ambiguity and Judicial Power on the Roberts Court September 15, 2026 Anita Krishnakumar
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.