Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

On Law School Exams, Open Book and Closed Book

Posted on December 9, 2004 by Michael Froomkin

[Edited & updated — first version didn't make enough distinctions between open-book and take-home exams] In the comments to an earlier item, a UM law student asks, reasonably enough,

If L.S. isn't just about the rules (which I agree it shouldn't be), then why are there closed book exams at our school? When is a lawyer ever in a situation where they must have a law memorized for that one moment in time (except for oral arguments; but even then they have a legal pad in front of them with cases)? We are taught how to read a case and do research in LRW. More advanced research was taught to me in editing and bluebooking PPL law review assignments. My torts teacher kept things very theoretical in class and on the exam…basically if you had common sense and a very basic knowledge of torts you did well, so long as your writing ability was above the class curve. I am enjoying L.S. for the most part; but I'm not lying to myself and saying success here equals success in the real world. School and jobs (maybe being a law professor is out of this realm) teach incommensurable subjects.

I thought the issue deserved its own item: As one of the few faculty members at UM who insists (over mild Decanal objections to the take-home aspect) on giving open book take home exams for some of my classes (but not all), this is a question near and dear to my heart. After all, I've argued that “life is a take home exam” — and I even believe it.

Nevertheless there are some good reasons for closed book in-class exams, and I give those too in some courses. These reasons are strongest in the first year, but to varying degrees they also apply in upper level courses.

Continue reading →

Posted in Law School | 23 Comments

Name the Country that Abuses Psychiatry to Silence Dissidents

Posted on December 9, 2004 by Michael Froomkin

One of the many horrifying things about the old Soviet Union was the use of psychiatry to silence dissidents. Anyone who dared suggest that the country wasn't a workers' paradise clearly had lost their grip on reality, right?

Fortunately, nothing like that could ever happen here, say to someone who claims that US troops torture captives.

Um.

Posted in Iraq Atrocities, National Security | Comments Off on Name the Country that Abuses Psychiatry to Silence Dissidents

US Plans Permanent Incarceration Facility at Guantánamo–How Long Until US Suspects Are Sent There?

Posted on December 9, 2004 by Michael Froomkin

Permanent jail set for Guantánamo:

… the Pentagon is quietly planning for permanency at the U.S. detention center at Guantánamo Bay, The Herald has learned.

Pentagon planners are now seeking $25 million to build a state-of-the-art 200-cell concrete building meant to eventually replace the rows of rugged cells fashioned from shipping containers at Camp Delta.

At the same time, the Army is creating a full-time, professional guard force — a 324-member Military Police Internment and Resettlement Battalion that will replace a temporary, mostly reserve force at Guantánamo.

A Department of Army memorandum to Congress obtained by The Herald envisions the new military police force being included in the 2005 and 2006 budgets. ''This action is part of a systematic process to enhance Army's capabilities required to defend the Nation's interests at home and abroad,'' says the undated memo from the Army's legislative liaison office.

This is serious. Not only is the temporary Guantánamo facility an embarrassment that should be razed to the ground rather than upgraded, but a permanent facility is an actively dangerous temptation for rogue policy makers. A permanent facility can have any of three purposes and they are all bad:

  • Hold some of the current prisoners in durance vile forever.
  • Establish a permanent rotating population of unpersons to be radicalized and sent home to hate us.
  • Ship US suspects out instead of giving them due process at home — like the next Padilla.

Be worried, be afraid, be angry, be active.

Posted in Guantanamo | 7 Comments

National Parent Strike Likely

Posted on December 9, 2004 by Michael Froomkin

It's only two people in one small town today, but I think this has the makings of a serious national movement: Parents on strike against slacker kids:

The dishes, garbage and dirty laundry would pile up for days when Cat and Harlan Barnard's two teenage children refused to do their chores. So the parents decided to take a picket line to the picket fences of suburbia.

Earlier this week, the Barnards went on strike. They moved out of their house and into a tent set up in their front driveway. The parents won't cook, clean or drive their children — Benjamin, 17, and Kit, 12 — until they shape up.

''We've tried reverse psychology, upside-down psychology, spiral psychology and nothing has motivated them for any length of time,'' Cat Barnard, 45, said Wednesday as she in her driveway sat in a lawn chair at an umbrella-covered table decorated with Christmas lights.

KIDS SURPRISED

The strike took Benjamin and Kit by surprise. They came home from school Monday to find their mother outside with handwritten signs that read ''Parents on Strike'' and “Seeking Cooperation and Respect!''

Cat Barnard and her 56-year-old husband, a government social services worker, decided their children needed to learn to be responsible.

The Barnards unsuccessfully tried smiley-face charts and withholding allowances. They even sought help from a psychologist. The breaking point may have been when Benjamin didn't offer to help his mother work on the lawn Sunday, even though she should have been resting after recovering from oral surgery.

I do think, however, that the Bernards have made one tacitcal error: they have ceded the house to the kids and are occupying the lawn. This may work in Flordia in winter, when it's very very nice outside, but I don't think this will translate well to Minnesota.

The Barnards have slept on air mattresses in the tent during their strike and have barbecued while their children fended for themselves with TV dinners inside the house. The parents only go inside to shower and use the bathroom.

On the other hand, if you put the kids in the doghouse in Minnesota, it's probably going to be considered child abuse.

Meanwhile, it does seem as if the Bernard kids may be getting the message.

A visibily angry Benjamin returned from school on Wednesday to find a dozen reporters in his parents' front lawn. He refused to say anything and went into the house followed by his mother, who tried to console him.

Hey kids — want to help move stuff in the house this evening?

Posted in Completely Different | 2 Comments

Good Thing Two Kids Was Enough

Posted on December 9, 2004 by Michael Froomkin

They only measured lap heat, not actual sperm production, but the results are suggestive: Laptops may damage male fertility.

I can hear the jokes already.

Posted in Science/Medicine | 2 Comments

Bad Deal: Snow Stays, Principi Leaves

Posted on December 9, 2004 by Michael Froomkin

The Cabinet lost one of its few competent members but retained one its most clueless and ineffectual (note the “and” — many are one or the other only some are both): CNN.com – Snow staying at Treasury. When does the press get to rats and sinking ships? (Although, to be fair, as political matter, pushing through an intelligence bill whatever its actual merits was good survival politics for the administration; failing to do so would have reeked of lame duckishness so hard no one could ignore it.)

Posted in Politics: US | Comments Off on Bad Deal: Snow Stays, Principi Leaves