Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

Why The Anti-Spam Law is a Joke

Pro-Spam “Anti-Spam” Law (found via Electrolite).

Nathan Newman has identified one of the key problems with the Senate's much touted anti-spam law, so I don't have to…

Posted in Law: Internet Law | 1 Comment

Patrick Gudridge on the Schiavo Case

The New York Times quotes my colleague Patrick Gudridge's charateristic appraisal of the Florida legislature's hasty action in the Schiavo case. See In Florida Right-to-Die Case, Legislation Puts the Constitution at Issue. I especially like the comment that “It's beautifully badly drafted.”

Posted in Florida | Comments Off on Patrick Gudridge on the Schiavo Case

Even If US Courts Don’t Have Jurisdiction Over Guantanamo, There Is No Recourse to Cuban Courts

In response to my most recent item on Guantánamo Edward Hasbrouck asks this reasonable question: “if courts in the USA say Guantanamo isn't under their jurisdiction, doesn't that mean they would have to recognize Cuban jurisdiction?”

The answer to this question is unusually clear: No.

Continue reading

Posted in Guantanamo, Law: International Law | 5 Comments

I Need User-Friendly Collaborative Drafting Software

The faculty is getting set to produce, G*d help us, a mission statement. The chance that this will be a pointless waste of time is high, much higher than a Retreat. But the downside is also bounded; the odds that anyone will get mad about this seem low. Unfortunately, we can't simply decide not to do it, as the central administration hath sent out a decree unto all parts of the University, yea even unto the most autonomous of Schools, that There Shall Be Mission Statements. And so there shall be.

So I thought I should try to make lemonade from this lemon. Why not use this as an excuse to introduce the faculty to the wonders of collaborative drafting software?

Continue reading

Posted in Software | 2 Comments

Meaningless Personality Quizzes, Part 3

It could have been worse.

Lorax
Which Dr. Seuss character are you?

brought to you by Quizilla

Posted in Meaningless Personality Quizzes | Comments Off on Meaningless Personality Quizzes, Part 3

The New York Times Uses the Inevitablity Tense

Neil Lewis of the New York Times writes an update on what's doing at Guantánamo, U.S. Erecting a Solid Prison at Guantánamo for Long Term. In the course of a perfectly solid piece of reporting, Mr. Lewis falls into the tense of Historical Inevitability,

The camp currently houses about 660 detainees in varying degrees of security. The new prison could be where prisoners sentenced by military tribunals would serve their terms. Although the rules for tribunals include the possibility of capital punishment, Colonel Hart said there were no plans to build an execution chamber. [Funny – the BBC reported that there were “plans” last June — in the sense of contingency plans, not in the sense of a firm decision.]

None of the detainees sentenced to prison terms or execution could be taken into the United States to serve their sentences because upon arrival, they would immediately gain new rights and avenues to challenge their detentions. Officials chose Guantánamo as a location where United States constitutional protections would not apply, and two federal courts have agreed that the naval base here is not legally part of the United States.

Got that? “None of the detainees sentenced to prison terms or execution could be taken into the United States to serve their sentences….” It's inevitable! It's a law of nature! What he means, of course, is 'Administration officials are afraid to bring any detainees to the US, even those convicted in the special military courts that the American Bar Association has condemned as too one-sided, because the Adminstration rightly fears the application of the Due Process clause of the Constitution.'

In fact there is nothing inevitable about Guantánamo. It's time to demand that the detainees be patriated—bring them to the US. Show the world we are not afraid of due process.

Please see my earlier item on Guantánamo

Posted in Civil Liberties | 1 Comment