Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

Experts Agree

Experts Agree: Power Corrupts, and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.

Actually, kidding aside, the first link is to an amazing NY Tiimes op-ed, The Rich Are More Oblivious Than You and Me, that talks about how just as rich people get inured to expensive things and think so much less of breaking them, so too powerful people come to think much less of the feelings and needs of others:

getting power causes people to focus so keenly on the potential rewards, like money, sex, public acclaim or an extra chocolate-chip cookie — not necessarily in that order, or frankly, any order at all, but preferably all at once — that they become oblivious to the people around them.

Indeed, the people around them may abet this process, since they are often subordinates intent on keeping the boss happy. So for the boss, it starts to look like a world in which the traffic lights are always green (and damn the pedestrians). Professor Keltner and his fellow researchers describe it as an instance of “approach/inhibition theory” in action: As power increases, it fires up the behavioral approach system and shuts down behavioral inhibition.

Strangely, this article never once mentions George W. Bush.

The second link is to an Australian study that suggests that using Powerpoint (and the like) makes it harder for audiences to absorb facts:

“It is effective to speak to a diagram, because it presents information in a different form. But it is not effective to speak the same words that are written, because it is putting too much load on the mind and decreases your ability to understand what is being presented.”

I believe it.

Posted in Software | 4 Comments

New Frontiers of Data Display: US Housing Prices via Rollercoaster Tycoon

This has to be the most imaginative and evocative (but admittedly not info-rich) way to present data I've seen since the famous chart of the French casualties during Napoleon's invasion of Russia: this video of US housing prices 1890-2007 (inflation adjusted) via Rollercoaster Tycoon.

Hang on for the ride. It ends with you facing off a cliff….

(via boingboing)

Posted in Econ & Money | 1 Comment

Random Thought About Presidential Term Limits

Why not amend the Constitution to allow Presidents to serve any number of terms — but no more than two consecutive ones?

Not only would this make Bill Clinton a possible candidate again, but it would keep the virtues of the current term-limit rule — forcing a degree of regime change — while reducing both of the worst effects of lame-duck status: the pointless Presidency and the lack of constraint on politicians who know they need never face the voters again.

Not that it would do any good with the current office-holder, who is a lame duck no matter what as the electorate has (finally) soured on him, but you can’t have everything. (The cure to the current problem is already found in the Constitution.)

Posted in Law: Constitutional Law | Comments Off on Random Thought About Presidential Term Limits

Blog Called on Account of Demonstration

Limited blogging for a while — the blog is being occupied.

Which beats the alternative.

(via Maxspeak. Poor guy.)

Posted in Discourse.net | 3 Comments

Smart Prosecution or Too Smart?

Justice Building Blog, has an interesting item today, SHOOTING FISH IN A BARREL. Here's the nub of it,

The Feds are scanning the calendars and investigating cases where clients plead guilty to Carrying a Concealed Firearm, many times for Credit Time Served or a withhold and probation. The Feds are then, after the plea in state court, indicting the defendant for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, where the penalty is a 15 year (or as they say in Fed land- 180 month) minimum mandatory prison sentence.

It's kind of hard to defend a client in federal court to a charge he has already pled guilty to in State Court.

On the one hand, this isn't technically double jeopardy as the law understands it (the federal offense has an additional element — being a felon — so it's not the same offense, nor an included one). On the other hand, it probably is double jeopardy as the rest of the world understands it.

Rumpole proposes conditional pleas (or not pleading at all) as a workaround. One commentator suggests not carrying a gun if you are a convicted felon. Opinions as to whether the federal prosecutors are acting reasonably also seem divided. There is something about the surprise element of punishment for an offense that the offender could reasonably think is a closed and adjudicated matter which I find troubling. And I don't much like the duplication of effort. But otherwise this is no worse jurisprudentially than a lot of stuff we accept for good reason, including federal prosecution of civil rights violations when states bobble the treatment of the underlying criminal prosecution.

Posted in Law: Criminal Law | 2 Comments

Amicus Brief Compares Bush Detention of Arab and Muslim Aliens in US to Japanese Internment

My friend Eric Muller has filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of Karen Korematsu-Haigh, Jay Hirabayashi, and Holly Yasui in the pending 2nd Circuit case of Turkmen v. Ashcroft.

Eric's blog entry is Today I Am Filing An Amicus Curiae Brief Challenging Post-9/11 Racial Detention. The brief is available for download, and there's also an article in today's New York Times, Relatives of Interned Japanese-Americans Side With Muslims. As the article notes,

In recent years, many scholars have drawn parallels and contrasts between the internment of Japanese-Americans after the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the treatment of hundreds of Muslim noncitizens who were swept up in the weeks after the 2001 terror attacks, then held for months before they were cleared of links to terrorism and deported.

But the brief being filed today is a rare case of members of a third generation stepping up to defend legal protections that were lost to their grandparents, and that their parents devoted their lives to reclaiming.

“I feel that racial profiling is absolutely wrong and unjustifiable,” Ms. Yasui, 53, wrote in an e-mail message from San Miguel de Allende, Mexico, where she works as a writer and graphic designer. “That my grandmother was treated by the U.S. government as a ‘dangerous enemy alien’ was a travesty. And it killed my grandfather.”

Professor Muller said he drafted the brief on behalf of the three grandchildren to try to persuade the Second Circuit to reject what he considers the needless breadth of Judge Gleeson’s opinion. “Judge Gleeson’s decision paints with such a broad brush, there isn’t really any stopping point,” he said.

The judge held that under immigration law, “the executive is free to single out ‘nationals of a particular country.’ ” And because so little was known about the 9/11 hijackers, he ruled, singling out Arab Muslims for detention to investigate possible ties to terrorism, though “crude,” was not “so irrational or outrageous as to warrant judicial intrusion into an area in which courts have little experience and less expertise.”

The brief counters that the ruling “overlooks the nearly 20-year-old declaration by the United States Congress and the president of the United States that the racially selective detention of Japanese aliens during World War II was a ‘fundamental injustice’ warranting an apology and the payment of reparations.”

And, it adds, the district court’s deference to the government “ignores the tragic consequences of such deference” for 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry during World War II.

Bravo Eric (& his team)!

Posted in Law: Constitutional Law | 5 Comments