That was John Roberts' response in 1983 to White House counsel Fred Fielding, who asked Roberts to evaluate a proposal then in circulation to create a kind of super appeals court to assist the Supreme Court with its ostensibly pressing workload. The New Yorker has a lenghty and compelling article about Roberts here, called "No More Mr. Nice Guy." It's certainly worth a read and has lots of inside stories about Roberts.
Speaking of the Supreme Court, it just granted cert in Conrad Black's case to decide the reach of the "honest services fraud" component of the mail fraud statute.
Or, if it's really a slow day, you can check out how much the airport can see when it does "whole body imaging."
13 comments:
FIRST! Its shumie time for the princess !
Who would the readers of this blog most want to see go through the screener and least want to see?
readers of this blog????
There are at least 4, including me and my alter ego. By the way, we vote for the same people.
hmmm...David, how many readers do you think frequent this blog? care to give us some daily click info?
Total 405,430
Average Per Day 557
Average Visit Length 2:04
Last Hour 41
Today 304
This Week 3,902
When is the professor coming back?
tis is a cut and paste marketing vehicle, devoid of wit or meaningful analysis..
the spammers who visit for 2.04 seconds to obtain info to use for spamming purposes don't count.
2:48 You Suck.
Although you are no more than a needle **** jealous **** head, you should review the list on the site meter and you will discovery that many different domain's visit the site.
Typical of the man on the sideline, you have no courage, otherwise you would start your own blog. David does a good job.
Why don't you post your name so that we can have some discussion here that you will find interesting?
I have no problem posting mine.
s/Anonymous
David - calm down.
Where the hell has Ed Williams been?
David did not write that, I did...David would never use the possessive when he meant the plural; and yes, where the hell is Ed Williams.
Miami judge rules case against Paris Hilton can go forward
MIAMI - A judge in Miami won't throw out a lawsuit claiming Paris Hilton didn't live up to her promotion contract for the 2006 movie Pledge This!
U.S. District Judge Federico Moreno ruled Monday there are enough issues in dispute for a trial to begin on June 8.
The court-appointed receiver for a now-defunct Miami entertainment company contends that Hilton's failure to plug the movie's DVD release cost investors $8.3 million.
Hilton says she relentlessly promoted the film and that the investors made unreasonable demands for her time.
The judge says one issue is whether Hilton was actually too busy or decided not to promote Pledge This! because she hated the movie.
Another issue is whether more promotion would have mattered.
Post a Comment