Court rebukes OLR, praises attorney

David Ziemer reports in the Wisconsin Law Journal on Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Torvinen, 2010 WI 123.

Christian Adams "Redistricting: Where Do We Draw the Line?" November 9, 2010 at U Wisconsin

The University of Wisconsin Student Chapter presents Christian Adams who will speak on "Redistricting: Where Do We Draw the Line?" November 9, 2010 Time Tuesday, November 9, 2010 6:00 p.m. at the Law School.

The results of the 2010 Census indicate changes are coming to the nation's legislative districts. The 2010 election will determine who gets to make the decisions about where district lines will lie for the next 10 years.

J. Christian Adams served in the Voting Section at the United States Department of Justice where he brought cases involving redistricting, military voting protections and voter intimidation cases, including one against the New Black Panther Party.

He also successfully investigated and litigated the Section 2 case United States v. Ike Brown, 494 F. Supp. 2d 440 (S.D.Miss. 2007), which was the first lawsuit brought under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 on behalf of a discriminated-against white minority, thereby expanding the protections of this civil rights law to all Americans.

He is also a contributing columnist covering elections and the Justice Department at Pajamas Media.com. He has discussed election law issues on Fox News, CNN, NBC, CBS and has published in the Washington Examiner and Washington Times. He is a frequent radio talk show guest and has appeared on Fox News, CNN, NPR, CBS and NBC to discuss election issues.

Refreshments will be served. RSVP by email to reserve a seat and receive location information.

The First Thing We Do ...

Stephen B. Presser reviews Unrestrained: Judicial Excess and the Mind of the American Lawyer, by Robert F. Nagel, in The University Bookman, Winter 2010.

By our use of the case method and our Socratic style of legal education, Nagel argues, we law professors teach our students to believe two somewhat contradictory things—that judges’ personal preferences inevitably influence cases, but that personal idiosyncrasy can be reduced to acceptable levels because judges are constrained by a need to follow previous historical precedents and decide cases only with reference to the arguments of counsel and the relevant texts of Constitution, statutes, and regulations. This, Nagel claims, breeds judges (all of whom are lawyers) who speak an esoteric language, and who become convinced of the moral clarity of their reasoning and the infallibility of their judgment, to such an extent that they are compelled to dictate the solutions to our most contentious social, cultural, and political issues.

Mr. Nagel was the featured speaker at the Milwaukee Chapter's June 27, 2002 event.

Epstein on conflicts of interest and the FDA

Public defender official announces Supreme Court bid

Steve Elbow reports at The Capital Times on Marla Stephens announcing her candidacy for the Wisconsin Supreme Court seat held by Justice David Prosser.

(via Illusory Tenant)

The Originalist Who Came In From The Cold

The Originalist Who Came In From The Cold: A Response to Professor Josh Chafetz’s Impeachment & Assassination, by Seth Barrett Tillman, is available for download at the SSRN Working Papers Series. Per the Abstract.

This article is a short response to Professor Josh Chafetz's "Impeachment & Assassination," 95 Minn. L. Rev. (forthcoming Nov. 2010).

According to Professor Josh Chafetz, “impeachment maintains the link between removal and death, but attenuates it…Impeachment is…a political death - a President who is impeached and convicted is deprived of his continued existence as a political officeholder. And, like death, impeachment and conviction may be permanent.” In this short response, it is my purpose to show that Chafetz’s proposed metaphor does not work and, indeed, that inferences drawn from this metaphor lead Chafetz far afield from the Constitution’s original public meaning.

Institute for Justice

New report on how city and state restrictions on liberty of contract make it impossible to do business in Milwaukee.

Admissions in treatment can’t be used after revocation

David Ziemer reports at Wisconsin Law Journal on State v. Peebles (2009AP3111-CR)

Court extends rule for tribal transfers

Jack Zemlicka reports at Wisconsin Law Journal on the Wisconsin Supreme Courts's October 18, 2010 review of In the matter of the petition to create a rule governing the discretionary transfer of cases to tribal court, 2008 WI 114 (07-11 ) and 2009 WI 63 (07-11A).

No punitive damages under UFTA

David Ziemer reports at Wisconsin Law Journal on C & A Investments v. Kelly (2009AP2420)

Bradley Smith on 'Citizens United'

Video of a discussion with Prof. Bradley Smith in connection with his appearance at the October 12, 2010 panel discussion on "Citizens United: The Future of Campaign Finance and Political Speech" (via MacIver Institute)

A Kalal for the Wisconsin Constitution

By Daniel Suhr, available for download at the SSRN Working Papers Series. Per the Abstract

When the Wisconsin Supreme Court interprets state statutes, it follows a methodology first set in State ex rel. Kalal v. Dane County Circuit Court [2004 WI 58] (2004) [opinion]. This method focuses primarily on the text of the statute, and circumscribes reference to legislative history and other secondary sources.

Yet when the Wisconsin Supreme Court interprets the state constitution, it follows a different methodology, first set in Buse v. Smith (1976). This method looks at text, legislative and popular history, and contemporaneous legislative enactments. For amendments to the state constitution, legislative and popular history covers two sessions of the Legislature and the statewide discussion of the amendment in advance of its ratification by the people at the polls.

In the first half of this paper, I outline the Court's interpretation of the state constitution through history, both from 1848 to 1976 and 1976 to present. In the second half, I critique the Court's current method, and decide that it is an unreliable guide for judicial interpretation of the state constitution. Additionally, I suggest that Kalal advanced certain rule of law values which make its method preferable. Thus, I conclude by recommending that the Court adopt the methodology of Kalal for interpreting both statutes and the state constitution.

Andrew Cook, Brown Bag O’ Justice Lunch, October 27, 2010

The University of Wisconsin Law Student Chapter presents Attorney Andrew Cook October 27, 2010 at Noon, as part of its Brown Bag O’ Justice Lunch Series. Mr. Cooks works for The Hamilton Consulting Group and is on the board of directors for the Madison Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society. Space at this event is limited, so RSVP by email as soon as possible to reserve a seat and receive location information.

Carrie Severino "Advice and Consent in Theory and Practice" October 21, 2010

Judicial Crisis Network
photo

Carrie Severino will speak on "Advice and Consent in Theory and Practice" October 21, 2010 at the Milwaukee Athletic Club, 758 North Broadway, at a luncheon presented by the Milwaukee Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies.

Ms. Severino is Chief Counsel and Policy Director of the Judicial Crisis Network. In that capacity she has briefed Senators and Congressmen on judicial nominations, appeared on MSNBC, FOX, and C-SPAN, and regularly speaks and writes on judicial issues, particularly the Kagan nomination, the federal nomination process, and state judicial selection.

Reservations may be made by printing and mailing this form with $20.00 ($15 for students, teachers, judges and clergy) to: Federalist Society, c/o Daniel Kelly, Suite 1700, 1000 North Water Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202, for receipt on or before October 18, 2010. Reservations may also be made by email. There will be a $25.00 charge at the door for those without reservations. Seating is limited. Refunds cannot be given to those who reserve but not to attend.

Punitive damages not available under Wisconsin’s Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act

Joe Forward reports at the State Bar of Wisconsin on C & A Investments v. Kelly (2009AP2420)

Tibor Machan "The Myth of Animal Rights" October 21, 2010 at U Wisconsin

The University of Wisconsin Law Student Chapter presents Prof. Tibor R. Machan on Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. in Room 3253 of the Law School. Prof. Machan is R.C. Hoiles Professor, Business Ethics & Free Enterprise, Chapman University, and will discuss whether animal rights exist.

Dinner will be provided. For more information, email the Chapter.

Use at sentencing after revocation of incriminating statements made during counseling ordered as a condition of probation is compelled self-incrimination

Wisconsin State Public Defender reports at On Point on State v. Peebles (2009AP3111-CR)

Insurer can contest coverage issue

David Ziemer reports at Wisconsin Law Journal on Zarnstorff v. Neenah Creek Custom Trucking (2009AP1321)

Esenberg-Fallone Debate, Four Cases from Last SCOTUS Term, October 19, 2010

Tuesday, October 19th, the Marquette Student Chapter of the Federalist Society, along with its American Constitution Society counterpart, hosts a debate by Professors Richard Esenberg and Edward Fallone on four U.S. Supreme Court cases decided last term:

Salazar v. Buono, 130 S. Ct. 1803 - religious symbols on government property

Rent-A-Center v. Jackson, 130 S. Ct. 2772 - enforceability of arbitration agreements

Graham v. Florida, 130 S. Ct. 2011 - sentencing juveniles to life in prison

Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 - effective assistance of counsel

The debate begins at Noon in Room 444, Eckstein Hall. There is no charge and lunch (by Buca di Beppo) will be provided.

APPI Conference “The Concept of Social Justice” November 12-13, 2010

The American Public Philosophy Institute will hold a conference on “The Concept of Social Justice” November 12-13, 2010 at Marquette University, Cudahy Hall 001. The conference has been organized by Christopher Wolfe of APPI and the Thomas International Center, who also serves as a member of the advisory board of the Milwaukee Chapter of the Federalist Society.

Friday, Nov 12:

Panel One 1:00 to 2:30 p.m.
Paper: “Justice over Charity: Some Dangers in Faith-Based Poverty Initiatives” Samuel Fleischacker, University of Illinois at Chicago
Respondent: Robert Vischer, University of St. Thomas Law School

Panel Two 2:45 to 4:15 p.m.
Paper: “Is Social Justice an Empty Abstraction?” Jean Bethke Elshtain, University of Chicago
Respondent: Michael Fleet, Marquette University

Panel Three 4:30 to 6:00 p.m.
Paper: “The Search for Universal Ethics: the Church, Natural Law, and Social Justice” Joseph Koterski, S.J., Fordham University
Respondent: Kevin Hector, University of Chicago Divinity School

Saturday, Nov 13:

Panel Four 9:30 to 11:00 a.m.
Paper: “All Justice is Social – But It’s Not All Social Justice” Nicholas Wolterstorff, Yale University
Respondent: Ryan Hanley, Marquette University

Panel Five 11:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
Paper: “The Church’s Best Contribution to the Political and Social Order” J. Brian Benestad, University of Scranton
Respondent: Patrick Carey, Marquette University

Panel Six 3:00 to 4:30 p.m.
Paper: “The Origins of the Concept of ‘Social Justice’: Rectifying a Misunderstanding of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas on Justice” John Finnis, University of Notre Dame Law School and Oxford University

There is no charge to attend.

No Merleau-Ponty

Eric Kleefeld reports at Talking Points Memo, Who Is John Galt? The New Star Of Wisconsin Senate Race Debate!

Protectionism

Great blog post about economic liberty.

Coulter update

For any New York Times readers who don't read Ann Coulter's column, Laura M. Holson provides one perspective on what Coulter's been up to lately in the Fashion & Style section of Sunday's edition.

October 2010 arguments and hearings

Wisconsin Supreme Court unless otherwise indicated

October 1, 2010 (West Bend)

9:30 a.m. Tammy W-G. v. Jacob T. (2009AP2973

11:00 a.m. Dawson v. Town of Jackson (2009AP120)

2:00 p.m. Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee (2009AP1874-AC)

October 4, 2010 9:45 a.m.

Court review of order dated May 1, 2006, In the Matter of the Petition for Amendment to Supreme Court Rule 22.24 relating to Cost Assessments in the Lawyer Regulation System (05-01)

Administrative Conference (Public Hearing held 02/24/10), In the Matter of the Petition of the State Bar of Wisconsin to modify Chapter 72 of the Supreme Court Rules (Expungement of Records) (09-07)

In the Matter of the Petition to Amend SCR 12.02(6) and SCR 12.03(7) concerning the Lawyers Assistance Corporation [Filed 6/29/2010] (10-07)

October 6, 2010

9:45 a.m. Foley-Ciccantelli v. Bishop's Grove Condominium Assn., Inc. (2009AP688)

10:45 a.m. Link Snacks, Inc. v. Link (2008AP2897)

1:30 p.m. State v. Conner (2008AP1296-CR)

October 7, 2010

9:45 a.m. Tews v. NHI, LLC (2009AP828)

10:45 a.m. Werner v. Hendree (2008AP2045)

1:30 p.m. Metropolitan Associates v. City of Milwaukee (2009AP524)

October 18, 2010 9:45 a.m.

Review of orders dated July 31, 2008 and July 1, 2009, In the Matter of the Petition to create a rule governing the discretionary transfer of cases to tribal court (07-11)

October 19, 2010 9:30 a.m.

In the Matter of Amendment of Supreme Court Rule 81.02, Compensation of Attorneys Appointed by the Court [Filed 3/5/2010] (10-03)

In the Matter of the Petition for Establishment of Standards and Procedures for Permanent Revocation [Filed 3/16/2010] (10-04)