With Abbi Silver’s “election” to the Supreme Court official, there is now an opening on the Court of Appeals. If you want the job, you need to get your application in by 5 pm on December 7 so the Commission can narrow the list down to three people for Governor-elect Sisolak to appoint someone. [nvcourts]
Jeff Sessions is no longer the US Attorney General. [NY Times]
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg fell in court and fractured three ribs. [CNBC]
The new Trump-appointed US AG Whitaker has stated in no uncertain terms that the best method to kill the Mueller investigation is by slowly starving it of funding. If that strategy is used, there will not be a clear "trigger" moment for the people to rally around, rather the investigation would die a slow, gradual death.
That means yesterday's firing of AG Sessions is the clearest "trigger" moment we are going to get, people. Time to get out there and protest – PEACEFULLY – we are not a mob!
This sentiment is exactly what Trump and his supporters are counting on.
Democracies are rarely toppled with one clear, bright-line event. They are slowly ground down and dismantled, one brick at a time. This is exactly what is going on now. We are being desensitized to point where Trump blatantly hijacking the investigation into whether (and to what extent) a hostile foreign actor influenced our presidential election (the very foundation of our democracy) now seems normal. This is not normal or acceptable!
What would our country look like today had everyone in the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's was apathetic rather than out there rallying for change?
Peaceful protest is not only ingrained in our heritage, it's our right, and it's our duty to protect our country.
I agree it's a little premature to be organizing a rally. Let's see if Trump or the new acting AG actually do anything with Mueller a la the Saturday Night Massacre.
But 9:02 is way off. How do you know its nothing after 2 years? Do you think tracing through everything that happened with a foreign country and a bunch of loosely-aligned government officials happens overnight? Hell, Nixon didn't even resign until 2 years after the Watergate break in and over a full year after special counsel Archibald Cox was appointed. That was just to tie a specific break (in the US) in to Nixon's campaign (in the US). I'd say this is a tad more complex. What's the harm in letting it continue?
The staff time to investigate is a drop in the bucket – probably a few million a year. I just don't see a valid argument to stop the investigation when it could show how a foreign power has interfered with our elections or that our President is compromised by a hostile foreign power. Let the facts be the facts.
But the facts don't matter. Regardless of what Mueller reports, 30% of the country will accept it as gospel fact and another 30% will reject it outright. We are at a point where most of the country values nurturing grievances against the opposition more than they value democratic norms or individual liberty. We are at the beginning of the end of the American Republic, at least as we know it.
More protests. Give me a break! That's all how you leftists know how to do.
Get ready for FISA declassification and mass high profile arrests now that Rosenstein is no longer in charge. You will soon learn the very unconfortable truth.
11:51 here. 5:12, thanks for proving my point. One day, "the leftists" will be defeated, once and for all. You and I will likely live to see that day. It would be a glorious day, except for one thing- the only way to defeat "the leftists" is to blow up the Republic. Or maybe it will be worth it. What do you think, 5:12?
Notwithstanding the (Russian bots') skepticism, it looks like the protests may actually be having an impact…
"Whitaker Backlash Prompts Concern At The White House"
"Several senior officials told CNN they were surprised by the criticism, and believe it could potentially jeopardize Whitaker's chances of remaining in the post if it continues to dominate headlines."
The rightists are clearly winning the name-calling war, but with really really stupid names.
Guest
Anonymous
November 8, 2018 5:00 pm
Another tragic event that could have been avoided. We need to remove the dogma from PTSD and provide better care and services to our veterans who struggle with this terrible disease. My heart breaks for the victims as well as the thousands of soldiers fighting seemingly hopeless silent mental battles.
Just an off-the-cuff reaction here: while I agree with pretty much everything in this comment, linking PTSD to what appears (at first glance) to have been a premeditated, cold-blooded slaughter of random people is dangerous and may actually add to the stigma of PTSD. Having war/service-related PTSD does not normally turn someone into a violent, rampaging murderer of random civilians, I wouldn't think (as someone w/tangential relationships to many people who have served and have actually dealt with PTSD; so let's wait to see what the investigation turns up.
Guest
Anonymous
November 8, 2018 5:57 pm
I totally agree with you. I was talking specifically about this guy and the info in the press conference.
Guest
Anonymous
November 8, 2018 6:17 pm
For the solos / small firms out there: do you send Christmas or holiday cards to your clients / former clients? Or is that just kind of hokey these days?
In addition to answers to this question, do folks have thoughts about thank you gifts for referrals – is a $10 Starbucks card or just a written thank you note OK? Something more?
I have the solo firm. Last year I sent out a bunch of christmas cards to other attorneys and to clients. Not one single recipient sent one back nor did anyone even ever mention getting it! Sure it's the gift of giving that counts but as an act that took up time and money there was no objectively measurable return. YMMV.
It should be looked at in terms of an advertising analysis. Sending to clients and the public is simply to keep your name in front of them and in their consciousness. Do you get a return on your investment?
In terms of thank you gifts, that is more of a nuanced question as it implies that the recipient has already given you something of value during the year. If you were the individual who referred the case to an attorney who presumably made a profit on the referral, how would you feel if you received a $10 Starbucks card in recognition of your gift (you could have just as easily given the matter to someone else). Obviously, there can not be a quid pro quo between the referral and the gift, nor can you afford to give so much in gifts that it has an adverse financial impact on your business.
I was a solo. I used to send out 200 cards each year, with every card containing a photo of my child, taken by a professional photographer. I sent cards to clients, attorneys and judges. Judges called me to tell me that they had taped my child's photo to their office doors. 10 years later, people still rave about the cards and photos. I cost about $500 and I think it was the best advertising I could have done.
1:16 has good experiences with sending out holiday cards, but most lawyers report it is a senseless exercise.
The attorneys the cards are sent to, for the most part, don't even know you sent a card as it is opened by support staff. And if the attorney is aware you sent the card, they assume your office simply maintains a list of all attorneys they've dealt with on cases, so the cards are therefore almost viewed as an impersonal mass mailing situation, as opposed to you really liking that attorney on a personal basis and wishing to single out him or her for holiday wishes.
And the same goes fro holiday mailings to clients. They will refer cases to you if they were satisfied with your handling of their case. They realize you are sending the cards to all clients as a rote exercise, so therefore it lacks any personal touch and will not generate any referrals that otherwise would not have been made save for receiving the card.
But the real pointless exercise is sending chocolate-covered popcorn or a fruit basket to judges at the holidays. The only gift that would be substantial enough to generate preferential treatment from a judge would be a gift in an amount which would clearly violate ethical rules. No judge is going to think more of you, or favor you in any sense, on account of receiving the vile chocolate-covered popcorn or pretzels. But, if you insist on sending, at least send a high quality box of candies, not the far-less appetizing items I mentioned above. (By the way, caramel -covered popcorn can be tasty, but chocolate-dipped popcorn, which appears to be a recent holiday gift-giving trend, is disliked by many).
BTW I am not questioning 1:16's honesty, but I doubt people would be calling him/her up 10 years later to rave about a Christmas card received. They might do so if the card was accompanied by a fat check, but not if it included a mass distributed memo with photos about how cute and wonderful your kids are. If anything, people will resent if your kids are a lot better-looking and more accomplished than their own.
I suspect 1:16 instead had an isolated incident or two wherein someone mentioned the cards years later.
4:17 sounds too cynical, particularly around the holidays.
That said, I agree as to those mass-printed letters bragging about the family. The people who are close enough to us to truly care, already know all the info. included in those letters. But the people who are more remote to us and who know little or nothing about our personal lives, do not tend to view those mass letters as heart-warming, and same as to any cards or inserts that include photos and updates of the whole family or the children.
My experience is that when people send this type of material during the holidays, they tend to get ridiculed behind their backs. 4:17 is correct at least to that point. If they know you and your family, don't insult them by sending a mass produced informational letter. And if they don't really know about your family, they are not interested in you bragging about your own family, particularly if the recipient is having family difficulty and/or feels their children don't measure up to yours. It's like you're rubbing it in.
I also have difficulty believing 1:16 and that everyone is delighted beyond measure to receive cards and photos featuring how great his/her family is.
We are clients and get some of those Christmas, I mean, Holiday gifts. They are nice to get but not necessary. Except the ones with the good cookies–keep those coming. As for the cards, we prefer the ones with pictures. They don't have to be your family; the ones with staff members are quite welcome. However, under no circumstance send the "Holiday newsletter". We have enough incentive to bring out unseeming snark.
Thanks for the feedback all. It's one of those things I am not sure if clients actually appreciate, or just view it as a sort of sleazy marketing gimmick. If I were to do it, I'd keep it simple and professional. Plus, I'm single and don't have any kids, and I had to put my poor old dog down last summer. 🙁 So there would be no cute pictures, no family updates, no…
OK, nevermind the holiday cards. I'm getting on Match.com
Commenting from the point of view of a Judge's staff, everything that is gifted to the Judge and Staff is appreciated. The Judge shares everything with anyone, so there is good cheer had by all. Anyway, just a little message to state that we as staff do appreciate any gifts that attorneys give the judge's, but the judge's do not actually learn who gave what or when, as the tags are removed from the gifts before the Judge even sees them.
I have my own firm, and I only send out a few hand written cards to friends, fellow attorneys. Clients, I send holiday cards as well. None sent to judges. I don't kiss ass.
Guest
Anonymous
November 8, 2018 9:20 pm
My heart goes out to Notorious RBG. According to the CNN bio, when she was in law school, she had a baby and her husband then came down with cancer. She made Law Review that year. She is my hero. God Bless.
too bad they didn't stick with taking sct back to 5 justices. That would have let there be two COA panels with just the expense of one more position. Also, I think their dispositions should be citeable.
We should absolutely be able to cite the CoA's decisions. Without that ability, it is a complete waste. It is sad that I can cite a law review article, a case from a different jurisdiction, or basically anything else, but I cannot cite a decision from the court of appeals in my own state. That is just BS and stupid. Come on Supreme Court get your head out of your ass!
Unpublished opinions of the Court of Appeals may not be cited (absent narrow exceptions) but published opinions of the Court of Appeals can be cited. NRAP 36(c)(3).
Correct, except that there are around three published CoA Opinions. I can cite the United States District Court but cannot cite the CoA as an actual superior court over the District Court.
ATTENTION PATRIOTS:
The new Trump-appointed US AG Whitaker has stated in no uncertain terms that the best method to kill the Mueller investigation is by slowly starving it of funding. If that strategy is used, there will not be a clear "trigger" moment for the people to rally around, rather the investigation would die a slow, gradual death.
That means yesterday's firing of AG Sessions is the clearest "trigger" moment we are going to get, people. Time to get out there and protest – PEACEFULLY – we are not a mob!
No One Is Above The Law LV Rally
https://act.moveon.org/event/mueller-firing-rapid-response-events/search/
Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 5 p.m.
Lloyd D. George – US District Court Downtown LV
Be safe!
Pass. 2 years and nothing. Wast of time and money.
This sentiment is exactly what Trump and his supporters are counting on.
Democracies are rarely toppled with one clear, bright-line event. They are slowly ground down and dismantled, one brick at a time. This is exactly what is going on now. We are being desensitized to point where Trump blatantly hijacking the investigation into whether (and to what extent) a hostile foreign actor influenced our presidential election (the very foundation of our democracy) now seems normal. This is not normal or acceptable!
What would our country look like today had everyone in the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's was apathetic rather than out there rallying for change?
Peaceful protest is not only ingrained in our heritage, it's our right, and it's our duty to protect our country.
Meh.
I agree it's a little premature to be organizing a rally. Let's see if Trump or the new acting AG actually do anything with Mueller a la the Saturday Night Massacre.
But 9:02 is way off. How do you know its nothing after 2 years? Do you think tracing through everything that happened with a foreign country and a bunch of loosely-aligned government officials happens overnight? Hell, Nixon didn't even resign until 2 years after the Watergate break in and over a full year after special counsel Archibald Cox was appointed. That was just to tie a specific break (in the US) in to Nixon's campaign (in the US). I'd say this is a tad more complex. What's the harm in letting it continue?
The staff time to investigate is a drop in the bucket – probably a few million a year. I just don't see a valid argument to stop the investigation when it could show how a foreign power has interfered with our elections or that our President is compromised by a hostile foreign power. Let the facts be the facts.
But the facts don't matter. Regardless of what Mueller reports, 30% of the country will accept it as gospel fact and another 30% will reject it outright. We are at a point where most of the country values nurturing grievances against the opposition more than they value democratic norms or individual liberty. We are at the beginning of the end of the American Republic, at least as we know it.
Cool observation @ 11:51. So what are you going to do about it?
11:51 here. There's nothing that can be done about it. It's the life cycle of Republics. You can't fight it.
More protests. Give me a break! That's all how you leftists know how to do.
Get ready for FISA declassification and mass high profile arrests now that Rosenstein is no longer in charge. You will soon learn the very unconfortable truth.
WWG1WGA
11:51 here. 5:12, thanks for proving my point. One day, "the leftists" will be defeated, once and for all. You and I will likely live to see that day. It would be a glorious day, except for one thing- the only way to defeat "the leftists" is to blow up the Republic. Or maybe it will be worth it. What do you think, 5:12?
Notwithstanding the (Russian bots') skepticism, it looks like the protests may actually be having an impact…
"Whitaker Backlash Prompts Concern At The White House"
"Several senior officials told CNN they were surprised by the criticism, and believe it could potentially jeopardize Whitaker's chances of remaining in the post if it continues to dominate headlines."
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/08/politics/white-house-matt-whitaker-criticism/index.html
When did the word leftist become a thing?
The rightists are clearly winning the name-calling war, but with really really stupid names.
Another tragic event that could have been avoided. We need to remove the dogma from PTSD and provide better care and services to our veterans who struggle with this terrible disease. My heart breaks for the victims as well as the thousands of soldiers fighting seemingly hopeless silent mental battles.
Just an off-the-cuff reaction here: while I agree with pretty much everything in this comment, linking PTSD to what appears (at first glance) to have been a premeditated, cold-blooded slaughter of random people is dangerous and may actually add to the stigma of PTSD. Having war/service-related PTSD does not normally turn someone into a violent, rampaging murderer of random civilians, I wouldn't think (as someone w/tangential relationships to many people who have served and have actually dealt with PTSD; so let's wait to see what the investigation turns up.
I totally agree with you. I was talking specifically about this guy and the info in the press conference.
For the solos / small firms out there: do you send Christmas or holiday cards to your clients / former clients? Or is that just kind of hokey these days?
In addition to answers to this question, do folks have thoughts about thank you gifts for referrals – is a $10 Starbucks card or just a written thank you note OK? Something more?
I have the solo firm. Last year I sent out a bunch of christmas cards to other attorneys and to clients. Not one single recipient sent one back nor did anyone even ever mention getting it! Sure it's the gift of giving that counts but as an act that took up time and money there was no objectively measurable return. YMMV.
It should be looked at in terms of an advertising analysis. Sending to clients and the public is simply to keep your name in front of them and in their consciousness. Do you get a return on your investment?
In terms of thank you gifts, that is more of a nuanced question as it implies that the recipient has already given you something of value during the year. If you were the individual who referred the case to an attorney who presumably made a profit on the referral, how would you feel if you received a $10 Starbucks card in recognition of your gift (you could have just as easily given the matter to someone else). Obviously, there can not be a quid pro quo between the referral and the gift, nor can you afford to give so much in gifts that it has an adverse financial impact on your business.
I was a solo. I used to send out 200 cards each year, with every card containing a photo of my child, taken by a professional photographer. I sent cards to clients, attorneys and judges. Judges called me to tell me that they had taped my child's photo to their office doors. 10 years later, people still rave about the cards and photos. I cost about $500 and I think it was the best advertising I could have done.
1:16 has good experiences with sending out holiday cards, but most lawyers report it is a senseless exercise.
The attorneys the cards are sent to, for the most part, don't even know you sent a card as it is opened by support staff. And if the attorney is aware you sent the card, they assume your office simply maintains a list of all attorneys they've dealt with on cases, so the cards are therefore almost viewed as an impersonal mass mailing situation, as opposed to you really liking that attorney on a personal basis and wishing to single out him or her for holiday wishes.
And the same goes fro holiday mailings to clients. They will refer cases to you if they were satisfied with your handling of their case. They realize you are sending the cards to all clients as a rote exercise, so therefore it lacks any personal touch and will not generate any referrals that otherwise would not have been made save for receiving the card.
But the real pointless exercise is sending chocolate-covered popcorn or a fruit basket to judges at the holidays. The only gift that would be substantial enough to generate preferential treatment from a judge would be a gift in an amount which would clearly violate ethical rules. No judge is going to think more of you, or favor you in any sense, on account of receiving the vile chocolate-covered popcorn or pretzels. But, if you insist on sending, at least send a high quality box of candies, not the far-less appetizing items I mentioned above. (By the way, caramel -covered popcorn can be tasty, but chocolate-dipped popcorn, which appears to be a recent holiday gift-giving trend, is disliked by many).
BTW I am not questioning 1:16's honesty, but I doubt people would be calling him/her up 10 years later to rave about a Christmas card received. They might do so if the card was accompanied by a fat check, but not if it included a mass distributed memo with photos about how cute and wonderful your kids are. If anything, people will resent if your kids are a lot better-looking and more accomplished than their own.
I suspect 1:16 instead had an isolated incident or two wherein someone mentioned the cards years later.
4:17 sounds too cynical, particularly around the holidays.
That said, I agree as to those mass-printed letters bragging about the family. The people who are close enough to us to truly care, already know all the info. included in those letters. But the people who are more remote to us and who know little or nothing about our personal lives, do not tend to view those mass letters as heart-warming, and same as to any cards or inserts that include photos and updates of the whole family or the children.
My experience is that when people send this type of material during the holidays, they tend to get ridiculed behind their backs. 4:17 is correct at least to that point. If they know you and your family, don't insult them by sending a mass produced informational letter. And if they don't really know about your family, they are not interested in you bragging about your own family, particularly if the recipient is having family difficulty and/or feels their children don't measure up to yours. It's like you're rubbing it in.
I also have difficulty believing 1:16 and that everyone is delighted beyond measure to receive cards and photos featuring how great his/her family is.
If you are going to give a card and/or a gift, it is a waste of time if you don't drive to your client's place of business and deliver it personally.
We are clients and get some of those Christmas, I mean, Holiday gifts. They are nice to get but not necessary. Except the ones with the good cookies–keep those coming. As for the cards, we prefer the ones with pictures. They don't have to be your family; the ones with staff members are quite welcome. However, under no circumstance send the "Holiday newsletter". We have enough incentive to bring out unseeming snark.
Thanks for the feedback all. It's one of those things I am not sure if clients actually appreciate, or just view it as a sort of sleazy marketing gimmick. If I were to do it, I'd keep it simple and professional. Plus, I'm single and don't have any kids, and I had to put my poor old dog down last summer. 🙁 So there would be no cute pictures, no family updates, no…
OK, nevermind the holiday cards. I'm getting on Match.com
Commenting from the point of view of a Judge's staff, everything that is gifted to the Judge and Staff is appreciated. The Judge shares everything with anyone, so there is good cheer had by all. Anyway, just a little message to state that we as staff do appreciate any gifts that attorneys give the judge's, but the judge's do not actually learn who gave what or when, as the tags are removed from the gifts before the Judge even sees them.
I have my own firm, and I only send out a few hand written cards to friends, fellow attorneys. Clients, I send holiday cards as well. None sent to judges. I don't kiss ass.
My heart goes out to Notorious RBG. According to the CNN bio, when she was in law school, she had a baby and her husband then came down with cancer. She made Law Review that year. She is my hero. God Bless.
Who is applying for CoA? Gonzalez? Denton? SHJ?
The CoA is a mind-killing job.
too bad they didn't stick with taking sct back to 5 justices. That would have let there be two COA panels with just the expense of one more position. Also, I think their dispositions should be citeable.
We should absolutely be able to cite the CoA's decisions. Without that ability, it is a complete waste. It is sad that I can cite a law review article, a case from a different jurisdiction, or basically anything else, but I cannot cite a decision from the court of appeals in my own state. That is just BS and stupid. Come on Supreme Court get your head out of your ass!
Unpublished opinions of the Court of Appeals may not be cited (absent narrow exceptions) but published opinions of the Court of Appeals can be cited. NRAP 36(c)(3).
Correct, except that there are around three published CoA Opinions. I can cite the United States District Court but cannot cite the CoA as an actual superior court over the District Court.