Friday, March 24, 2006

Welcome to the Rock

Alright Boalt admits, this is an open thread for you to ask questions to current and former Boalties. I reserve the right to delete any stupid questions. Commenters should feel free to mock stupid questions. But otherwise, ask away.

A friend IMs me: "so this chick was telling me about this game where you write down all the gunners' names on a piece of paper, and you mark it off like bingo when they participate, and when you get bingo, you have to participate and work bingo into your answer somehow."

Excellent game!!! And I post that as an answer to the whole competitive questions coming up. Boalt is competitive in the sense that there are some people who try to do their best. There are others who are more than happy to get by. I have never encountered an instance of anyone hampering some else's learning or not even helping out. I'm a lazy bum and tend to miss a lot of classes, but I've always gotten notes whenever I've asked for them. In fact, if you have good notes and outlines for Frickey's Legislation, you know where to send them. With that said, I think the best way to find out is by visiting the schools and snooping around. I don't have anything to gain by someone choosing Boalt over another school, but I do want an accurate image of my school to be portrayed. And I still haven't e-mailed DO about my rankings. :)

Happy Spring Break!

Labels: ,

Thursday, March 23, 2006


Lights flicker in Dean Edley's presence.* Any ideas why?


* As observed by four students in today's Civil Justice Workshop.


Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Cobra II: First Blood

I'm at a talk by Michael R. Gordon, co-author of Cobra II. It's put on by the Institute of Int'l Studies here in Berkeley. So, here's the liveblog. I will clean it up later.

-- By summer 2002 it was obvious to MRG that there would be a war with Iraq. But now embedding process was available to him. Embedded with land invasion planners, who dubbed the invasion plan Cobra II, after Gen. Patton's plan for breaking out of Normandy. Gained access to a classified doc that he uses in the book. The doc is about interrogation of Saddam and the info he held.

-- Sidenote: The guy on a wheelchair who points to stuff with a pointer on his head is right next to me. You may have seen him naked on the Berkeley public access channel. He reeks.

-- The two sides utterly misread the other sides political and military strategies. How did Saddam misread the US? Well he was mostly concerned with internal Iraqi threats. He had attempted to keep the Shi'ia down on several occasions. He had attempted to use chem weapons against them (not just the Kurds). He was also worried about a coup to the extent that the Republican Guard were not allowed inside the capital. One of the worst fears that Centcom had was turning Baghdad into a Stalingrad, but Saddam was more afraid of that scenario than the US. His strategy on wmd was to comply with the letter of the inspections, but on the other hand he didn't want the world to know that his cover was bare. He was concerned about the Iranians. Also he didn't think the US would launch a full on invasion. He didn't plan on the insurgency because he didn't think we'd get that far.

-- US miscalculations: There were Five.
1. When we were fighting the last war, the RG were the main enemy, so we felt obliged to defeat the RG around Baghdad, and then go to Baghdad and cut the head of the snake. But there were also paramilitary forces out there such as the Fedayin and now they are part of the insurgency.

2. Also Baghdad was not the center of gravity, maybe the Sunni Triangle or the Iraqi population were the center of gravity. So Sec of Def and Gen. Franks misread the enemy.

3. We did not adapt. There was ample evidence within a few weeks that the enemy we were fighting was not the same enemy we had planned. Commander of 5th Corps (Gen. Wallace?) predicted that we would be fighiting these guys after the fall of Baghdad. Washington ignored these recommendations thinking the Army was just reluctant to put the pedal to the metal. They did not plan on fighting a counter-insurgency and did not send in continued reinforcements. The Fedayin were not part of the script of the munchkins killing the Wicked Witch. There is an expression in the military, "the enemy has a vote." When they thought about the post-war Iraq, they wanted to transfer maximum responsibility to the Iraqis. They wanted to rely on the Iraqis to do the policing. We would govern through their ministries. These were the assumptions. In fact Sec. D gave a speech called "Beyond Nationbuilding" and advocated that we would not do Iraq like we did the Balkans, but instead we'd do it like Afghanistan. Then it became clear that we could not run it like Afghanistan, e.g. restoring services.

4. Dysfunctional Bureaucracy. Joint Chiefs, Sec. State, and others were cut off. Pres, VP, and Sec. D were the main planners.

5. Bremmer and Sec. D dissolved the Iraqi military.

-- So all of these combined along with our inability to meet the needs of the Iraqis, the aura of American invincibility vanished. Almost all US commanders in summer 03 believed there was an opportunity where if we had done the right, we would not have had this level of resistance.

-- Opens up for Questions

-- You told us what you know, now I want to know when you knew it. Did you know a few months into this what a disaster it was? If so on the basis of the factual stuff?

This took a long time to piece together, but quickly into the war MRG knew that the war was not heading in the right direction. E.g., on April 16, 2003, Gen. Franks flew to Baghdad and gave instructions about troops leaving Iraq. This was overly optimistic. Very early on it was evident that there is a mismatch between US admin planning and actual reality.

-- How much weight given to Powell given that he went through this once before?

There's a story about Powell sending Schwartskopff a division that was not requested. He told NS to use the force or if not send it back. He believes in not having any sort of a contest in a military match. He wants quick victory and an exit strategy. This even applied to Bosnia, where Powell was opposed to no fly zone. Sec. D wanted to reform the Powell doctrine and do something different. Gen. Franks got behind it. Powell had reservations about this. He expressed concerns about force levels, but as Sec. State he had no really say in this. Franks even mentions in his book that Powell called him and was a gentleman that Powell would raise the issue of troop levels with the Pres but he wanted to tell Franks first.

-- How did you get info declassified and how do you feel about Shock and Awe then and now.

I didn't get it declassified. I just published it. There are some things that he has exercised discretion. Shock and Awe really didn't work. Saddam knew what we were going to hit, and hung out with civilians. One of his palaces had no furnitures or art or housewares. And there were notes that said "Couch, room number 3 by the window." They never planned on torching their own oil fields. They were going to win. Same with this, they planned on moving back in after enduring the airstrikes. Best example is airstrikes before start of war where we tried to hit Saddam based on hot intel. Well we now know that he hadn't been there for years. There was not even a bunker at that location that we bombed. There was a moment after this when Saddam came on with thick glasses and we doubted that it was him. But it turns out he went to his Presidential Secretary's safehouse and wanted to give a speech to the nation. There was no teleprompter and no printer, so he wrote it out and read it with those glasses.

-- Bremmer says that there was no army to speak of.

He gives a partial self-serving account. It is true that the Iraqi army went AWOL. Well you can recall the Army. They were recalled in a sense. There was a decision made to pay them and they showed up to get their pay. The decision he made as the viceroy of Iraq was that he wanted to build Iraq in a way that was free from the taint of Saddam. But then Saddam didn't trust his own army so they couldn't all be Baathists. The argument he makes is the kind of Washington insiders make during spin control and not a genuine argument. Generals on the ground say it was a mistake to get rid of the Iraqi army.

-- Why was the intel on the resistance that would emerge so bad?

Well CIA was confident that the southern cities were ours. But precisely because the Shi'ia had risen up before and we didn't support them, the Shi'ia were weary. But the CIA in Afghanistan was pretty well wired in Afghanistan. They had a lot of old relationships there from the Soviet days and money can buy you a lot in Afghanistan. In Iraq we didn't have anything. We didn't have enough dots to connect them. On the analysts side, there were some people who emphasized sectarian strife.

-- Question inaudible

Abizaid wanted to put an Iraqi face to the whole thing. So he called Challabi's military attache, a US colonel attached to him, and 700 of Challabi's fighters were sent. The fighters did not contribute anything. Challabi gave a quick speech in Nasariya and that was it. The whole point is that we didn't succeed in putting an Iraqi face on this.

-- How do you feel about imbedding?

History of media within the military. Basically distrust of media since Vietnam. In this war there were all sorts reporters. The military's own history of the conflict uses a lot of the photos from imbedded reporters. In this war, a lot of the people who fought got the credit. In the first PG war, the Pentagon briefers got a lot of the credit. There are some questions about the media being coopted by the military, but overall it's a good thing. You are always dependent on your sources (e.g. white house beat), but a lot of the questions about the progress of the war have been raised by reporters on the ground.

-- Where do you think we are now? Is it a civil war? Where should we be going?

I don't have any special insight. Talking to his colleagues, it seems like Iraqis took a step back from the cliff following the Mosque bombing. This is not like Bosnia because the Iraqis have intermarried and they have coexisted. So now the Iraqi leadership is trying to avert a civil war, but Al Qaeda is trying to create the opposite because they feel this will create a situation that is completely ungovernable and force the US to leave. He hopes things work out because then the deaths would not be in vain. He has praise for Allil Zahad (? Or did he say Talabani? Unclear) whom Bremmer excluded from Baghdad.

-- Where'd Jay Garner go?

In Washington there was a sense that he and the retired generals he recruited were not in charge of the situation and they wanted a take-charge guy. As Bremmer became a force in his own right and made decisions on his own (though he reported to Rummie who was given charge of post-war Iraq by the President). Garner was not happy about how it all turned out. He was brought in under a different set of assumptions. We went from a guy who would do some refugee aid and set up a quick government to a guy who was a viceroy who rewrote the constitution. The Marines set up elections in Najaf for mayor, but then word came from Bremmer that the wrong guy was going to win so they had to cancel. The problem was that a hardline Shi'ia was going to win. Response to this is that well it's Najaf and that's like cancelling an eleciton in South Carolina because a conservative Republican is going to win. Marine Generals went on TV saying they are deferring the election and then went to argue with Bremmer. They blame this cancellation as the source of a lot of problems in the south because after this they saw us as occupiers.

Bully Pulpit: Housing Request

I'm sure Armen will yell at me later that this is something that should go to the Discussion Board, but I know people read the blog, and I have no idea about traffic at the Discussion Board.

Anyways, a general solicitation: a friend of mine has a summer associate gig at a small plaintiff-side firm in SF. She's coming from out of state. She'd like to find a sublet in the city from mid-May-1st week of August. She's cool, fun... she's pretty much all that. So if anyone is going out of town for the summer, and is looking for a subletter, drop me an email (available through my "blogger profile" at left).


Sunday, March 19, 2006

Where Have All the Women Gone

NYT has an article titled, "Why Do So Few Women Reach the Top of Big Law Firms?" by Timothy L. O'Brien (in case you want to lexis it) (HT: How Bashful). I'll get around to reading the article sometime today, but I want to hear from the women of Boalt. Are you going to gun for partnership? Do you feel like you have a legitimate shot? And a number of related questions that are implicit.

Labels: ,

Friday, March 17, 2006

F*cking Blogger


Thursday, March 16, 2006

Accountability 102

The award for the day's most egregious misappropriation of constitutional verbiage, goes to Sen. Chuck Grassley, whilst promoting the (winning) Senate resolution to raise the national debt limit to $9 trillion. According to the N.Y. Times:
Senator Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa Republican who heads the Senate Finance Committee, said before the vote that an increase in the debt limit to $8.97 trillion was essential to preserve "the full faith and credit of the federal government," and that spending for the Iraq war and for antiterrorism measures had helped to push up spending.

[Emphasis added]
Con law is not really my thing, but I don't know if the Constitution's authors would think that raising the national debt limit had much to do with full faith and credit.

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Why Won't They Let Me In?

[NOTE: Cross posted at De Novo]

No I'm not talking about clubs in Vegas, but actually this press release on behalf of an Army captain who thinks he is being denied admission to law schools because he served in Iraq. The key sentence is: "While having average and/or below average grades and LSAT scores..."

I'm never too fond of anyone with a sense of entitlement. This is just a perversion of the previous kid who thought he deserved to get in everywhere b/c of his numbers. Except this one wants schools to overlook the numbers and admit him for his valor. The United States government has a perfectly well-established process for awarding valor. A seat in Civ Pro is not one of them.

Labels: ,

Accountability 101

This was rich. Email received yesterday:
From: []
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:33 AMTo: #Students-All
Subject: Anatomy of A Deal

*Boalt Hall and Haas Business School* will be cosponsoring a unique program tomorrow at 12:45 in Room 105. "Anatomy of A Deal" will cover every aspect of a major business transaction...
[emphasis added: Tac]

And then today's update:
From: []
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:21 AM
To: #Students-All


"Some people think..."? Those idiots. Shouldn't they have known that "tomorrow" on Tuesday really means Thursday? Silly law students, unable to divine authorial intent. They will never be good originalists.

Boalt administrators are having a rough spring with the email...


Monday, March 13, 2006

The Green Palmed Thief

So another laptop stolen. Response to suggestion that library install security cameras is the following:
We have also had a few suggestions for us to install security cameras. We will be exploring this option but there are both financial and privacy concerns with the use of security cameras in a library environment.
Privacy concerns? What privacy concerns? If a liquor store selling doritos doesn't seem to have privacy concerns I'm more than certain neither will a law library. Financial? That I understand. But I think it's not something that DE can't solve in a heartbeat. The Donor X security cameras. Hey if we can have lecture hall named after Brobeck, why not?

More seriously, the library has a few flaws. First, there are two separate entrances. While this is convenient, it's a security hassle. For example, at night when they actually do check IDs, the second entrance has to be closed. This leads to point number 2. No way to actually check who goes in and who goes out without shutting one of the entrances.

At the UCLA law library, there is only one entrance, and that entrace is guarded by a rent-a-cop (a CSO actually, and over here I don't know what they are called but they have those beige rent-a-cop uniforms). If you are not affiliated with the law school then you have to sign in, even as an undergrad. You have to tell the librarian why you're there. As an undergrad, just telling them that it's legal research was enough to let me in even if the library was packed. But generally, they gave studying preference to law students like there's no tomorrow. Anywho, the list of non-law students being finite and collected, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out why this would discourage thefts.

Unfortunately I don't see how this can be implemented here given the current configuration of the library. Other suggestions?

Labels: ,

Saturday, March 11, 2006

Allow me to interject...

I _hate_ to break up all the hating that's going on on the blog this week (punctuated only by a little 2L transfer love, it seems), but something needs to be noted. We do a lot of complaining. And a while back, I complained about this:
it seems that Boalt has been doing a lot of things in certain ways just because "that's the way we've always done them." And a lot of these things are the ones the students gripe about most: registration for classes, class schedules, exam schedules... Where Boalt has been willing to innovate, students have by and large been pleased (everyone I know preferred being able to download and turn in their take-home exams on-line last semester). Why does the Boalt administration seem so afraid of change?

I'm not about to take credit for any major policy changes on the basis of a blog posting (well, maybe I'm going to gloat a little right now. OK, done.), but here's proof positive that the Boalt administration may be more responsive to student concerns than we usually give them credit for (snipped from this week's BBB, without permission):
The good news is that we will not be using ExamSoft this semester. For those of you who installed ExamSoft in prior semesters, you may receive an email from ExamSoft
informing you of their latest software upgrade. Feel free to disregard it.
Further details on how we’ll administer exams will be given in the exam memo (distributed in early April), but it’ll work much like take home exams – you’ll save your exam answers in a .doc file and upload them to the server at the end of the exam. We’ll still hand out paper copies of the exam. This means that Mac users can now take an in-house exam on laptop.

Examsoft was annoying, caused more problems than whatever facade of "security" it provided, and disadvantaged Mac users (who had to go out and rent/borrow a computer, or take by hand). This is a welcome change, and thanks go out to the admin people who made it happen.


Friday, March 10, 2006

Four and a Half Minutes Hate

I cannot stay quiet about this anymore. I dislike my Evidence class. What? you might ask. You dislike Evidence with Prof. Swift? No. I love Evidence with Prof. Swift. I dislike my *class*. Today, Friday morning, is exemplary. As of the class' start time at 10:00 AM, 24 of 95 students were in their seats, ready to participate and learn. For those keeping score, that is barely a quarter. Mind you, this is a class that had a waitlist of nearly a hundred students, all of whom wanted a chance to be in the class. And recall that the ABA requires attendance and a specific amount of class time for accreditation. And all this talk of the Honor Code and ranks got me to look at the Academic Rules. 1.07 governs here: "We expect every student to prepare fully for class and to participate actively in class discussion. For this purpose regular attendance and preparation of assignments are required."

People continued talking well past 10:00. Enough people showed up to start class at 10:04:30. Starting 4.5 minutes late would mean losing 7% of our class time if Prof. Swift did not keep the class over five minutes. Attendance and start times have better on Tuesdays and Thursdays, but on Fridays it has been ridiculous. This is not the most extreme example, it's just the one I counted students for. Amazingly, the parade continued throughout the class. How does one show up fifteen minutes late for class? How do substantial numbers of people not show up at all (I would say that roughly 60-70 people show up for Friday Evidence)? Did they all forget where it is? Or do they simply lack respect for their fellow classmates, the professor, and the 100 or so people on the waitlist they're screwing over?

I understand not everyone is perfectly punctual. But the law is (compare, statute of limitations). This is law school. I have yet to work in a firm, but I expect (and hope) that meetings start on time. Judges start on time too. My judge this summer told us a hilarious, and overtly cautionary story, about punctuality. She had an attorney who kept missing his client's hearings. Finally, on the third missed hearing, she dispatched the federal marshals (it turned out he was in another courtroom acorss town), had the attorney put in handcuffs, placed in the back of the car, driven to the courthouse, and dragged up to her courtroom (still shackled). HIs client deserved his attorney's presence, and so did the judge, opposing counsel, and the rest of the court. According to the judge, the attorney never showed up late again in all her dealings with him.

I know it's an asshole thing to do -to sit in the back of the class and watch people shamble in. So it goes.

PS: And the people that are not prepared during the week they know they are on call? Yeah, I don't like you either.

PPS: The title is a reference to 1984. And I took the word "hate" out of the body of the post because it's too strong a word.

Labels: ,

Show Us Your Cards

I don't want to create this thread, I really don't. I didn't want to create the OCIP one either for similar reasons...I hate breeding further competition. But there is a part of me that finds the sharing of information useful. So with that said, here is the rankings thread.

Here are the rules and assumptions.

1. It can be useful for 2Ls, 1Ls, and incoming to know what grades roughly place you where. It is no secret from the registrar's own website that 3.4 to 3.6 translates roughly to top 10% for Order of the Coif purposes.

2. If you want to anonymously post your ranking, please kindly also add the "GPA" as computed by the registrar for O of C purposes if you would like. This is nothing more than an attempt to recreate the spreadsheet that DO has. ("GPA" = ((HH units * 5) + (H units * 3) + (P units * 2))/total units). This number serves two purposes: (a) saves me from roughly approximating it b/c I don't have relevant units for each grade a person posts and (b) gives the poster greater anonymity by not revealing specific course grades or patterns. THIS RULE IS MANDATORY AND I WILL DELETE ANY COMMENTS NOT CONFORMING TO IT. That is, if you want to reveal anything about your grades, reveal this number only. I'm proud of your AmJurs and disappointed in your Prossers, but I really don't give a rat's ass about them.

3. I still have not asked for my ranking and I am happy to see some of my classmates troubled by the sudden heart-pounding interest in rankings. Maybe it's a way to validate all the hard work you've put in. Maybe it's a way to make you feel better/worse about yourself compared to your classmates. But if this rankings crap goes to anyone's head, then they're a douche and characteristically un-Boalt.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Honor Code, Schmonor Code...

So I personally couldn't give a ... about my class ranking, people seem to be really exercised about it in the comments. Cool. I'm not judging. But I was curious about something: in her original email, Dean O said:

Remember, if you do receive your ranking from me, you may use it only for purposes of applying for a clerkship. Any other use or disclosure would be a violation of the Honor Code.

That got me thinking about the Honor Code. So I actually read it (NB: I didn't pore over it. I skimmed it. I have better things to do. Really. I do.). And I just don't see any language that in the Code that reads anything like "you can't talk about your ranking." If they're going to insist we take that thing seriously (and the number of times Dean O trots out "it's a violation of the Honor Code..." indicates they expect us to take it seriously), then they can't be all chicken little about it. Where's the language in the Honor Code about not discussing rankings? Tell me please. The Code is here.
Update: Check out the comments to see what an idiot I am! Ahh, if I've learned nothing else in law school (and really, it's sad how little I've learned), I have learned humility. And humiliation. Both of those. Good times.

Labels: ,

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Why doesn't Disco Stu like 1Ls?

DS was recently in the library surrounded by 1Ls. At first it was just one or two, but inevitably more flowed in (they still haven’t figured out that grades are mostly arbitrary and they really shouldn’t care about law school – and DS was only there because he had to make up work from an extended Tahoe vacation). They started jabbering about WOA – it’s a one credit class people! They were chomping their gum and sniffling their noses and playing with their highlighters. They were texting their friends (probably about some mundane thing like myspace). And DS realized, he really didn't like 1Ls. Maybe he realized it a long time ago and was just trying to procrastinate from writing a paper. The following are some of the possible explanations.

Does DS dislike anyone new? He generally doesn't have a problem with transfers – although he thinks they should all stop congregating around the same tables at the entrance. And he didn’t like how during OCIP they took a lot of firm jobs away from fellow Boalties who were smart (or lucky) enough to get in the first time and have actually been going here a full year and a half – although he has no doubt they have a stronger work ethic than he does and will probably do better for a firm b/c they busted their ass at their previous (pathetic) law school in order to graduate with a Boalt JD.

Is DS jealous? He thinks on average 1Ls are a better-looking class. Perhaps a bit cooler too. There are some fun ones out there. Those who show up for bar review, or routinely get joked in Boalt Briefs and don’t complain about it. DS doesn’t think this is it though. He’s ready to be done with law school – after all, he’s phoning it in right now. DS certainly doesn’t wish he were a 1L, no matter how good they look.

Is DS just an asshole? (Remember though, he posted the 1L guide to OCIP and tried to pass down the lessons he and others had learned). Does this mean that he feels sorry for them in addition to loathing them?

Is DS just too old? Today’s music sucks. He generally doesn’t try to associate with anyone born in the 80s – though exceptions are made. To quote from Abe Simpson – “I used to be with it. Then what it was changed. And what I was with wasn’t it. And what was it was weird and scary.”

As a 3L will he dislike both 2Ls and 1Ls? Will he simply dislike the same rising 2Ls and not the new 1Ls?

As a 2L has DS not earned the right to think he’s better than 1Ls? As an upperclassmen in college he can’t remember disliking freshmen. He certainly thought they were less human, and treated them accordingly.

Is it the way they’re still interested in class? They answer all the prof’s questions. They still seem excited to be there. Does DS want to feel that way again?

Do all 2Ls feel like this (not just our class, but 2Ls in perpetuity)? Will this year’s 1Ls dislike next year’s 1Ls? Do other law school 2Ls dislike other law school 1Ls?

DS would be interested to see how other 2Ls feel toward our junior class. And how did last year’s 2Ls feel toward us?

A caveat. DS does not prescribe to Armen's notion that he will stand by everything he has written. DS is anonymous for a reason - this post. Transfers will get upset at this. 1Ls will get upset at this. DS is simply saying what many 2Ls are thinking. A frank discussion needs to be had about interclass dynamics and DS hopes this post will be a catalyst towards that.

And for christ's sake, why hasn't Disco Stu received his class rank yet?

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, March 07, 2006

I'd Like to Dedicate This Post to John Steele

It's ok SMcGB, I have one in the wings for you too.

Join an Inn of Court for Next School Year.

Joining an American Inn of Court ( is a terrific way to meet local judges and lawyers at once-per-month evening meetings during the school year, at which substantive presentations, role-playing, and other professional programs occur. We have eight slots for Boalt students next school year in The Earl Warren American Inn of Court in Oakland, for a very low cost. We probably can place a half dozen students with other local Inns. If you are interested in volunteering or just curious about the Inns, send an email to John Steele at no later than March 24. If we have more interested students than slots, we'll conduct a lottery.
Also, for the 3Ls and alumns out there, any pearls of wisdom for the yougens who are about to join country club known as the California Bar? More broadly, since the theme of the comments lately have been to whine whine whine (I still have not e-mailed DO to get my ranking...for those too concerned that the curve may have gone to my head) I wonder if there are any suggestions from anyone out there about what Boalt can do curriculum-wise to improve, if anything.


Message to Regents: Mo' Money, Mo Problems

I haven't followed this issue very closely, but congratulations to some of our Boalt Hall predecessors for early success in their lawsuit against the UC Regents for fee increases (after they promised not to raise fees). Mo Kashmiri, a Boalt grad, has been the real leader of this effort, and though no one in the class of 2007 is affected, I think we should all be grateful that he decided to stand up to the Regents and tell them that UC should not bail itself out of its financial woes at the expense of current and future students. (How 'bout those alumni-California taxpayers who REALLY benefited from low fees?)

Compared with what I guess would be considered its "peer institutions", Boalt Hall (and UC Berkeley as a whole) is still a relative bargain, if you pay the in-state tuition. That's great, and I think we should recognize that all sides -- university and Boalt administration, even some of the Regents -- really have tried to control fee increases. But Kashmiri's court challenge is a nice reminder to the Regents and administration that they should find more creative solutions to handling the university's financial pressures than simply raising tuition and/or fees every time a budget problem arises.

Thanks to GG for reminding to post on this. Also, check out what Seemachine, who has followed the issue closely, has to say.

Labels: ,

Sunday, March 05, 2006

And the AmJur Goes to

Oscars open thread. Just want to note that I'm a huge fan of Jon Stewart, but his opening kinda blew. It was almost like an opening act at a comedy club. What's the deal Jon?


Saturday, March 04, 2006

You Love Me, You Really Love Me!

From a Boalt weblog:

"As many of the ladies of Boalt can attest, the choices we are faced with are less than ideal. Most of the women are beautiful, smart, accomplished while the men are not quite at the same level. Don't get me wrong, there are a few rays of hope walking around in the halls but for the most part the attractive men are married or in a relationship."

I'd like to point out that Armen and I clearly fall in the category of "walking ray of hope." That's definitely one of the nicest things that's ever been said about me on the internet. I bet that's true for Armen too. Thank you Boalt blogosphere, you are far too kind to us!

(title chosen in reference to tomorrow)

Friday, March 03, 2006

Comment and Goeth

For a while now I've been taken aback by a lot of the witty comments. I want to know who you are. This sounds like a Craigslist rant or missed connection or something, but I've been meaning to ask: who the hell are you people? So for this particular thread, I ask that you post who you, the gentle commenter are. Nothing more, nothing less, well something more if there's anything lighting a fire under your ass, but you get my point. Some of the regular readers come up to me and tell me they read N&B, but you're welcome to note that you're a reader too. WHO ARE YOU PEOPLE?

Thursday, March 02, 2006

A Judge Friendly Reminder


Thank you.

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

In case you haven't heard...

...the Barrister's Ball is on Friday. Hey, we've already established that I'm a fan of the BHWA, but I've received four email forwards (three from Boalt groups, incl. Holly Parrish), one paper advert in my locker/mailbox and the entry lobby is plastered with what I would estimate is no fewer than 100 copies of the flyer (seriously, the main staircase is literally covered in posters). Enough. I think the word is out. Uncle. Mercy. Please make it stop...*

*also, go on Friday to the Alumni Club, 8-12 and support a great fellowship and maybe drink and gamble a little. Just remember, what happens at Barrister's Ball... is known by every single person at Boalt, and half the grad school community, by the time you wake up, hungover and in a stranger's bed (if you're lucky enough to have made it to the bed).