Category Archives: Law

Law, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Technology and Society

First-Amendment Rights

2 Comments

..of public employees: A quick cheat sheet.

What I found amusing about the tweets from Badlands National Park yesterday (which were cheered by the supposed fans of “science”) were how either they weren’t “scientific facts” (no, it is an opinion, not a fact, that last year was the “hottest on record”) or trivial and irrelevant chemistry (“A gallon of gasoline puts X pounds of carbon into the atmosphere when burned). But I was also amused at the concern that the employees who had done so had probably been fired.

[Update a few minutes later]

Here’s the story for those who don’t know what I’m talking about.

Law, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Technology and Society

Our Petition For Rehearing

8 Comments

We’ve requested a rehearing en banc (that is, the full court) by the DC court of appeals on the mistaken ruling in December of a division of that court. Amici (and I’d expect at least as many as the last time) have another week to file.

[Late-morning update]

Cato has filed an amicus brief:

Political thinkers would certainly like to believe that historical analogies are integral to expressing their views on important political choices. Just in the last year, one candidate for office has been compared to Hitler, 21 Hitler, 22 Hitler, 23 Hitler, 24 and Mussolini. 25 Indeed, that public figure was so annoyed by this criticism that he threatened to “open up the libel laws” to prevent such speech in the future. Luckily for him, the division’s decision has done this work for him.

I don’t think they realize what a can of worms they opened.

[Later-afternoon update]

National Review has also filed a petition.

Law, Media Criticism, Political Commentary

Obama’s “Scandal-Free Administration”

10 Comments

As regular readers here know, it’s a myth:

All of these scandals were accompanied by a lack of transparency so severe that 47 of Mr. Obama’s 73 inspectors general signed an open letter in 2014 decrying the administration’s stonewalling of their investigations.

One reason for Mr. Obama’s penchant for secrecy is his habit of breaking rules—from not informing Congress of the dubious prisoner swap involving Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl and the Taliban, to violating restrictions on cash transfers to Iran as part of a hostage-release deal.

The president’s journalistic allies are happily echoing the “scandal-free” myth.

If it was “scandal free,” it was only because the anointed media refused to report it honestly.

Business, Law, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Technology and Society

Obama’s Drilling Ban

15 Comments

Trump should immediately rescind it.

Yes. I hope he spends his first week doing nothing except reversing all these unlawful unconstitutional executive orders.

[Friday-afternoon update]

Obama’s midnight-regulation express:

Any action that is rushed is likely to be shoddy, especially if it’s from the federal government. The point is for Mr. Obama to have his way and to swamp the Trump administration with a dizzying array of new rules to have to undo. That diverts manpower from bigger and better priorities.

President Obama is hoping this work will prove too much and his rules will stand. He’d be making a good bet. George W. Bush promised to undo last-minute Clinton regulations. Yet a paper done in 2005 by Jason M. Loring and Liam R. Roth in Wake Forest Law Review found that a whopping 82% were left to stand.

Then again, a Republican Congress seems ready and willing to invoke the Congressional Review Act, which allows legislators to reject rule-making. More important, Mr. Trump and his team seem to understand that Americans are angry at Mr. Obama’s tendency to rule like an autocrat. They also surely know how damaging many of these Obama parting gifts (particularly energy rules) will prove to their own agenda.

A Trump administration could send a powerful message to future presidents and build public support by highlighting the “midnight regulation” phenomenon and then making it a priority to ax every final Obama order. Single them out. Make a public list. Celebrate every repeal. That would be as profound a rebuke to the Obama legacy—a legacy based on abuse of power—as any other.

Also a reminder that the Bush administration was terrible on regulations and small government. I don’t see why undoing all those would require much “manpower.” Getting rid of them would be a good start to “draining the swamp.”

Law, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Technology and Society

My Lawsuit

11 Comments

Yes, there has been a ruling, over two years after argument in the appeals court. I’ll have a comment after discussing with counsel.

[Update a few minutes later]

For what it’s worth, here’s Mark Steyn’s take.

[Update a while later]

Here are the official statements from CEI and counsel:

Statement from CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman:

Today’s ruling simply means this case will proceed and the Superior Court will now consider the merits of both sides’ arguments. The Competitive Enterprise Institute is a staunch defender of free speech and open, public debate, and we are confident we’ll prevail on the merits as this case goes back to Court. As a public figure with his own history of harshly attacking those who disagree with him, Michael Mann must now show that CEI’s commentary met some very stringent standards of malice. It did not, and we will continue to fight against those who seek to punish and harass groups and individuals who speak out on controversial issues.

Statement from Andrew Grossman, CEI’s attorney and partner at BakerHostetler:

T​oday’s decision throws out half of Michael Mann’s claims against the Competitive Enterprise Institute and sends the others back to the Superior Court for further consideration. We are confident that Dr. Mann’s remaining claims will ultimately fail, because they attempt to shut down speech and debate that is absolutely protected by the First Amendment. Today’s decision only draws out Dr. Mann’s years-long effort to wage “lawfare” against his opponents instead of engaging in public debate.

So, on we go.

[Update a few minutes later]

Here‘s the story from Buzzfeed, FWIW.

[Noon update]

Thoughts from Jonathan Adler.

[Friday update]

National Review‘s formal response to the ruling.