Former appellate defender and UC Berkeley Law graduate. My practice was limited to representing indigents on appeal.
I’ve written more than a dozen books and published more than 50 short pieces in The Washington Post, Cnn.com, and others. My book prizes include the Jane Addams Book Award.
This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.
Here is Stephanie P. Jones' take on SCOTUS's decision to grant cert in the immunity case.
(She gets annoyed at a few of the influential TV lawyers.)
If you will all please forgive me, I am about to do a "Brag About The Kids" moment.
My stepdaughter (who is now finishing her third year at Harvard Law School) made this video while bored during the pandemic:
Me, my husband, and her shirtless younger brother make a brief appearance at the end.
I will qualify my prediction ⤵️
Lawyers are always trying to predict what courts will do. That's part of the job.
Nobody gets it right all the time. If everyone knew what courts would do the practice of law would be very different. It's always a calculation.
This article is disturbing in many ways, but the thing that jumped out at me is that in the US, while the right is more likely to support authoritarianism than the left, it’s only by four points, probably close to the margin of error — but, unlike every other country, “centrists” support authoritarianism at a much higher rate than either right or left. (See Figure 2.) That’s a flashing red alert sign, with klaxon.
I'll put this response here for everyone:
The Court made a decision. All we can do is speculate about why. Eventually we may know why they elected to proceed in this manner.
Like everyone else, I can speculate on why they proceeded this way, but I refuse.
I predict they'll nix the idea of immunity.
That's different from speculating on what happened in a closed meeting.
(Maybe, as a defense lawyer, I am accustomed to courts not doing what I want them to do or think they should do.)
Between this site and a few others, I must have typed a dozen times "Go to my blog, find the Criminal Law FAQ page under the resources tab of my blog and read the entire page."
Because dozens of people are saying the exact same phrases.
That's what happens in group think ecosystems.
If you are saying the same thing, in the same words, that hundreds of other people are saying, you have lost your way.
I spent 5 years writing FAQ pages and "talking people off the ledge" each time there was a collective meltdown.
I stopped doing that because it is never ending.
I keep saying the same things over and over.
In 2021, when people were demanding indictments, I said, "indictments are the start of a long harrowing process."
I explained that trials are harrowing.
Judges make bad decisions.
Juries don't always get it right. A person can be guilty but be acquitted.