On September 27, 2010 my little ‘ole blog turned one-year-old (though I originally launched at joshblogs.wordpress.com)!
My very first blog post was on September 27, 2009. 1,138 blog posts and 155,000+ hits later, here I am. Here’s to many more years!
I have been blogging now for about 1 year (I launched on September 27, 2009). In that short time, I have written almost 1,100 posts, received about 150,000 visitors, and had lots of fun. Like my blog? Read it? Hate it?
However you feel, show some love and nominate me for the ABA Blawg 100. This is the listing of the top 100 law blogs.
Here are the instructions:
Use the form below to tell us about a blawg—not your own—that you read regularly and think other lawyers should know about. If there is more than one blawg you want to support, feel free to send us more amici through the form. We’ll be including some of the best comments in our Blawg 100 coverage. But keep your remarks pithy—you have a 500-character limit.
Some additional tips:
• We’re not interested in “occasional” blawgs—blawgs you name should be updated at least weekly.
• Editors make the final decisions about what’s included in the Blawg 100; this isn’t a scenario in which the blawgs that receive the most amici are the ones that make the list.
Friend-of-the-blawg briefs are due no later than Friday, Oct. 1.
This will take a minute, and I’d really appreciate it.
Thanks in advance 🙂
Posner interrupts with the first question at approximately 2:30. At 4:15 Estrada inadvertently calls Posner, “Justice Posner,” then corrects himself. lol
At 5:20 Estrada said, “If I could be permitted 3 sentences to respond, I would appreciate it.” Posner gave him most of one sentence to reply.
Enjoy the mp3 🙂
[podcast]http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/1J0RXO7U.mp3[/podcast]
A recap of the oral arguments here.
The New York Time’s On Langauge column says not necessarily:
Those who dislike the “Jersey” label may be surprised to discover that it has a distinguished historical pedigree. I asked Maxine N. Lurie, professor of history at Seton Hall University and co-editor of the Encyclopedia of New Jersey, about the usage, and she traced its origins to the end of the 17th century, when there were actually two “Jerseys”: the provinces of East and West Jersey, dividing the territory of New Jersey along a diagonal. (New Jersey was named in honor of the proprietor of East Jersey, George Carteret, who hailed from the Island of Jersey.)
Because of this split, it was common to talk of “the Jerseys,” even after the provinces were united in 1702. Lurie suspects it was “easier to refer to the ‘Jerseys’ and people from ‘Jersey’ than to say ‘East New Jersey’ and ‘West New Jersey.'” The historical record bears this out: 18th-century documents are peppered with mentions of “the Jerseys,” and colonial accounts from 1735 and 1746 refer simply to “the province of Jersey.”
A question of personal interest to the proprietor of this blog–is “Jersey Shore” proper? Yep.
Making compound forms with “Jersey” has certainly never let up: consider the Jersey Shore and the Jersey Devil, Jersey justice (the rough kind) and Jersey lightning (strong liquor, usually applejack), Jersey boys and Jersey girls. Jersey Joe Walcott won the world heavyweight boxing title in 1951, and concrete highway dividers have been called “Jersey barriers” since the late ’60s.
Just don’t call it Joisey.
Congratulations to Justin Donoho, the Chief Justice of the inaugural season of FantasySCOTUS. Justin had the highest score, and beat out nearly 5,000 other members, including former Supreme Court clerks, appellate litigators, and numerous professors to obtain this coveted title. Justin’s golden gavel trophy is in the mail.
Justin recently finished a clerkship with the Honorable William J. Bauer on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Before clerking, he attended law school at the University of Chicago, where he served as a research assistant for Judge Richard A. Posner. Now Justin is an associate at Grippo & Elden in Chicago.
Recently, I recorded a JoshCast with Justin. I was most curious how he worked his magic. His answer? He started with the presumption that the Court would vote 9-0 reverse and worked from there. In many cases, involving controversial topics, he would look how Justices voted in like issues. In other cases, he “just went with his gut.” Interestingly, his predictions generally didn’t change following oral arguments, though he still read the transcripts closely.
Which case threw him the biggest loop? Justin said he initially predicted that Citizens United v. FEC would be 9-0 reverse. That “was pretty silly” he commented.
When I asked him how he predicted the votes of Justice Kennedy, Justin chuckled and said that if he had the answer to that question, “he could license that.”
Listen to the JoshCast for the rest of the story.
The second season of FantasySCOTUS will kick off on the first Monday in October. We have lots of great new features, and many new prizes, so stay tuned.
[podcast format=”video”]https://joshblackman.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/chiefjustice.m4a[/podcast]