Trying to stay dry…
Tropical Storm Bill hit the area on today. Lots of wind and rain, but thankfully it appears there were no fatalities. I decided to leave the office early today so I ended up working from home. Bates-labeling and reviewing documents sure makes the day fly by! :P
Movie-recommendation-of-the-moment: Evelyn. I saw it for the first time on today. I had never heard of the film until it was recommended to me by my parents so I thought I’d spread the word. Without being too much of a spoiler here’s the summary: The film is based upon a true story that occurred in Ireland in the 1950s. It involves a father, Desmond Doyle, who has to use the legal system to gain custody of his children. As a background note, during this time period the Catholic Church and the legal system were intricately tied, so the film also involves Doyle having to reconcile religion and the law. Doyle’s case proves to be a landmark case in Irish family law and greatly extended the right’s of a father to his children.
The film has a nice blend of family law and religion. The only thing I can say lacking was a documentary that fleshed out the real story. I watched some of the bonus footage of the DVD but it discussed more of the movie production rather than the actual story behind it. So of course I’m anxious to know more… I plan to research more about Doyle and the Supreme Court of Ireland’s opinion. I will post my findings.
Ironically, Evelyn takes place in the 1950s, yet presently in the US we have a disparity in how fathers are treated in our legal system. The argument that children need a maternal influence more than a paternal one is persuasive but misguided. “The best interest of the child” – the standard used by many jurisdictions, should reflect the need for both parents and not just presume that custody should go to the mother. In the fight for women’s rights, I believe the rights of men have in some instances been overridden in this area.
I think one area that is ripe for the Supreme Court to handle would be the father’s right in the abortion debate. Is not part of the being inside the mother also a part of him? If a fetus is a thing, could joint ownership be claimed? Things that make you go “hmmm.” I have heard of a case or two involving this premise, but they were each resolved before getting to the Supreme Court. If you want the court to have to come up with a better argument for Roe v. Wade the rights of the father could be a good way to start.
Legal-Term-of-the-Day: putative spouses - persons who in good faith think that they are legally married but they are not.
Bible-Verse-of-the-Day: "As long as I am in the world, I am light of the world." John 9:5 KJV
Monday, June 30, 2003
Sunday, June 29, 2003
As usual, on today I attended church. Service was nice. The gist of the message - working with the abilities (and disabilities) of others to create the best for the Lord. There's a scripture that pertains to that issue that comes to mind, I think that will be the Bible Verse of the Day.
From a legal aspect, the week has flown by and there is a lot to discuss:
Legal Recap of the Week
The Supreme Court passed decisive opinions on two controversial issues, Affirmative Action and Gay Rights.
Affirmative Action
In Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger the Court clarified its stance on affirmative action. The cases dealt with the policy as it was used at Michigan University and Michigan University's Law School.
In Gratz, the Court held that Michigan's undergraduate point system in which it awarded minority students twenty points in the application process simply for being a minority was unconstitutional. However, in Grutter, the court found that the policy of Michigan's Law School, in which minority status is a consideration, was within the realm of constitutionality. The court agreed that there is a compelling interest in promoting racial diversity. Notably, the court predicted that within twenty-five years the use of affirmative action would be obsolete.
As a minority student, I understand the dilemma facing the nation. I once read an author who said, "A colorblind nation produces a colorless result." By that he meant that if we were to remove some of the institutions that have been put into place for minorities (colorblind mentality) then the result would be less minorities and in many instances an all-white arena (colorless society). Although this quote was made in regards to voting and minority districting, it is still applicable here. Unfortunately, there still remains a large chasm between the educational systems of many whites versus non-whites. On that we can all agree. But the answer is a bit more shady. Should we ignore the issue and let the gap grow more - or should we correct the injustice by perhaps creating another injustice?
I have teetered on the issue. I think one possible solution is to focus on the economic hardships of the person, regardless of race. No matter how we choose to address the issue, one thing that we must realize is that hard affirmative action policies can hurt minorities more than help them. Instead of money being spent to recruit minority students, this money could be spent to better educate them at the offset. A society that seeks only to promote minorities without equipping with the tools for them to succeed is blind. In my ideal society, all affirmative action policies must teach minorities to affirm to take action to better themselves and the future.
Gay Rights
The court struck down sodomy laws in the US. From a legal standpoint, the move made sense. If homosexuality is not illegal, why then ban the acts? In many cases it was merely a way to harass gays.
From a moral standpoint, I have not found the decision problematic either so I do not quite understand the outcry against it. For example, many people believe that adultery is an amoral sexual act. But should the US government fine and/or jail those who engage in those acts? I think no sexual act (between consenting adults) should be above another under the law. If adultery isn't regulated, neither should gay acts be.
That is not to say that I support homosexual acts, I do not. I do, however, agree that people should be treated equally under the law.
The more interesting debate that the Supreme Court's decision has spurred is other gay rights such as marriage and adopting children.
Legal Term of the Day: mandamus - an extraordinary writ issued by a superior court to a lower court, executive body, administrative body, or the like, commanding the performance of a particular act.
Bible Verse of the Day: "...But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that." 1 Corinthians 7:7b KJV
see also 1 Corinthians 12 which discusses the diversity of the gifts which alone may seem insignificant, but are vital to the body of believers.
From a legal aspect, the week has flown by and there is a lot to discuss:
Legal Recap of the Week
The Supreme Court passed decisive opinions on two controversial issues, Affirmative Action and Gay Rights.
Affirmative Action
In Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger the Court clarified its stance on affirmative action. The cases dealt with the policy as it was used at Michigan University and Michigan University's Law School.
In Gratz, the Court held that Michigan's undergraduate point system in which it awarded minority students twenty points in the application process simply for being a minority was unconstitutional. However, in Grutter, the court found that the policy of Michigan's Law School, in which minority status is a consideration, was within the realm of constitutionality. The court agreed that there is a compelling interest in promoting racial diversity. Notably, the court predicted that within twenty-five years the use of affirmative action would be obsolete.
As a minority student, I understand the dilemma facing the nation. I once read an author who said, "A colorblind nation produces a colorless result." By that he meant that if we were to remove some of the institutions that have been put into place for minorities (colorblind mentality) then the result would be less minorities and in many instances an all-white arena (colorless society). Although this quote was made in regards to voting and minority districting, it is still applicable here. Unfortunately, there still remains a large chasm between the educational systems of many whites versus non-whites. On that we can all agree. But the answer is a bit more shady. Should we ignore the issue and let the gap grow more - or should we correct the injustice by perhaps creating another injustice?
I have teetered on the issue. I think one possible solution is to focus on the economic hardships of the person, regardless of race. No matter how we choose to address the issue, one thing that we must realize is that hard affirmative action policies can hurt minorities more than help them. Instead of money being spent to recruit minority students, this money could be spent to better educate them at the offset. A society that seeks only to promote minorities without equipping with the tools for them to succeed is blind. In my ideal society, all affirmative action policies must teach minorities to affirm to take action to better themselves and the future.
Gay Rights
The court struck down sodomy laws in the US. From a legal standpoint, the move made sense. If homosexuality is not illegal, why then ban the acts? In many cases it was merely a way to harass gays.
From a moral standpoint, I have not found the decision problematic either so I do not quite understand the outcry against it. For example, many people believe that adultery is an amoral sexual act. But should the US government fine and/or jail those who engage in those acts? I think no sexual act (between consenting adults) should be above another under the law. If adultery isn't regulated, neither should gay acts be.
That is not to say that I support homosexual acts, I do not. I do, however, agree that people should be treated equally under the law.
The more interesting debate that the Supreme Court's decision has spurred is other gay rights such as marriage and adopting children.
Legal Term of the Day: mandamus - an extraordinary writ issued by a superior court to a lower court, executive body, administrative body, or the like, commanding the performance of a particular act.
Bible Verse of the Day: "...But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that." 1 Corinthians 7:7b KJV
see also 1 Corinthians 12 which discusses the diversity of the gifts which alone may seem insignificant, but are vital to the body of believers.
Saturday, June 29 - Part II
Saturday was largely uneventful. I don't think I went outside at all. Just got lots and lots of R and R. My good friend Kelly invited me to go see "Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle" but I declined. Although I had slept all day, I felt as if I might get another nap in if I went to see that flick. :P I recently saw the first Charlie's Angels and thought it was 'okay' so I may just wait for part two on video.
So instead of going to the movies I decided to stay home and rest some more. But my law book called to me and so I had to do some reading. "But law school hasn't started yet," you say. Yes, let me explain. Loyola has two weeks of orientation prior to law school and we have an assignment for the first day of orientation. I guess that is to prepare us for our regular law classes that probably will also have assignments for the first day.
The book I have to read is called Introduction to Legal Method and Process by Berch, Berch and Sprizter. Right now I am on the portion of the book dealing with case law. Actual quote from the book "Now the first thing you are to do with an opinion is to read it." WOW, really? lol. After laughing I read on. The next thing the book says: "Does this amuse you? There is no reason why it should amuse you." The authors are psychic. The book goes on to clarify that legal reading is not like everyday reading. If you don't know the meaning of a word you don't just read on faster, you stop to look it up. That is very true, in normal reading you can sometimes discern the meaning of a word from the context of the sentence. In law this is rarely the case. So tip number one: read (and try to comprehend) each word.
Before even reading this part of the book I had decided to invest in a law dictionary - I already have Black's Law Dictionary - 6th ed. But there's a 7th ed. so I want it! But the whole dictionary bit has given me an idea - everyday (or at least every post) I will put up a legal term of the day. And just because I can I will also put in a Bible verse of the day. So now you can be entertained, learn the law, and get some spiritual food all in one stop. Ya can't ask for more. :)
Legal Term of the Day: Nisi prius– trial court (as distinguished from an appeals court).
Bible Verse of the Day: “Verily, Verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” John 5:24 KJV
Saturday, June 28, 2003
On second thought....
I don't think the open disclosure thing is going to work. If I want to feel free to speak (well, type) candidly, I have to believe I have some degree of anonymity. So my name for the purpose of this blog is "Jo" and my nickname is "Angel".
If I wanna be a lawyer, I need to think like a lawyer. Idea One: Don't get sued for defamation of character over things said about people online. heh heh. :)
I don't think the open disclosure thing is going to work. If I want to feel free to speak (well, type) candidly, I have to believe I have some degree of anonymity. So my name for the purpose of this blog is "Jo" and my nickname is "Angel".
If I wanna be a lawyer, I need to think like a lawyer. Idea One: Don't get sued for defamation of character over things said about people online. heh heh. :)
Friday, June 27, 2003
Wow... my *first* entry. Well, I guess I should give a short intro.
My name is *edited* - I also like to go by 'Jo'. I am a 21-year-old girl living in New Orleans. Currently, I am employed with a large firm as a paralegal. Sadly, my last day there is approaching soon. The reason? I will begin law school in August! I am pretty hyped up about it - can't wait to get the 'law school experience'. Ideally, the bulk of my entries will center around my law school experience, but I may delve into other parts of my life.
At first I wanted my blog to be anonymous but then I decided to go for it - so I'm airing my thoughts unabashedly before the world. This could be a wild ride.
What else should you know? I am a Christian. yep, sorry for those who were expecting to read about the crazy New Orleans scene. I do like to have fun, but I try to keep it within limits.
Well, I think that is enough for now... to learn about the rest of me, you need to read my future entries...
My name is *edited* - I also like to go by 'Jo'. I am a 21-year-old girl living in New Orleans. Currently, I am employed with a large firm as a paralegal. Sadly, my last day there is approaching soon. The reason? I will begin law school in August! I am pretty hyped up about it - can't wait to get the 'law school experience'. Ideally, the bulk of my entries will center around my law school experience, but I may delve into other parts of my life.
At first I wanted my blog to be anonymous but then I decided to go for it - so I'm airing my thoughts unabashedly before the world. This could be a wild ride.
What else should you know? I am a Christian. yep, sorry for those who were expecting to read about the crazy New Orleans scene. I do like to have fun, but I try to keep it within limits.
Well, I think that is enough for now... to learn about the rest of me, you need to read my future entries...
(c) http://angel-in-law.blogspot.com
< ? law blogs # >
