Well, my wife is currently watching the Westminster dog show on TV because she is deeply disturbedloves dogs. We have actually gone to the dog show a few times, and it really is just like Best In Show. Unfortunately, everyone blew off my wife this year, including me and her mother, so she's not going to make it.
Tonight, for my part, I went to a panel discussion at the City Bar Association on the Nike case currently before the Supreme Court. It was an interesting topic, and one of the panelists was my old Constitutional Law professor, so I went.
Since I'm not currently practicing law, most of the discussions I see of this case reduce to one or more of the following three forms:
A: Corporations are evil.
B: No they're not.
Or:
A: Globalization is evil.
B: No it isn't.
Or:
A: Nike is evil.
B: No it isn't.
But the case isn't really about any of those things. It's about the rule of law, and about the Constitution, and precedent, and policy, and poorly written and interpreted statutes, and trying to come up with a rule that will make sense in a variety of situations. Perhaps what suprised me the most was that despite my knee-jerk sympathy towards Nike in the matter, I was deeply troubled by the legal argument they were making. Then again, I was equally troubled by the alternative, too.
Still, Nike will probably win.
Tomorrow, I fly off to Rochester, New York, on business, then if I finish in time, maybe drive to Buffalo from there to catch another flight to Orlando. Oy.
Tonight, for my part, I went to a panel discussion at the City Bar Association on the Nike case currently before the Supreme Court. It was an interesting topic, and one of the panelists was my old Constitutional Law professor, so I went.
Since I'm not currently practicing law, most of the discussions I see of this case reduce to one or more of the following three forms:
A: Corporations are evil.
B: No they're not.
Or:
A: Globalization is evil.
B: No it isn't.
Or:
A: Nike is evil.
B: No it isn't.
But the case isn't really about any of those things. It's about the rule of law, and about the Constitution, and precedent, and policy, and poorly written and interpreted statutes, and trying to come up with a rule that will make sense in a variety of situations. Perhaps what suprised me the most was that despite my knee-jerk sympathy towards Nike in the matter, I was deeply troubled by the legal argument they were making. Then again, I was equally troubled by the alternative, too.
Still, Nike will probably win.
Tomorrow, I fly off to Rochester, New York, on business, then if I finish in time, maybe drive to Buffalo from there to catch another flight to Orlando. Oy.
no subject
Date: 2003-02-10 08:53 pm (UTC)yeah, yeah, yeah, so maybe i'm biased...
no subject
Date: 2003-02-10 08:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-02-10 09:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-02-13 09:38 pm (UTC)off topic
Re: off topic
Date: 2003-02-11 07:43 pm (UTC)Unfortunately, on this trip I am like to have to drive right to the Buffalo airport from Rochester, meaning I will miss things like chicken wings. Next time. Thanks for the suggestion!
boo hoo