Rank Tribalism And Justice

Print This Post

You may also like...

8 Responses

  1. Ravious says:

    God, I love this blog. Weirdly enough it is the only legal blog I feed, and it is just.

  2. Ken says:

    I would like it noted for the record that I deliberately avoided referring to Price Waterhouse as a seminal case.

  3. Imaginary Lawyer says:

    I'm kind of stunned myself that FLP published this nonsense. However, I doubt that the author failed to read the opinion – he or she probably is a friend of Judge Eiler if not a sockpuppet.

  4. Ken says:

    I don't know, IL. I suppose it is possible. But it had more of a "the actual facts of the situation are irrelevant to my academician's take on it" vibe to me.

  5. Imaginary Lawyer says:

    It is certainly consistent with that vibe. But the turn-that-frown-upside-down recasting of Judge Eisler's behavior – oddly mirroring the judge's own defense of her behavior – as "no-nonsense" and appropriate, the insistence that such behavior would be seen as perfectly OK from a male judge, the anonymity, the open letter format, and the obsession with the phrase 'with all due respect'…well, that rings to me like somebody who has a personal axe to grind.

  6. Rick H. says:

    The comments on the Time article are thoroughly depressing. So many of my fellow Americans take absolute delight in state authority, reflexive tribal hatreds and punishment for its own sake. Get me a fucking spaceship out of here.

  7. Matt Raft says:

    My take on reforming judicial behavior is that adding more women would help:


    You would think taxpayers would be able to hire only the best people as judges and fire the ones who don't seem suited to the job. After all, for most lawyers, a job with full medical and dental benefits; a pension; and no billable hours or the need for an ever-expanding book of business is heaven on earth.

  8. R. Raymond says:

    Rick H.,
    Yeah, it depresses me too.