RSS FeedBiking While Under the Influence
We’ve previously mentioned DUIs while driving a wheelchair and a lawn mower.
One of our readers asked whether he could be charged when riding a bicycle.
Well, maybe not in Canada, but in Ohio…
h/t Lawrence Koplow of the Arizona DUI Defence Blog
Facebook and Law Profs, and We got Scooped
It’s been a couple weeks (we’ve been busy), but Mitch Kowalski of the Legal Post caught an interesting post over at Volokh again.
And yes, he rubs it in that he scooped us on it. At least thank you for the link love Mitch.
My law profs can join my Fan Page. They don’t need to see the dubious comments people write on my wall.
Canada’s First Fourth-Tier Law School?
As most of Canada’s larger universities now have affiliated faculties of law, it falls to younger and smaller universities to adopt legal education. Recently, Lakehead University was unsuccessful in convincing Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty that it would be prudent to establish a law school there, although this rebuff will not likely dash its long-term hopes.
Along these lines, yesterday’s Speech from the Throne by BC Premier Gordon Campbell, a Liberal, contained an interesting tidbit: “A new law school will be opened at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops in collaboration with the University of Calgary.”
Thompson Rivers University?
Thompson Rivers is a small institution (less than 10,000 students) which until 1995 was known as “Caribou College” and did not even become a full university until 2004. In response to the BC Throne Speech, one journalist questioned why the government would mandate a law program at Thompson Rivers, in association with “a kooky, right-wing Alberta university,” when Simon Fraser University would have been a much more appropriate choice.
That raises a good point. Canada’s club of law-degree-granting universities is fairly small, with only 20 schools featuring full-fledged legal programs. All of these institutions are historically established or far larger than Thompson Rivers, or both. It is arguable that these institutions are thus able to provide strong facilities and cross-disciplinary education, as well as the less tangible advantage of proximity with a large knowledge-based social milieu. The minuscule Thompson Rivers, on the other hand, “in the longer term… will seek to develop dedicated space for the TRU Law School.”
The title of this post may come across as institutional snobbery, but this is not true. Rather, it seeks to draw attention to the question of whether Canadian legal education should move toward the situation in the US, where an abundance of no-name backwoods law schools saturate the market with marginally-educated lawyers. It would have made far more sense to create a law school at Simon Fraser University, which would be sizable (and reputable) enough to sustain a unique legal program without having to rest on the intellectual capital of another institution.
Proposition 8 Maps on Who Donated
With privacy issues dominating the blawgosphere this week, here is an interesting development that might raise some eyebrows.
Proposition 8, which prohibited same-sex marriage in California in the last federal election in the U.S., has obviously upset some people in that state.
The Secretary of State has provided information on who donated to support the Proposition.
Someone has taken it a step further and plotted these donors on a map, complete with city, job, and amount of donation.
Although this information is publicly available, plotting the names in this manner on such a controversial subject could create targets of violence or harassment.
Is this going to far? Will this type of intimidation quell political participation in the future? How much anonymity and/or privacy should donors expect?
About that Valentine’s Day Card…
If you received a Valentine’s Day card in the mail yesterday, and you’re not exactly sure who it’s from, this might be of interest to you:
A guy walks into a post office one day to see a very well-dressed, middle-aged, balding man standing at the counter methodically placing “Love” stamps on a huge stack of bright pink envelopes. Each envelope had hearts all over it.
The man then took out a perfume bottle and sprayed scent all over the envelopes.
His curiosity getting the better of him, the guy goes up to the balding man and asks him what he is doing. The man says “I’m sending out 1,000 Valentines cards signed, ‘Guess who?’”
“But why would you want to do that?”
“I’m a divorce lawyer,” the man replied.
Court: No Expectation of Privacy in our Online Identity
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has ruled that Canadians have no expectation of privacy in their online identity.
In a St. Thomas-area child porn case, the police asked Bell Canada for a customer’s name and home address based on that customer’s IP address. Bell Canada complied and handed over the information.
The customer’s husband was allegedly using the family computer to search for child porn. He was arrested.
The accused argued that the police search of Bell’s records should have required a warrant. Obtaining his details without a warrant, he claimed, was a violation of his s. 8 Charter right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.
Justice Lynne Leitch disagreed, writing that:
“One’s name and address or the name and address of your spouse are not biographical information one expects would be kept private from the state.”
Her decision, though it represents an erosion of internet privacy, appears to be well founded. In a moot competition concerning s.8 of the Charter, Omar Ha-Redeye and I argued the exact same point on behalf of the Crown. (Ironically, Justice Leitch was one of the judges of our competition.)
In the appropriately named R. v. Plant, [1993] 3 S.C.R. 281, a marijuana grower sought s. 8 protection for his electricity consumption records. Justice Sopinka held:
… in order for constitutional protection to be extended, the information seized must be of a “personal and confidential” nature. In fostering the underlying values of dignity, integrity and autonomy, it is fitting that s. 8 of the Charter should seek to protect a biographical core of personal information which individuals in a free and democratic society would wish to maintain and control from dissemination to the state. This would include information which tends to reveal intimate details of the lifestyle and personal choices of the individual. The computer records investigated in the case at bar while revealing the pattern of electricity consumption in the residence cannot reasonably be said to reveal intimate details of the appellant’s life since electricity consumption reveals very little about the personal lifestyle or private decisions of the occupant of the residence. [emphasis added]
If you’re interested, see also R. v. Tessling, 2004 SCC 67 at paras. 59-62.
In R. v. A.M., 2008 SCC 19 however, the Supreme Court tempered the “biographical core of personal information” requirement. Binnie J. explained that even where the information sought by police is not aimed at revealing intimate details of the lifestyle of the accused, the analysis does not end there. Simply, the privacy of the contents of a communication is protected if it was reasonably intended by its maker to be private [para 68].
In the present child porn case, Justice Leitch held that the information sought by the police was nothing more than a name and an address. She likened it to information in a telephone book. There were no contents of communications which were worthy of protection.
Ultimately, she found that a customer could not have expected such information to be kept private from the state.
Tech blog Ars Technica criticized the decision:
“Though it’s clear that the ruling in the case (which is still ongoing) was made with good intentions, privacy advocates know what the road to hell is paved with. Critics fear that such a precedent could open the doors to police asking for information on all manner of Internet activities, ranging from the embarrassing to the questionable-but-legal, without judicial oversight.”
Prof. James Stribopoulos, who teaches criminal law and evidence courses at Osgoode, joined the chorus of criticism:
“There is no confidentiality left on the Internet if this ruling stands…”
The reasoning of the judge misses the context of what police are seeking, suggested Mr. Stribopoulos.
“It is not just your name. It is your whole Internet surfing history. Up until now, there was privacy. An IP address is not your name; it is a 10-digit number. A lot more people would be apprehensive if they knew their name was being left everywhere they went.”
This information should require a search warrant by police if there is suspected criminal activity, said Mr. Stribopoulos. Judges are accepting the argument that this is “just your name” because “everyone wants to get at the child abusers,” he said.
The case itself is still ongoing after this Charter ruling.
It’s Not Easy being a Felon on Valentine’s
Hold on a Sec… I Actually Got Into Law School
Hi everyone,
Please allow me to introduce myself: my name is Vitali. I was referenced in Omar’s post earlier today as the guy trying to get into law school. As of this afternoon, I am no longer “trying”: I received an acceptance from University of Western Ontario and, with that, the keys to this blog (thanks Omar!). I look forward to contributing to this blog as well as maintaining my own.
About me:
Undergrad: UofT Management with Co-Op, currently in 4th year
Legal Interests: Intellectual Property, New Media Regulation (subject to change)
Previous fields of work: IT, banking, automotive (four months in each field…bird’s eye view. I love Co-Op).
I think that’s enough for a first post. Look for my posts dealing with media issues in this blog as well as mine.
Why Do Law Student Blogs Struggle in the Long-Term?
A couple weeks ago, Orin Kerr of the Volokh Conspiracy raised the issue of what he perceived as the decline of law student blogs.
We know the folks at Volokh focus on American content, so we don’t take their comments there personally. On this site we’re noticing several thousand visitors a day.
One explanation offered was that a few years back law student bloggers were still early adopters and they benefited off the novelty. My good friend Jansen Dennis of the University of Minnesota Law School rightly pointed out that links from law professors are not what create value or worth for a law student blog.
A very plausible reason of students just not having enough time to blog was also offered up.
Stephen Brown related stories of Career Services threatening that no blogging law student would ever get a job, and others noted the professional “liabilities” of having a web presence.
To me the last explanation seems the most ridiculous. It’s true that some of our contributors have heard the same from their respective Career Services. But these people are Luddites who often left practice years ago, and have no idea of the immense potential of blogging.
There are plenty of lawyers that we Google when doing our write-ups here, and we frequently come across some rather humorous material. If you don’t create at least some positive web presence, someone else will create it for you eventually, and usually not favourably. An online identity is a reality in today’s world – the real issue is how to manage it.
ClaimID, for example, is a great way to prevent others from pretending to be you or using your name inappropriately. A bigger issue is when people pretend to be others and comment using their name. We’ve seen a couple incidents of this already on this site, and co.mments, Commentful, coComment and BackType might be of some use to these users.
But this does relate to what some described as a cultural change, or a reluctance to participate in activities that do not have clear tangible returns. These arguments miss the point, and anyone who blogs knows they get more out of the interaction and reading other posts than they ever expect to get in direct monetary compensation.
Other readers noted that group blogs such as this site tend to be more successful, again going back to the time issue and the ability for multiple contributors to create regular postings. This was one of the reasons that Nuts & Boalts was presumably successful to this day.
But a larger issue emerging from this is continuity. Law students are only in school for three years. After that time there are confidentiality and conflict issues that can limit online content. Most of our contributors are in their second year now, and we started on this site just before or during our first year.
For this reason we have tried to recruit new first year students this year. Law students already involved in blogging and the online space, such as David Shulman, were easy decisions.
Other students trying to get in to law school are always on our radar. For example, Vitali Berditchevski, a 4th year student at UofT, writes on My Journey to Law School and recently said,
Also, I’m being noticed in the bLAWgosphere, which is interesting. If you have your own bLAWg or know something ahout law/law school, please don’t hesiste to comment.
Vitali is referring to a conversation we had about his site. We have several mutual friends that set up the intro, and his site was passed on to us soon after he started blogging.
We do want this site to continue well after we’ve moved on, and so these efforts continue. This past week we welcome a new contributor to our site, Ryan MacIsaac. Although Ryan is not in law school yet, he does have several offers of admission and will be starting in the Fall. He recently completed a B.A. in Linguistics from UofT.
And yes Ryan, we are looking at people like you to take the helm once we start articling.
Should Public Television be Supporting Hate Speech?
Earlier today Warren Kinsella pointed out that Steve Paikin’s The Agenda will be having a very interesting guest on their show. One who, without question, clearly promotes hatred for racial/ethnic minorities, the disabled, and the poor.
Scott Tribe has reiterated these concerns, and provides a sample letter for TVO.
Is that how your tax dollars should be spent?
More importantly, what is the responsibilty of publicly funded media when inviting guests that are clearly beyond the pale of reasonable discourse?
My Brand (As a Joint Student)
Cross-posted from the Financial Post
When I was an undergrad, Western law had the reputation for being the “business” law school. Indeed, Western makes an effort to distinguish itself through this brand; in fact, one of the criticisms levied against the school is that it is too focused on business law and not enough on other concentrations, like family and criminal law. I don’t mind. It is the corporate law brand that I’m interested in.
It was never clear to me exactly how Western law got its reputation, until a friend of mine pointed out to me that Western itself, had always been known as the “business” university, thanks to Ivey. Rankings notwithstanding, Western has always been home to the oldest business school in the country. Ivey places great emphasis on alumni relations, who spread the reputation through their words and deeds, and the business reputation continues. As far back as anyone can remember it has always had a great reputation. The entire university benefits from that brand, including the law school.
In this blog, I have often sung the praises of Ivey, without giving the faculty of law its due. I chose Western based on a number of factors, including its reputation, and I haven’t questioned my decision since. Midway through my degree, I am still in awe of many Western’s law students whether they are in the joint program or not. They are more than just smart: Western law students are smart in a way that’s useful.
Just the same, I confess that I feel a special connection when I meet joint-degree students, whether HBA/JD or JD/MBA. I think that every joint student here does. In fact, it’s the same feeling I get when I meet someone who graduated from McGill (my undergraduate alma mater). It’s the feeling of sameness, that feeling of association. Anyone who has ever been involved in the Greek system of fraternities and sororities probably knows what I’m talking about. If you’ve ever traveled to another country and randomly met someone from your hometown, you probably know what I’m talking about too.
A handful of students have just received offers of admission into the JD/MBA program. The way the program is designed, they apply before or during first year, and begin the program the following spring after their law school final exams are done. The new class starts business school this May, just as I started last May. Knowing what I now know about the program, I am very excited for them all. I am also excited for the long-term future of the program. The more time I spent in the program, the stronger the bond I felt to the program’s brand, and the more important it became to me that next year’s class succeed.
Today I received an email from one of the new students in the class, who wants to organize a clothing sale for the group. Last summer I organized one, so when I read the e-mail I smiled. The surest sign that any academic or social group will succeed is when the next generation wants to become actively involved.
Growing up, my father always told me: you’re only as good as your next sale. In other words, always try to do better. If you didn’t do great last time, you’ll get better; if you did great last time, there is no reason to be arrogant and become complacent. Western law wasn’t complacent: it matured its business law brand by recruiting the top business law academics in the country. Ivey matured its MBA brand by restructuring the program to stay competitive in a world that emphasizes a one-year degree. The three-year JD/MBA brand at Western/Ivey is still very young, so it’s hard to see how exactly it will mature; but if every generation going forward brings in students who want to get involved, then I can only foresee success for my program and my brand.
This Name Fails Miserably
From the Fail Blog we bring you a judge who should have changed his name well before taking his bar exams.
Or at least insist on using his full first name in all introductions, especially nation-wide media interviews.
