Georgia’s anti-BDS law is struck down in federal court as violative of the First Amendment. #gapolcair.com/wp-content/upl…
The crux of the analysis: Georgia doesn’t need to suppress speech to further whatever interest it has in foreign relations.
This is actually a MTD. But the law is all but toast.
Court: plaintiff stated a claim that the law was void for vagueness.
The Court thoroughly dissects the law, explaining that the Georgia statute is riddled with constitutional infirmities from free speech, to compelled speech, to being impermissibly vague. The anti-BDS law is as close to constitutional death as a law can get at this point. #gapol
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There’s been a lot of discussion about what legal scholarship is or should be here lately, but one thing that strikes me (and it has been said before) is the legal academy’s strange notion of originality. Other fields do a much better job in recognizing that the production of
knowledge is not about novelty, but building on old theories, looking at the same evidence in a new way, or harmonizing different schools of thought with new analysis. The idea of preemption, which is really acutely problematic with law students, is one symptom of this.
This week and next week, many 1Ls will start law school. There are plenty of good thoughts out there about tips for incoming students, but I wanted to throw in a few more with some geared toward first generation college graduates and first generation lawyers:
(1) First things, first: congratulations to achieving great success to earn your way to law school.
(2) Get to know your profs and build relationships with them. We're here to help you understand course materials and connect you with folks in the profession-- we enjoy doing it!
(3) There is a learning curve to navigating the law school world, don't worry if it feels uniquely burdensome. Plenty of us felt that way too, and your colleagues will, as well.
(4) If you don't know what something is (like law review, clerkships, etc.)-- don't be afraid to ask.
“Trump administration is considering narrowly defining gender as a biological, immutable condition determined by genitalia at birth, the most drastic move yet...to roll back recognition and protections of transgender people under federal civil rights law.” nyti.ms/2R9W1jB
A few things. First, this policy ignores the fact that there are intersex persons. Second, we should be horrified at the idea of government mandating genetic tests for anything. Third, this would erase transgender people’s existence but it would harm a wider group of folks. 1/
If the Admin’s idea that our notions of what discrimination “because of sex” boils down to sex organs— yikes. That undermines protections for gender non-conforming cisgender people, gays/lesbians/bisexuals, and stereotypes used to discriminate against cisgender heterosexuals.