Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Burning Sands, Esq.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 689
1
FSU for all the foregoing reasons.

2
General Board / Re: Alito calls USNWR rankings an "abomination"
« on: June 19, 2014, 03:26:34 PM »
In order to be accurate, the rankings would have to be according to region, or by state.

I Could see that being a factor, but nationwide is still accurate. A grad from school1 likely will try to work in State2-50

Nationwide rankings are only accurate for the first 14 or so schools.  Outside of that, the national rankings are arbitrary and, in most cases, misleading because they don't match up with real life regional employment options.

3
General Board / Re: Citizens United Case Debate?
« on: June 17, 2014, 09:56:55 PM »
Even if we accept that spending money is free speech, and further accept that corporations have a 1st Amendment right to it, that still doesn't take into consideration that no right is absolute. All of our constitutional rights are subject to reasonable restrictions by the state and federal governments.  That includes the 1st Amendment.  Under the 1st Amendment, we have the right to free speech, but states can still make laws that prevent us from making threats to other people or from yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.  Why should this be any different? 

Or perhaps the better question is this: why should a corporation have an absolute right to free speech when human beings do not?


4
General Board / Re: Alito calls USNWR rankings an "abomination"
« on: June 17, 2014, 08:57:29 PM »
In order to be accurate, the rankings would have to be according to region, or by state.

5
General Board / Re: Citizens United Case Debate?
« on: June 17, 2014, 05:29:15 PM »
And that's the worst part about the holding in this case.  A corporate entity is still legal fiction created for the sole purpose of doing business while limiting the liability of its owners. It seems awfully inconsistent with the purpose of the Constitution to afford Constitutional rights on an entity that doesn't have a soul and cannot be held accountable for its actions outside of monetary fines.

6
General Board / Re: Donald Sterling Lawsuit ?
« on: June 17, 2014, 05:23:56 PM »
I think Maintain pretty much hit the nail on the head.  From my admittedly limited understanding of NBA contracts,  the NBA owners are not owners outright in the sense of how we might own a car but instead are owners of a franchise much in the same way that a person might "own" a McDonald's restaurant.  If the parent of the franchise wants their franchise back there is probably a provision in the agreement allowing them to do just that, otherwise some rogue owner could potentially destroy their brand.

7
General Board / Re: LSD Needs to Modernize Site
« on: June 17, 2014, 05:15:37 PM »
Good question.  I can reach out to the owner and see if he's interested in tinkering with it.

8
General Board / Re: Citizens United Case Debate?
« on: June 17, 2014, 02:00:41 PM »
Great responses Burning Sands.

It is unfortunate money plays such a role in elections, but I still think people should be allowed to spend their money how they wish.

It is up to the voters think for themselves and not be fooled by expensive campaign funds I don't think legislating the issue or blocking people is the right approach and the Supreme Court agrees for now, but I can definitely see the issue being revisited.

It is an interesting debate and great summary of the issues in the case.

I think there are 2 separate ideas being conflated here.  One is the right to spend your money however you want to, which I agree is fine.  The other is whether whether spending money is a first amendment right to free speech.  I think this stretches the meaning of free speech a bit too far.

I think people should be (and are) free to spend their money however, whenever and on whatever they want, just not the Presidential election.  Obviously money can buy influence and corrput the process, and for that reason alone it should be regulated in our elections and not treated as a first amendment right.  If we say that spending money = free speech, then we're admitting that rich people have more of 1st Amendment right than poor people.  I don't think that's what the founders intended when they drafted it. 

9
General Board / Re: LSD Needs to Modernize Site
« on: June 16, 2014, 09:44:09 PM »
The blind leading the blind.

10
General Board / Re: Alito calls USNWR rankings an "abomination"
« on: June 16, 2014, 09:43:10 PM »
Perhaps the states can file a suit on public policy grounds and have the ABA enter expert testimony on the harmful effects of the rankings.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 689