Contra Costa Times, May 24, by Carl Steward
http://www.contracostatimes.com/search/ci_9371559?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com
Former Cal chancellor Ira Michael Heyman’s speech to NCAA delegates back in 1987 offered keen insight to keeping college sports under control…. Would he be interested in updating his ’87 views? “I’m played out on the subject,” he said.
-San Jose Mercury News, May 22, by Howard Mintz
[Registration required, or go to G:\Law School in the News\News Clips]
“George saw the historical moment and seized it,” said Boalt Hall School of Law Professor Stephen Barnett, an expert on the court who at times has criticized George. “The decision took a great deal of courage and leadership.”
-San Francisco Chronicle, May 23, by Wyatt Buchanan
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/23/BAIQ10RM4S.DTL
“It could be considered improper for the court to hold its decision for what are essentially political reasons.”
-Legal Newsline, May 30, by Chris Rizo
http://www.legalnewsline.com/news/213060-ten-ags-ask-california-court-to-stay-gay-marriage-ruling
“This case will clearly have an effect on other states, so it would be appropriate that they would file amicus briefs,” said Barnett…. “After considering this case for a few years, California is not about to withhold its decision to give other states time to think about it.”
San Francisco Daily Journal, May 20, by Jill Redhage
[Registration required, or go to G:\Law School in the News\News Clips]
“It’s not something you would do unless you had a specific career goal in mind, or unless you were looking to pursue an academic career in law,” said Jason Shepherd, an administrative assistant for UC Berkeley School of Law’s advanced degree programs.
-San Francisco Chronicle, May 20, by Deborah Saunders
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/20/EDVT10N2DQ.DTL
Rick Frank told me, “If Proposition 98 passes, it will be the property-rights and eminent-domain lawyers full employment act.”
-Contra Costa Times, May 25, by Richard Frank
http://www.contracostatimes.com/berkeleyvoice/ci_9271750
“Both propositions are vague as to when state government would be able to condemn property to prevent criminal conduct (e.g., crack houses) or protect public health and safety interests from hazardous waste sites.”
-KTVU Evening News, May 27, by Jim Vargas
[Link not available]
“Proposition 98 goes far beyond what is being advertised as the ‘save my home’ initiative … Water storage projects, water transfer projects, flood control measures and the like would all be threatened and perhaps impossible if Proposition 98 were to be enacted by the voters.”
-San Francisco Daily Journal, May 28, by Richard Frank
[Registration required, or go to G:\Law School in the News\News Clips]
“Californians can expect a great deal of litigation over the initiatives. A successful Proposition 98, in particular, promises to be the subject of numerous lawsuits that will likely be needed to resolve definitively the scope and meaning of that measure. Conversely, if both Propositions 98 and 99 are defeated at the polls, it can be safely predicted that California’s longstanding legal and policy debate over eminent domain, rent control and property rights will continue well past June.”
-ABC7-TV News, May 29, by Dan Ashley
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/assignment_7&id=6173232
An independent analysis by the University of California Center for Environmental Law and Policy found confusing language in both propositions…. “My sense is that if Proposition 98 is enacted, we will see a great deal of litigation to address a number of the key ambiguities in that measure,” says Richard Frank with the Center for Environmental Law and Policy.
The Boston Globe, May 18, by Drake Bennett
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/05/18/my_space/?page=full
The extraterrestrial property regime envisioned by … Robert Merges … would have one key condition: A portion of the total available property would be set aside for a period of time to give developing nations a chance to catch up and to bid once they’d reached the point at which they were technologically and financially able.
San Francisco Chronicle, May 18, by Carolyn Jones
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/18/BAOK10OF9L.DTL
Yoo is not likely to be fired for his political views, Boalt Dean Christopher Edley Jr., wrote in a memo last month…. While many of his colleagues and students are disturbed by Yoo’s opinions, Yoo is protected by the First Amendment and campus policies on academic freedom, Edley wrote.
-NPR Day To Day, May 16, by Madeleine Brand
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90517603&ft=1&f=1059
“The argument they will make is: This is discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation—which it plainly is—and that that discrimination violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. And that sexual orientation, much like gender, race, ethnicity, are to be given special consideration by the court.”
-San Francisco Chronicle, May 17, by Bob Egelko
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/17/MNQR10O1OC.DTL
“I know of no case in which a (law) sought to deprive someone retroactively of a right they had at the time,” said Jesse Choper, a constitutional law professor at UC Berkeley who filed arguments in support of the same-sex couples in the case decided this week.
-KCRW-FM To The Point (Los Angeles), May 19, by Warren Olney
http://www.kcrw.com/news/programs/tp/tp080519can_same-sex_marriag
“The fact that many, many citizens voted contrary to the Supreme Court’s decision is true in virtually every constitutional decision made in either a federal or state Supreme Court finding that government action violates equal rights. If lots of people hadn’t voted to take that action, the case would never had reached the Supreme Court. So that’s true with all of the rights of the accused that the Supreme Court has found, that’s true with the rights of women that many courts have found, that’s true of the racial cases as well.”
KQED-FM Forum, May 16, hosted by Michael Krasny
http://www.kqed.org/epArchive/R805160900
“I believe the court acted appropriately. There was no other place to go at this stage in the constitutional puzzles and the legislative complexities that were presented by this case. This is not four justices finding something that has not been found.”
PBS Bill Moyers Journal, May 16
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05162008/watch.html
Maria Echaveste: Hillary Clinton did not get a fair chance with both media perspectives and the subtleties on gender discrimination. I think … there’s a zone of protection around Senator Obama on race where none existed on gender.… It also raised all kinds of pretty misogynistic views about women and that woman in particular. And a lot of women are angry about it.
Chris Edley: The real challenge of leadership is to find ways to talk about the things that divide us and help us figure out how to bridge those not by ignoring them but by, in some sense, overcoming them, resolving them, accommodating them.… I’m not for ignoring race in the sense that it can’t be ignored. It’s going be there no matter what. If you ignore it in the sense of simply not talking about it then you’ve failed to do anything effectively to deal with the cancer.
KQED Special Broadcast, May 15, by Judy Campbell
http://www.kqed.org/epArchive/R805151601
“I think it’s absolutely historic. I think it does go beyond gay marriage, because the court took the opportunity to decide that the sexual orientation is a suspect classification under the California State Constitution, just like gender and race and religion. They’ve never done that until today, and so that means that the gay and lesbian activists now can look to apply this new strict scrutiny standard to other areas where they’re being discriminated against.”