18:24 well spent: Caleb Brown interviews Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) on separation of powers, criminal justice, the electoral college, executive powers and many other topics [Cato Podcast series]
“How to Tell Your Salaried Employees They Are Now Hourly”
With the new federal regulations set to kick in December 1, this oft-unwelcome news will reach many employees just too late for them to take out any resulting upset on the politicians who encouraged or permitted it to happen [Evil HR Lady, earlier]
Recalling a defiant New Haven Hallowe’en
Amid the wreckage left by superstorm Sandy, residents of two New Haven, Ct. neighborhoods celebrated trick-or-treating against official advice. Was that “libertarian” of them? [Mark Oppenheimer]
Oregon occupiers acquitted: one juror’s statement
An Oregon jury has reached a verdict acquitting the occupiers of the Malheur wildlife refuge (earlier) of conspiracy charges. In seeking to explain this outcome, it may help to know about a detailed letter from a juror in the case, published in The Oregonian. Obviously, one juror’s view is not definitive in such a case.
I am indebted to reader J.B. for the following rough paraphrase of some themes and highlights of the juror’s letter:
* We didn’t intend to affirm or endorse the defendants’ views.
* We were certainly convinced that the defendants’ actions caused a lot of real-world disruption and damage.
* We don’t want to encourage other people to do stuff like that and regret the possibility that the acquittal might do that.
* The government had a complicated theory that, according to the law as the judge explained it to us, made the defendants’ subjective intentions more significant than the actual effects of their actions.
* We didn’t think the evidence about the defendants’ subjective intentions was strong enough to meet the legal standard for conviction under the government’s complicated theory as the judge explained the law to us.
* We’re frankly kind of puzzled as to why the government didn’t charge less complicated crimes like criminal trespass that might have been easier to get a conviction for.
All of which is not short enough to fit on a bumper sticker. The report by the Oregonian’s Maxine Bernstein, again, is here.
My letter in the Baltimore Sun
The Baltimore Sun ran an editorial that began with the line “Rich people threaten lawsuits. It’s what they do.” That isn’t really right, though, I point out in a letter to the editor: “In fact, whether they enter politics or not, most wealthy persons do not share Mr. Trump’s habit of using lawsuits as a tactical weapon (and many who do pursue litigation overzealously are not rich).” Read the whole thing here.
Labor roundup
- Want or need to contract out of the rules set by Seattle’s new worker-scheduling ordinance? You’ll have to unionize. Cute, no? [Bruce M. Cross et al., Perkins Coie] Also in Seattle: ostensible safety initiative aims to force hotels to unionize, would require blacklisting of guests even absent legal complaint [Carla Murray, CrossCut]
- “NLRB GC now wants to legalize intermittent and partial strikes” [Michael VanDervort]
- Boston city hall to private firms: nice little outfit you got there, shame if it didn’t unionize [Steve Malanga, earlier here, here on alleged extortion scheme]
- Less a university and more a shop floor: NLRB ruling on teaching/research assistants did more harm than good [Jon Hyman, earlier here, here]
- NLRB makes it as quick and easy as it can for workers to join a union. But should they wish instead to leave… [Diana Furchtgott-Roth]
- “Will NLRB’s New ‘Joint Employer’ Standard Discourage Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives?” [Seth Borden]
“Ten Ways for the Next President to Promote the Rule of Law”
“5. Issue More Guidance (and Accept the Consequences) 6. Be Less Capricious and More Transparent in ‘Waiving’ Laws 7. Stop Stealing Money from Congress.” [Adam White (Hoover), Liberty and Law]
Sorry, your cellphone game violates Dodd-Frank
The Securities and Exchange Commission has settled an enforcement action against Forcerank, LLC, a provider of a mobile phone game that enables players to engage in fantasy stock trading for a small charge, much of which was refunded to players in the form of prizes for successful predictions. The SEC takes the position that the transactions involved, however small, fall into the class of swaps and derivatives that, under Dodd-Frank, cannot be offered to the public except under intensively regulated conditions. [Stephen Quinlivan]
October 26 roundup
- Fuller investigation of that “reputation management” ruse of filing dummy court cases with the aim of getting critical web posts taken down [Eugene Volokh and Paul Alan Levy, Levy first and second followups, earlier here and here]
- “When Civic Participation Means Shaming A Non-Voter’s Kid” [my Cato post about an ill-considered public service announcement]
- Why America’s regulation problem is so intractable: Fortune magazine cover story [Brian O’Keefe]
- El Paso benefits from immeasurable advantage over neighboring Juarez, Mexico: rule of law and related American cultural attitudes [Alfredo Corchado, City Journal]
- Tort litigation in Pennsylvania is at its most intensive in a few counties, and residents pay the price [Peter Cameron, Scranton Times-Tribune, I’m quoted]
- California AG Kamala Harris orders BackPage execs arrested; Section 230 be damned? [TechDirt]
Canada lawsuit: cheese-rolling competition injured child spectator
“According to cheese-rolling historians, humans may have been chasing wheels of cheese down steep slopes since pagan times. Written accounts of cheese-rolling date back nearly 200 years.” But now lawyers are catching up with the hazardous pastime. The original Gloucester cheese-rolling festival in England was officially canceled in 2010 — an unofficial version continues — and now in British Columbia, Canada, a suit claims compensation for a child spectator said to have been knocked to the ground by the impact of a rolling cheese on the other side of a safety net. [CBC]