Beer lobby fighting California pot initiative

The California Beer & Beverage Distributors has contributed money to defeat the marijuana-legalization measure, as have police groups. One consideration that might shed light on the latter stance: “Police forces are entitled to keep property seized as part of drug raids and the revenue stream that comes from waging the drug war has become a significant source of support for local law enforcement.” Surprisingly, the politically active prison-guards union has not (yet) thrown its weight onto the “no” side, though prison supervisors have. [Ryan Grim, HuffPo via Tabarrok]

“Handicapped man sues Tampa strip club”

In Tampa, the Mons Venus strip club “is being sued for its alleged uninviting nature to people with disabilities.” Kendrick Duldulao, who uses a wheelchair, says there are no suitable ramps, “the hostess stand is too high, and the toilets and jukebox are inaccessible.” [BayNews9.com] More: Radley Balko (“Reached for comment, other Mons Venus patrons replied, ‘There’s a jukebox?'”)

Standing and the left-right divide

With cases like the ObamaCare challenge, it’s less clear that broad constitutional standing necessarily advances “liberal” political goals, and advocates on both sides may be adjusting their positions (even) farther toward a tactical or instrumental view of standing controversies. (Ilya Somin; Somin v. Kerr on the merits); Linda Greenhouse, NYTimes “Opinionator”.

Symposium on California Prop 64

In 2004 Californians voted to curtail s. 17200, the state’s distinctively liberal “unfair competition” law which had brought into existence an entrepreneurial sector of lawyers to sue businesses even in the absence of an injured consumer as client. The Federalist Society’s State Court Docket Watch has just published a symposium on the lessons and aftermath of Prop 64, with participants including William Stern of Morrison & Foerster, Scott Leviant of Spiro Moss, Jeremy Rosen of Horvitz & Levy, and Shaun Martin of the University of San Diego School of Law

September 24 roundup

  • “Appeals court dismisses Oneida Indians’ 40-year-old land claim” [Syracuse Post-Standard; Howard Bashman links to more coverage including opinion; much more on the case in my forthcoming book]
  • When blogging, careful about using the sort of hypotheticals common in law school discussion [Kerr]
  • Beacon, N.Y.: Retro Arcade Museum falls victim to retro town ordinance banning pinball [NYT]
  • Prosecutor suspended from law practice over misconduct, which almost never happens [Greenfield]
  • George Mason U. Law & Econ Center unveils new website;
  • On Polinsky and Shavell’s “The Uneasy Case for Product Liability” [Beck, Drug & Device Law]
  • What did other defendants pay? “Company wants look at asbestos bankruptcy trust payments” [LNL, Maryland]
  • Measuring tape? The many items you’re not allowed to bring into Detroit’s City Hall [Amy Alkon]

“How Title IX Is Stifling High School Baseball in Florida”

Parents at a Brevard County school want to chip in to upgrade the local team, but that would risk triggering an impermissible gender imbalance. [Saving Sports] Also, why Title IX has been less helpful than one might think for women’s gymnastics; and Alison Schmauch has a new paper on Title IX for the Federalist Society. Update: school board rejects parents’ request (Florida Today h/t Gitarcarver, Saving Sports)