TSA aims subpoena at bloggers, seizes laptop

TSA can take decisive action after all, when bloggers as opposed to terrorists are the targets: “Two East Coast travel bloggers who posted a sensitive airport security memo on their Internet sites have been subpoenaed by federal officials trying to find out who sent them the document. One of the writers, Steve Frischling, also had his laptop seized by agents looking for evidence of his source for the Transportation Security Administration directive.” [Alison Grant, Cleveland Plain Dealer; Elliott.org; BoingBoing (Frischling got laptop back)(& welcome Coyote readers)]

More: Via Instapundit, a contrarian view from Christopher Fotos at Aviation Week, and coverage from Wired “Threat Level”. Update: TSA backs off [AP/Law.com, BoingBoing]

“Parents Who Won’t Vaccinate Kid Sue Catholic Preschool”

“A Rockland County family filed suit against the New York Archdiocese after a Catholic preschool wouldn’t accept their child because she has not been fully vaccinated, according to the Post. The couple — who filed the suit anonymously — claim they are the victims of religious discrimination and are seeking a court order so their 4-year-old can attend the St. Margaret School in Pearl River after the preschool rejected their request for a religious exemption.” [Gothamist]

December 29 roundup

  • “Trial lawyer group hails Senate health care bill as ‘stunning victory'” [Point of Law]
  • Christopher Hitchens on our leaders’ absurd reaction to the attempted plane bombing [Slate] More: Stewart Baker on the security challenges [first, second]; Mark Steyn [first, second]
  • Lots of coverage for Ted Frank’s Center for Class Action Fairness and its objection in a Yahoo! settlement [Zywicki/Volokh, Stier/Mass Tort Lit, CCAF, Turkewitz; Drum] And the Center has also filed objections in an AOL settlement of claims arising from advertising copy placed in the footers of emails;
  • Sad: “Texas Man Freed by DNA Sues Over ‘Excessive’ Attorney Fees” [AP/Law.com]
  • Litigious creationists: promoters of “intelligent design” back in court yet again [L.A. Times via WSJ Law Blog]
  • “One Possible Class-Action Defense Strategy: Disappear and Live in a Tent” [Lowering the Bar]
  • “Softballer can’t slide, wants money” [Elie Mystal, Above the Law; Queens, N.Y.]
  • Litigators advised to use social media to snoop on players in their cases [Trial Lawyer Tips]

Photo-retouch blogging draws lawyer nastygram

Photographer Anthony Citrano:

On Tuesday night, I received an aggressive and threatening letter from Martin Singer, Demi Moore’s attorney. It is marked “Confidential Legal Notice – Publication or Dissemination is Prohibited”. However, since Mr. Singer and I have no confidentiality agreement, and it provides essential context to the matter at hand, I have decided to publish it.

Citrano’s original post on Boing Boing discussed evidence that a Vanity Fair cover photo of the actress had been retouched. Now Boing Boing reports that it too, as well as other blogs such as Jezebel, have received nastygrams from Singer, and responds with new evidence on the retouching question. And it adds:

Yes, the discussion at hand is only about an image of a celebrity on the cover of a fashion magazine. But the ability to freely discuss the provenance and technical history of a photo, including those with more crucial news value — say, images of detainee abuse, or Iranian missiles — is a freedom we believe should be preserved.

On the Lavely & Singer firm’s “don’t you dare print this nastygram” demands, see, e.g., this earlier post. More: Scott Greenfield.