Great coverage here in today’s Oregonian by Brent Hunsberger regarding Umpqua Bank’s decision to cram mandatory arbitration down the throats of Umpqua customers. If you’re an Umpqua Bank customer, you might want to seriously consider moving your funds to a credit union. By way of background, the U.S. Supreme… Continue Reading →
A win for the plutocracy* Yesterday’s decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion represents a breathtakingly bad opinion that does profound harm to consumers. It’s a bit geeky, but the takeaway is that this is a huge win for the rich and… Continue Reading →
For those who watch the U.S. Supreme Court, a theory of constitutional interpretation–so-called “originalism”–is now in vogue. The theory, which is often mouthed by politicians, suggests that the only way to interpret the U.S. Constitution is to look at what the founders wanted and thought and felt back when they… Continue Reading →
It’s official. Justice Stevens announced his retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court effective the end of this term. Court watchers have been speculating for a while that this would happen. Here is one of many news reports. I’m taken by this quote from the linked MSNBC report… Continue Reading →
Much is being written about President Obama’s first State of the Union address. I didn’t hear the whole thing, but thanks to the miracle of the interwebs, video clips are up. One has already caught my eye. First some background. Here is an overview of the Court’s… Continue Reading →
This isn’t my usual gig. After all, to paraphrase one of my heroes, Senator Sam Ervin, I’m just a simple trial lawyer. I am no federal constitutional scholar. Nor am I ever likely to argue in the U.S. Supreme Court. I’m not even an expert on the First Amendment, though… Continue Reading →