Georgia might be the first state to offer Bible classes in its public schools. Last week, Gov. Sonny Perdue signed a bill into law that allows Georgia public school districts to offer elective courses on the Bible. Some thoughts on this:
I haven't had the opportunity to read the legislation, but it sounds as though what the legislature and governor are trying to do is shore up local school districts in the state, some of whom already have Bible classes incorporated into the curriculum. The practical effect of the law will be, first and foremost, to have a uniform curriculum for all elective Bible courses in the state; the legislation gives the state Education Department until next February to draw up the curricular guidelines. Local school districts would then have the option of whether to offer the courses.
Two other reasons stand out for why the state legislature would pass legislation for Bible courses. One possibility is that they are trying to appeal to the conservative base of the Republican Party in an election year. The other is legal, and strategically sound. Getting the state involved in the Bible controversy will allow the state to use its legal resources to defend the practice once the inevitable challenge comes from the ACLU or Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Otherwise, the anti-religion groups would be free to attack local school districts piecemeal, leaving each of them unable to engage in a protracted legal battle or to fight an injunction.
Overall, it makes sense to get the state involved, because there are many legal and constitutional pitfalls with a Bible class, and they are easier to navigate when there is a single, statewide standard for what should be taught, context, etc.
Many people would object to any amount of Scripture being taught in the public schools, claiming that this violates the separation of church and state. But there are two things to keep in mind here. One, this is an elective course that local school districts have the option of offering to their students. Two, the law stipulates that the courses must be taught "in an objective and nondevotional manner with no attempt made to indoctrinate students." Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192582,00.html
Critics might say such a goal is impossible. But the Bible has value not just to Christians, but in the context of a history or social studies class as well. As long as it is taught in this way, as a work of history, literature, and in the context of its influence on American law and government, a class on the Bible could have educational value for Georgia high school students. If there is enough demand for a Bible class, I would like to see opponents wait and see how the law is implemented before making up their minds.
Sunday, April 30, 2006
Friday, April 28, 2006
On Staying Cool
The title of this post refers to the advice we received in our Property class today to "stay cool" for the upcoming exam. Our professor told us to look at the example of Justice Alito during his confirmation hearings-his wife sobbed, but he didn't flinch. By referring to us, I'm not sure if he meant Alito or his wife, given the strain we are all under right now.
Today was our last day of class for the first year of law school. It is difficult to look at it with a sense of context right now, because I am right in the thick of studying for my final exams, which begin Monday. But whether or not we realize it, what we have done so far, just getting through the first year of law school, is a huge accomplishment. It has been a long 9 months since I have moved to Columbus, and it has not been an easy experience by any stretch. But I have made it and survived, and have proved to myself that I will not be retreating up I-71 anytime soon.
That being said, there are lessons I have learned from this past year. There are some things I have done right, but other areas where I could use some improvement. The rest of this week, in a three-part series of blog posts, I will talk about what I need to do to stick with my goals for 2006 in three key areas: spiritual, professional, and social. Tonight, I will discuss my professional goals and how I am working towards those goals for this year, and how I can improve.
My professional goals, generally speaking, for 2006 have been to do my best with respect to law school grades, line up strong plans for summer, become more active in politics and networking, use my time productively, and create and maintain a blog, as a resource for fellow Christian law students (and general interest for all readers).
Generally speaking, this is the most successful of the three areas in which I set goals for this year. I am proud to say that one of my goals for the year has already been accomplished-you are reading it right now. I will be participating in the Blackstone Legal Fellowship this summer, so I definitely accomplished what I wanted there. I have had some real and definite successes so far in 2006.
However, there are areas where I need to improve for the remaining 7 months of the year:
1) Grades: my law school grades have been solid so far, but to improve and do even better, in the fall I need to focus on spreading out my workload through the semester. The mistake I made during the first year was to concentrate most, or all, of my outlining during the last couple weeks of class. This has created a very stressful situation, as I am rushing to finish my course outlines before the exam in order to preserve a meaningful amount (2-3 days) of study time before each test. In the fall, I resolve to do a better job of having a quota of outlining to complete every 2-3 weeks. This will make the end of the semester (Appellate Advocacy included) much less stressful.
This, along with other changes I plan to make, will help make me a more effective law student, which ultimately has a spiritual component as well, insofar as what I do as a law student and lawyer reflects my love of the Lord and my willingness to serve Him through my labor.
2) Networking: in general, I plan to attend as many Mentoring Program and other networking and Republican Party events as my schedule will allow. Not much to say here.
3) Time management: probably the most critical skill I need to develop in my life, short of prayer and spiritual disciplines. When I get back from my internship this summer, I will need to take inventory of all my time commitments, and make a comprehensive schedule covering everything from exercising at RPAC to time to cook dinner to reading for Business Associations (one of our second-year courses). I will more fully develop this idea later. This topic is closely related to grades, since I need to do better at managing my workload throughout the semester.
Today was our last day of class for the first year of law school. It is difficult to look at it with a sense of context right now, because I am right in the thick of studying for my final exams, which begin Monday. But whether or not we realize it, what we have done so far, just getting through the first year of law school, is a huge accomplishment. It has been a long 9 months since I have moved to Columbus, and it has not been an easy experience by any stretch. But I have made it and survived, and have proved to myself that I will not be retreating up I-71 anytime soon.
That being said, there are lessons I have learned from this past year. There are some things I have done right, but other areas where I could use some improvement. The rest of this week, in a three-part series of blog posts, I will talk about what I need to do to stick with my goals for 2006 in three key areas: spiritual, professional, and social. Tonight, I will discuss my professional goals and how I am working towards those goals for this year, and how I can improve.
My professional goals, generally speaking, for 2006 have been to do my best with respect to law school grades, line up strong plans for summer, become more active in politics and networking, use my time productively, and create and maintain a blog, as a resource for fellow Christian law students (and general interest for all readers).
Generally speaking, this is the most successful of the three areas in which I set goals for this year. I am proud to say that one of my goals for the year has already been accomplished-you are reading it right now. I will be participating in the Blackstone Legal Fellowship this summer, so I definitely accomplished what I wanted there. I have had some real and definite successes so far in 2006.
However, there are areas where I need to improve for the remaining 7 months of the year:
1) Grades: my law school grades have been solid so far, but to improve and do even better, in the fall I need to focus on spreading out my workload through the semester. The mistake I made during the first year was to concentrate most, or all, of my outlining during the last couple weeks of class. This has created a very stressful situation, as I am rushing to finish my course outlines before the exam in order to preserve a meaningful amount (2-3 days) of study time before each test. In the fall, I resolve to do a better job of having a quota of outlining to complete every 2-3 weeks. This will make the end of the semester (Appellate Advocacy included) much less stressful.
This, along with other changes I plan to make, will help make me a more effective law student, which ultimately has a spiritual component as well, insofar as what I do as a law student and lawyer reflects my love of the Lord and my willingness to serve Him through my labor.
2) Networking: in general, I plan to attend as many Mentoring Program and other networking and Republican Party events as my schedule will allow. Not much to say here.
3) Time management: probably the most critical skill I need to develop in my life, short of prayer and spiritual disciplines. When I get back from my internship this summer, I will need to take inventory of all my time commitments, and make a comprehensive schedule covering everything from exercising at RPAC to time to cook dinner to reading for Business Associations (one of our second-year courses). I will more fully develop this idea later. This topic is closely related to grades, since I need to do better at managing my workload throughout the semester.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
On Rising Above
Tonight, it is time to reflect on the events of the past month, to look at where I have been, and where I am headed.
As I write this, I am in the last stage of the first year of law school. In two weeks, I will be taking my exams in Property, Constitutional Law, and Legislation, and I will be competing for a spot on one of the law journals for next year. After that, I will have a few weeks off before I head out to Arizona for the first stage of the Blackstone Fellowship, and then beyond that, a fall semester packed with everything except time to rest. The rest of 2006 is going to be extremely busy, and will probably go by fast.
On the surface, this should be one of the best times of my life-I am getting to live out the plans I had made for myself. But recently, especially in the last month or so, I have let myself become consumed with the stress I am under. This has been brought on by a combination of things: a lack of enough sleep, not making it to exercise on a regular basis, but most importantly, I have lacked a regular prayer and devotion time. My communication with Headquarters has, for the most part, been severed by the Enemy's distractions.
Ultimately there is only one way out-finding a way to rise above the situation by growing and meeting my spiritual and student-related challenges.
About a month ago, I wrote about how my problem is that I am focused too much on living to please other people, instead of pleasing God. But what I still need to figure out is what it means to live a life that is pleasing to God. Right now, I think the best way to do this is to rise above the situation by handling adversity. This doesn't mean not making mistakes. But it does mean not curling up in the fetal position and whimpering about how things used to be in high school, when life was simpler and the sun was shining. It means to get tough-to be a good man, not merely a nice guy.
Law school, for me, goes far beyond getting an education. It is a time when I am being put on trial, being tested by the Lord to see what kind of man I am to become. My job is to let it be a crucible, not an incinerator.
Last night, I watched "The Ten Commandments" (the original version, with Charlton Heston), and I am reminded of his journey through the desert. At this point, Moses could not be in a worse situation. He was the prince of Egypt, yet he had lost everything, been stripped of his title, given a day's worth of bread and water, and left to crawl through the desert. Yet as the narrator explains, this was his great time of trial, where he was formed and sharpened for God's great work that lay ahead. It made me think of where I am right now-not that my experience is as difficult as his, but the struggles I face are God's way of preparing me for His purpose in a grand design I cannot see, a part I will play beyond the horizon.
Here's what I am going to start doing to rise to the challenges I face:
1) Restore my communion with God. My goals for this year included praying twice a day, and having a devotion and Bible reading at least daily. There is still plenty of time to get back on track with this, and make it happen. My prayer times lately have been short and ineffective, a "help me in this interview, Lord" or "bless John/Mary, Lord". My time with God has to go beyond this to be effective.
2) Get more sleep. Since I have a huge workload in between now and finals, the temptation is to stay up late and work until I am just short of falling asleep at my desk. This does no good for me or for getting me to the prize.
3) Exercise. Not only to lose weight, but to concentrate better, study more effectively, sleep better, and in general have a better quality of life. When I am at my best, I am at my best for God.
4) Trust God more. My tendency is to wring my hands over every future, hypothetical situation that might pose a threat to the regime I have constructed around myself. Will I find a job after I graduate? Will I get married? Will I have enough money to pay my bills? This is a spiritual shortcoming on my part, that has to be confronted through prayer, faith, and facing the facts.
Finally, the most important thing to remember is that I will get through this. The flames of the fire I face burn hot, but when I emerge from the chaos in my schedule and the turmoil of spiritual and emotional growth, I will be a more effective Christian than in the past. Through the strength of the Holy Spirit, I will be a more powerful person than ever before.
I will be more confident. I will have a deeper and more abiding faith not only in my salvation, but my earthly deliverance from sin and fear. I will have not only the knowledge from being an attorney, but the armor of God equipped for the great adventure that is yet to come.
As I write this, I am in the last stage of the first year of law school. In two weeks, I will be taking my exams in Property, Constitutional Law, and Legislation, and I will be competing for a spot on one of the law journals for next year. After that, I will have a few weeks off before I head out to Arizona for the first stage of the Blackstone Fellowship, and then beyond that, a fall semester packed with everything except time to rest. The rest of 2006 is going to be extremely busy, and will probably go by fast.
On the surface, this should be one of the best times of my life-I am getting to live out the plans I had made for myself. But recently, especially in the last month or so, I have let myself become consumed with the stress I am under. This has been brought on by a combination of things: a lack of enough sleep, not making it to exercise on a regular basis, but most importantly, I have lacked a regular prayer and devotion time. My communication with Headquarters has, for the most part, been severed by the Enemy's distractions.
Ultimately there is only one way out-finding a way to rise above the situation by growing and meeting my spiritual and student-related challenges.
About a month ago, I wrote about how my problem is that I am focused too much on living to please other people, instead of pleasing God. But what I still need to figure out is what it means to live a life that is pleasing to God. Right now, I think the best way to do this is to rise above the situation by handling adversity. This doesn't mean not making mistakes. But it does mean not curling up in the fetal position and whimpering about how things used to be in high school, when life was simpler and the sun was shining. It means to get tough-to be a good man, not merely a nice guy.
Law school, for me, goes far beyond getting an education. It is a time when I am being put on trial, being tested by the Lord to see what kind of man I am to become. My job is to let it be a crucible, not an incinerator.
Last night, I watched "The Ten Commandments" (the original version, with Charlton Heston), and I am reminded of his journey through the desert. At this point, Moses could not be in a worse situation. He was the prince of Egypt, yet he had lost everything, been stripped of his title, given a day's worth of bread and water, and left to crawl through the desert. Yet as the narrator explains, this was his great time of trial, where he was formed and sharpened for God's great work that lay ahead. It made me think of where I am right now-not that my experience is as difficult as his, but the struggles I face are God's way of preparing me for His purpose in a grand design I cannot see, a part I will play beyond the horizon.
Here's what I am going to start doing to rise to the challenges I face:
1) Restore my communion with God. My goals for this year included praying twice a day, and having a devotion and Bible reading at least daily. There is still plenty of time to get back on track with this, and make it happen. My prayer times lately have been short and ineffective, a "help me in this interview, Lord" or "bless John/Mary, Lord". My time with God has to go beyond this to be effective.
2) Get more sleep. Since I have a huge workload in between now and finals, the temptation is to stay up late and work until I am just short of falling asleep at my desk. This does no good for me or for getting me to the prize.
3) Exercise. Not only to lose weight, but to concentrate better, study more effectively, sleep better, and in general have a better quality of life. When I am at my best, I am at my best for God.
4) Trust God more. My tendency is to wring my hands over every future, hypothetical situation that might pose a threat to the regime I have constructed around myself. Will I find a job after I graduate? Will I get married? Will I have enough money to pay my bills? This is a spiritual shortcoming on my part, that has to be confronted through prayer, faith, and facing the facts.
Finally, the most important thing to remember is that I will get through this. The flames of the fire I face burn hot, but when I emerge from the chaos in my schedule and the turmoil of spiritual and emotional growth, I will be a more effective Christian than in the past. Through the strength of the Holy Spirit, I will be a more powerful person than ever before.
I will be more confident. I will have a deeper and more abiding faith not only in my salvation, but my earthly deliverance from sin and fear. I will have not only the knowledge from being an attorney, but the armor of God equipped for the great adventure that is yet to come.
Scheduling, pt. 2
I managed to rework my schedule for next year. It wasn't because of the classes or professors, but because I needed to work out time conflicts with the Legislation Clinic. So as of Thursday night, here is my new schedule for 2006-2007.
Fall 2006
Appellate Advocacy (Beazley)
Evidence (Imwinkelreid)
The First Amendment (Goldberger)
Business Associations (Oesterle)
Federal Courts (Caust-Ellenbogen)
Winter 2007
Legislation Clinic (Huefner)
Sem: Evidence and Trial Practice (Sargus)
Civil Procedure II (Greenbaum)
Advanced Constitutional Law (Laughlin)
Fall 2006
Appellate Advocacy (Beazley)
Evidence (Imwinkelreid)
The First Amendment (Goldberger)
Business Associations (Oesterle)
Federal Courts (Caust-Ellenbogen)
Winter 2007
Legislation Clinic (Huefner)
Sem: Evidence and Trial Practice (Sargus)
Civil Procedure II (Greenbaum)
Advanced Constitutional Law (Laughlin)
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Scheduling
Yesterday, I got to schedule my classes for the first time as a law student. A few observations on the whole thing, now that it is behind us for the most part.
Here is my schedule for next year, subject to change:
Autumn 2006
Appellate Advocacy (Beazley)
First Amendment (Goldberger)
Business Associations (Oesterle)
The Federal Courts (Caust-Ellenbogen)
Administrative Law (Shane)
Winter 2007
Legislation Clinic (Huefner)
Evidence (Krivoshey)
Civil Procedure II (Greenbaum)
Advanced Constitutional Law (Laughlin)
Scheduling my classes in college was fun. I went to The University of Akron, and we had online registration there, just like we do at Ohio State. There were several things that made it different from the chaotic stress-fest it is in law school. First of all, there was no limit on the number of credits I could take. I would load up on as many as I could manage within the limits of my time and mental health.
Second, beyond the required classes for my major, and for the Honors Program, I could take what I found interesting. This meant a heavy dose of political science and history, including classes on the Civil War, linguistics, and philosophy. The requirements for my major weren't that bad, since I had tested out of some things in high school. So it was a fantastic opportunity for me to get the most out of college, and study the subjects I wanted.
Judging from yesterday's experience, law school is completely different.
There is very little, if any, time to take classes just because they sound interesting. Everyone who is in law school is preparing for a particular kind of law or job. So if you want to be a prosecutor or defense attorney, you need to get into the classes on criminal procedure, white collar crime, whatever is available. Personally, I am going to become a litigator and want to work in constitutional law, so I took as many procedural and constitutional law-related courses as I could.
Advice to future law students-plan out your schedule before registration. I can't say how it works at all law schools, but ours was like a cyber version of the Oklahoma Land Rush. I sat in the computer lab at 7:59, sweating because the computers and people make the room temperature about 100 degrees. There is no time to look up classes once the online registration window opens-just enter in the numbers as fast as you can.
I kept track of how fast the classes filled up. One that I tried to get was full in 7 minutes. Another was full at 8:05. Things have changed since undergrad. Now, instead of getting into and out of classes without a problem, the people who don't get in get stuck on a "wait list" and have to hope that people in the class drop or cancel. So it's a lot different than undergrad-much more competitive for a small number of classes, and ultimately no one gets everything that they want.
Also, there are some classes that are even more competitive than normal. These include the seminars, practica, and clinics. For these, everyone gets a "first choice request" to try and get the class they want. I used mine to get into the Legislation Clinic, because it only takes 12 people a semester, and is tough to get into.
Bottom line....another situation where stress boils over with a lot of people, but you just have to manage. Another situation where I have to rise above the anxiety and depression that are so easy to embrace right now.
Here is my schedule for next year, subject to change:
Autumn 2006
Appellate Advocacy (Beazley)
First Amendment (Goldberger)
Business Associations (Oesterle)
The Federal Courts (Caust-Ellenbogen)
Administrative Law (Shane)
Winter 2007
Legislation Clinic (Huefner)
Evidence (Krivoshey)
Civil Procedure II (Greenbaum)
Advanced Constitutional Law (Laughlin)
Scheduling my classes in college was fun. I went to The University of Akron, and we had online registration there, just like we do at Ohio State. There were several things that made it different from the chaotic stress-fest it is in law school. First of all, there was no limit on the number of credits I could take. I would load up on as many as I could manage within the limits of my time and mental health.
Second, beyond the required classes for my major, and for the Honors Program, I could take what I found interesting. This meant a heavy dose of political science and history, including classes on the Civil War, linguistics, and philosophy. The requirements for my major weren't that bad, since I had tested out of some things in high school. So it was a fantastic opportunity for me to get the most out of college, and study the subjects I wanted.
Judging from yesterday's experience, law school is completely different.
There is very little, if any, time to take classes just because they sound interesting. Everyone who is in law school is preparing for a particular kind of law or job. So if you want to be a prosecutor or defense attorney, you need to get into the classes on criminal procedure, white collar crime, whatever is available. Personally, I am going to become a litigator and want to work in constitutional law, so I took as many procedural and constitutional law-related courses as I could.
Advice to future law students-plan out your schedule before registration. I can't say how it works at all law schools, but ours was like a cyber version of the Oklahoma Land Rush. I sat in the computer lab at 7:59, sweating because the computers and people make the room temperature about 100 degrees. There is no time to look up classes once the online registration window opens-just enter in the numbers as fast as you can.
I kept track of how fast the classes filled up. One that I tried to get was full in 7 minutes. Another was full at 8:05. Things have changed since undergrad. Now, instead of getting into and out of classes without a problem, the people who don't get in get stuck on a "wait list" and have to hope that people in the class drop or cancel. So it's a lot different than undergrad-much more competitive for a small number of classes, and ultimately no one gets everything that they want.
Also, there are some classes that are even more competitive than normal. These include the seminars, practica, and clinics. For these, everyone gets a "first choice request" to try and get the class they want. I used mine to get into the Legislation Clinic, because it only takes 12 people a semester, and is tough to get into.
Bottom line....another situation where stress boils over with a lot of people, but you just have to manage. Another situation where I have to rise above the anxiety and depression that are so easy to embrace right now.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
The Law and the War on Terror
Observations on two important cases in the news:
1) The government's case against 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui got much stronger today. Under oath, he actually admitted that he was planning to fly a fifth plane into the White House as part of the September 11th terror plot. No wonder his lawyers didn't want him to testify. They must have known he would literally hang himself with his own rope.
Maybe he just doesn't realize what he did today. Or maybe he did it deliberately, since he knew he would get the death penalty and be a martyr for the terrorists. Or maybe he just doesn't care anymore and wants to die. In any event, I think the jury will be more than happy to help him along with that. Essentially, his confession today makes the prosecution's case on him being part of a conspiracy, of him knowing about the 9/11 plot ahead of time. He actually admitted that he had prior knowledge, and that he would have taken part in it had he not been captured.
Two observations about the trial...I think the civil libertarians and all the people who insist that these terrorists, or terror suspects, be tried in civilian courts are trying to have it both ways when they try to block people like Moussaoui from testifying on their own behalf. His lawyers did not want him to take the stand, yet the same people who would leap to defend him would also want to prevent him from taking the stand. It just doesn't work that way. You cannot insist on granting terror suspects who are not U.S. citizens constitutional protections, and then manipulate those constitutional protections to get an acquittal. The judge in this case was right to allow Moussaoui to testify. If you have a civilian trial (by the way, I think they should have military tribunals, but that's a whole other post), you have to allow the defendant to take the stand in his or her own defense, if they wish to do so.
Second, I just hope that his testimony won't be called into question by what he said before (he had said before he was to take part in another attack after 9/11, among other things). The defense might try this, but I don't think the jury will buy it. For one thing, they already know this is a terrorist we're dealing with, and the evidence of his culpability, including today's confession, is overwhelming. Also, his actual guilt is not at issue here-the jury's role is to decide whether he gets life in prison without parole, or the death penalty. As long as they are willing to impose it, the weight of the evidence should support aggravating, rather than mitigating, circumstances.
2) On a related note, the Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld on Wednesday. This is the case involving Salim Ahmed Hamdan, who served as Osama bin Laden's personal driver and bodyguard. He was captured in Afghanistan four years ago, and has been held at Guantanamo Bay ever since. The Court has to confront a difficult issue here-does it affirm the D.C. Circuit's ruling that President Bush does not have the authority to create special military commissions for Guantanamo detainees, or does it reverse, presumably granting them access to civilian courts?
Here is the story on Fox News, which is my source for the information on this case: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,189268,00.html
Even if the Court reverses the D.C. Circuit, in order for Hamdan to have access to civilian courts to review his habeas petition, the Court would also have to rule that the Detainee Treatment Act, passed by Congress in December 2004, does not apply to petitions filed before the law came into effect. Herein lies the problem-there is no general consensus on where the law applies. Hamdan's side is going to argue for no retroactivity, and that petitions filed before the date are still to be considered. The government will have to lay out the case for retroactivity, under which case a military tribunal would handle Hamdan's case, not the federal courts.
The stakes here cannot be overstated. If the Court sides with the Bush administration, it will uphold the use of military tribunals for the suspects already at Guantanamo, and will be a strong precedent for using tribunals for any suspects that are captured in the future. This would allow the administration to conduct the war on terror with much more secrecy, as most anything that takes place in federal courts is public record. This is absolutely essential when dealing with individuals who would not hesitate to use chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons against our cities if given the chance.
But if the Court sides with Hamdan, it will open the courts up to a wave of habeas petitions from the detainees currently in military custody. It will make the war on terror exponentially more difficult for our military and intelligence services. Every al-Qaeda lowlife that is captured on foreign soil will start demanding a lawyer, demanding rights that belong to American citizens, and generally make it much harder for the government to gather intelligence that might lead to the capture of more of the enemy, or even stop a terrorist attack and save American lives.
The Court must not give our enemies this kind of power, to use our democratic system for their military and propaganda purposes. If the justices grant terrorists access to the federal courts, they will be acting in direct contradiction to the public policy of every conflict fought in the history of this country. There is a reason for this-it will be a Pandora's box of litigation, overly zealous civil libertarians, and paperwork our system was never meant to accomodate in a time of war and national peril.
I will try to elaborate more on my position on this in a future post, possibly when the ruling is handed down this summer. My prediction is a 4-4 tie, with the votes lining up along ideological lines (Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy to affirm, and Ginsburg, Souter, Stevens, and Breyer to reverse, with Roberts having to recuse himself since he participated in the D.C. Circuit's decision). A tie would affirm the D.C. Circuit, but could call into question the ruling's precedential value. Because of this, I don't think Hamdan is going to be the last word on the issue.
1) The government's case against 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui got much stronger today. Under oath, he actually admitted that he was planning to fly a fifth plane into the White House as part of the September 11th terror plot. No wonder his lawyers didn't want him to testify. They must have known he would literally hang himself with his own rope.
Maybe he just doesn't realize what he did today. Or maybe he did it deliberately, since he knew he would get the death penalty and be a martyr for the terrorists. Or maybe he just doesn't care anymore and wants to die. In any event, I think the jury will be more than happy to help him along with that. Essentially, his confession today makes the prosecution's case on him being part of a conspiracy, of him knowing about the 9/11 plot ahead of time. He actually admitted that he had prior knowledge, and that he would have taken part in it had he not been captured.
Two observations about the trial...I think the civil libertarians and all the people who insist that these terrorists, or terror suspects, be tried in civilian courts are trying to have it both ways when they try to block people like Moussaoui from testifying on their own behalf. His lawyers did not want him to take the stand, yet the same people who would leap to defend him would also want to prevent him from taking the stand. It just doesn't work that way. You cannot insist on granting terror suspects who are not U.S. citizens constitutional protections, and then manipulate those constitutional protections to get an acquittal. The judge in this case was right to allow Moussaoui to testify. If you have a civilian trial (by the way, I think they should have military tribunals, but that's a whole other post), you have to allow the defendant to take the stand in his or her own defense, if they wish to do so.
Second, I just hope that his testimony won't be called into question by what he said before (he had said before he was to take part in another attack after 9/11, among other things). The defense might try this, but I don't think the jury will buy it. For one thing, they already know this is a terrorist we're dealing with, and the evidence of his culpability, including today's confession, is overwhelming. Also, his actual guilt is not at issue here-the jury's role is to decide whether he gets life in prison without parole, or the death penalty. As long as they are willing to impose it, the weight of the evidence should support aggravating, rather than mitigating, circumstances.
2) On a related note, the Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld on Wednesday. This is the case involving Salim Ahmed Hamdan, who served as Osama bin Laden's personal driver and bodyguard. He was captured in Afghanistan four years ago, and has been held at Guantanamo Bay ever since. The Court has to confront a difficult issue here-does it affirm the D.C. Circuit's ruling that President Bush does not have the authority to create special military commissions for Guantanamo detainees, or does it reverse, presumably granting them access to civilian courts?
Here is the story on Fox News, which is my source for the information on this case: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,189268,00.html
Even if the Court reverses the D.C. Circuit, in order for Hamdan to have access to civilian courts to review his habeas petition, the Court would also have to rule that the Detainee Treatment Act, passed by Congress in December 2004, does not apply to petitions filed before the law came into effect. Herein lies the problem-there is no general consensus on where the law applies. Hamdan's side is going to argue for no retroactivity, and that petitions filed before the date are still to be considered. The government will have to lay out the case for retroactivity, under which case a military tribunal would handle Hamdan's case, not the federal courts.
The stakes here cannot be overstated. If the Court sides with the Bush administration, it will uphold the use of military tribunals for the suspects already at Guantanamo, and will be a strong precedent for using tribunals for any suspects that are captured in the future. This would allow the administration to conduct the war on terror with much more secrecy, as most anything that takes place in federal courts is public record. This is absolutely essential when dealing with individuals who would not hesitate to use chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons against our cities if given the chance.
But if the Court sides with Hamdan, it will open the courts up to a wave of habeas petitions from the detainees currently in military custody. It will make the war on terror exponentially more difficult for our military and intelligence services. Every al-Qaeda lowlife that is captured on foreign soil will start demanding a lawyer, demanding rights that belong to American citizens, and generally make it much harder for the government to gather intelligence that might lead to the capture of more of the enemy, or even stop a terrorist attack and save American lives.
The Court must not give our enemies this kind of power, to use our democratic system for their military and propaganda purposes. If the justices grant terrorists access to the federal courts, they will be acting in direct contradiction to the public policy of every conflict fought in the history of this country. There is a reason for this-it will be a Pandora's box of litigation, overly zealous civil libertarians, and paperwork our system was never meant to accomodate in a time of war and national peril.
I will try to elaborate more on my position on this in a future post, possibly when the ruling is handed down this summer. My prediction is a 4-4 tie, with the votes lining up along ideological lines (Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy to affirm, and Ginsburg, Souter, Stevens, and Breyer to reverse, with Roberts having to recuse himself since he participated in the D.C. Circuit's decision). A tie would affirm the D.C. Circuit, but could call into question the ruling's precedential value. Because of this, I don't think Hamdan is going to be the last word on the issue.
Friday, March 24, 2006
Reading, pt. 2
Yesterday, I finished the second of two books I have read on my own this semester.
This is compared to 6-8 I would have had time to read during my undergraduate years. One of those expressions people like to repeat is that "the law is a jealous mistress". I definitely understand now what those people were talking about, because my free time to devote to reading and personal enrichment has been about a third of what it used to be. If you are in undergrad and reading this, and thinking about law school, be prepared to work your tail off, because that's what you'll be doing in law school, and in your career as well.
But getting back to reading:
1) The first book I read this semester was Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared Diamond. He is a professor at UCLA, officially teaching geology, but has a broad range of knowledge in ornithology and environmental history, among other things. The basic premise of his book was that some societies in the past failed, and others succeeded, because of environmental factors. Some of these factors were induced by the population, and some occurred naturally, but different societies responded either successfully or unsuccessfully, thus "choosing" to fail or succeed.
The book is basically structured as a case study of past and present societies, such as the Greenland Norse and Easter Islanders (past), and China and Australia (present). Before each case study, Diamond included a chapter that listed the factors he would consider for each; these were things such as cultural traditions, the way the society made decisions (passed down from chiefs or decided by individuals), and the amount of contact with other cultures or societies, such as through trade. Then for each case study, he ran through the factors to determine what caused the society to collapse, or succeed and survive to the present day. The Greenland Norse and Easter Islanders died out because they depleted their natural resources and lived in almost total isolation from other societies; Tokugawa Japan succeeded because the shoguns regulated deforestation several hundred years ago, and preserved the country's environment.
The last part of the book talked about environmental conditions today-how companies are adopting new, more environmentally-friendly policies, for example, or factors that will either preserve the environment or destroy it.
When I first got into the book and found out it was all about environmental history, my first impression was that it would be another Silent Spring-type book written by another alarmist professor, talking about the proverbial sky was falling unless we began living like cave people and gave up all luxuries or vestiges of modern life. But Diamond's approach was actually pretty reasonable, and I thought he made some good points. One was that it is actually in many corporations' best interests to adopt environmentally sound policies, since it helps with securing contracts in developed and developing countries. Another was that societies have to have the courage and foresight to adapt their behavior to environmental realities, instead of holding on to their cultural traditions at any cost. For example, one Pacific island thrived after the islanders killed their pigs, which were a status symbol even though they harmed the environment, yet the Greenland Norse held on to cows until the very end, which factored into their collapse by starvation in the 13th and 14th centuries.
Overall....a good read, although it took me a long time to read (about 2 months) because of the dense material, and since I only spent about 10-15 minutes a day on it. I would recommend it if you want to learn more about how environmental conditions affect the course of history. It is also a good companion to one of Diamond's other books, Guns, Germs, and Steel.
2) The other book was 1776 by David McCullough, the Pulitzer-Prize winning historian (I will get around to reading his book John Adams soon). 1776 talks about this pivotal year of the Revolutionary War from the British and American perspectives, starting with the political tumult in England over the war, and covering the siege of Boston, the battle for New York, and finishing with Washington's attack on Trenton and crossing of the Delaware.
Instead of having a specific thesis like Diamond, McCullough's book takes the form of a narrative, focusing on the generals (Washington, Henry Knox, and Nathanael Greene for the Americans and William Howe, Henry Clinton, and Charles Cornwallis for the British) and the "regular people" in both armies. It was a spectacular read and I thought it was very entertaining-I read this one in three days over spring break.
I actually had a few thoughts and reflections on the book, that might apply to the Christian experience, law school, or life in general:
A) If there was ever a lesson on confidence you could get from the history books, look to George Washington. Whatever his other failings were, a lack of leadership was definitely not one of them. Washington was the American Revolution. At one point (p. 43), McCullough quotes the patriot Benjamin Rush as saying that he "has so much martial dignity in his deportment that you would distinguish him to be a general and a soldier from among 10,000 people."
Not that I come from a military background, but this is the kind of confidence I need to project that I lack too many times. Why? Who knows. All I know is that I need to start acting more confident, then maybe I will be more confident. One of the book's recurring themes was that Washington was miserable and down in his spirits about the war, from all the hardships he faced as commander, but he always kept his chin up and inspired respect when the Glorious Cause was in its darkest days. If you need to exude confidence, there is no better example than that.
B) As a Christian, reading 1776, I was impressed by how God used people like Henry Knox and Nathanael Greene to lead the American army, one of the most important causes in all of human history. Neither was born into wealth or an aristocracy. Knox was an overweight bookseller before the war, who became a highly decorated artillery commander. Greene had a limp from a previous accident, and was not even considered fit to drill with a militia company, yet he ended up being Washington's right-hand man and commanding Continental troops in the South later in the war.
The amazing thing is, the world had written these guys off. Who were they next to William Howe and Lord Cornwallis, rich noblemen who were some of the best military minds in the world? But we all know how the story ends. I believe it was God's hand that gave America its independence, and He used these two men, and so many others, so that we could be free today. This is a lesson too-no matter what your circumstances, no matter what you did before, just put your trust in the Lord and He will make a way. "With God, all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26 KJV).
C) No way to prove this, but there were so many miraculous twists and turns in the story of the American Revolution, that I truly believe God had a hand in it all. Just one example: when Washington's army was surrounded by the British on the edge of Long Island in New York, they were severely outnumbered and had to escape. On land, they were surrounded by the British army, and they had their backs to the East River, where the British fleet could come at any time and trap the army, thus the war would be over and the British would have won. Yet amazingly, the wind blew out of the northeast and kept the British fleet at bay, and shifted to blowing out of the southwest just long enough, and at the exact time, to allow the American army to escape across the river. Not only that, but when not all of the troops got across before dawn, a thick fog settled over the area, preventing an all-out British attack. Coincidence? I don't think it was.
I know this has been a long post, but I will be reading more books in the coming weeks, and posting on them again. Collapse and 1776 were both great, and I hope my schedule allows me to read more again soon.
This is compared to 6-8 I would have had time to read during my undergraduate years. One of those expressions people like to repeat is that "the law is a jealous mistress". I definitely understand now what those people were talking about, because my free time to devote to reading and personal enrichment has been about a third of what it used to be. If you are in undergrad and reading this, and thinking about law school, be prepared to work your tail off, because that's what you'll be doing in law school, and in your career as well.
But getting back to reading:
1) The first book I read this semester was Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared Diamond. He is a professor at UCLA, officially teaching geology, but has a broad range of knowledge in ornithology and environmental history, among other things. The basic premise of his book was that some societies in the past failed, and others succeeded, because of environmental factors. Some of these factors were induced by the population, and some occurred naturally, but different societies responded either successfully or unsuccessfully, thus "choosing" to fail or succeed.
The book is basically structured as a case study of past and present societies, such as the Greenland Norse and Easter Islanders (past), and China and Australia (present). Before each case study, Diamond included a chapter that listed the factors he would consider for each; these were things such as cultural traditions, the way the society made decisions (passed down from chiefs or decided by individuals), and the amount of contact with other cultures or societies, such as through trade. Then for each case study, he ran through the factors to determine what caused the society to collapse, or succeed and survive to the present day. The Greenland Norse and Easter Islanders died out because they depleted their natural resources and lived in almost total isolation from other societies; Tokugawa Japan succeeded because the shoguns regulated deforestation several hundred years ago, and preserved the country's environment.
The last part of the book talked about environmental conditions today-how companies are adopting new, more environmentally-friendly policies, for example, or factors that will either preserve the environment or destroy it.
When I first got into the book and found out it was all about environmental history, my first impression was that it would be another Silent Spring-type book written by another alarmist professor, talking about the proverbial sky was falling unless we began living like cave people and gave up all luxuries or vestiges of modern life. But Diamond's approach was actually pretty reasonable, and I thought he made some good points. One was that it is actually in many corporations' best interests to adopt environmentally sound policies, since it helps with securing contracts in developed and developing countries. Another was that societies have to have the courage and foresight to adapt their behavior to environmental realities, instead of holding on to their cultural traditions at any cost. For example, one Pacific island thrived after the islanders killed their pigs, which were a status symbol even though they harmed the environment, yet the Greenland Norse held on to cows until the very end, which factored into their collapse by starvation in the 13th and 14th centuries.
Overall....a good read, although it took me a long time to read (about 2 months) because of the dense material, and since I only spent about 10-15 minutes a day on it. I would recommend it if you want to learn more about how environmental conditions affect the course of history. It is also a good companion to one of Diamond's other books, Guns, Germs, and Steel.
2) The other book was 1776 by David McCullough, the Pulitzer-Prize winning historian (I will get around to reading his book John Adams soon). 1776 talks about this pivotal year of the Revolutionary War from the British and American perspectives, starting with the political tumult in England over the war, and covering the siege of Boston, the battle for New York, and finishing with Washington's attack on Trenton and crossing of the Delaware.
Instead of having a specific thesis like Diamond, McCullough's book takes the form of a narrative, focusing on the generals (Washington, Henry Knox, and Nathanael Greene for the Americans and William Howe, Henry Clinton, and Charles Cornwallis for the British) and the "regular people" in both armies. It was a spectacular read and I thought it was very entertaining-I read this one in three days over spring break.
I actually had a few thoughts and reflections on the book, that might apply to the Christian experience, law school, or life in general:
A) If there was ever a lesson on confidence you could get from the history books, look to George Washington. Whatever his other failings were, a lack of leadership was definitely not one of them. Washington was the American Revolution. At one point (p. 43), McCullough quotes the patriot Benjamin Rush as saying that he "has so much martial dignity in his deportment that you would distinguish him to be a general and a soldier from among 10,000 people."
Not that I come from a military background, but this is the kind of confidence I need to project that I lack too many times. Why? Who knows. All I know is that I need to start acting more confident, then maybe I will be more confident. One of the book's recurring themes was that Washington was miserable and down in his spirits about the war, from all the hardships he faced as commander, but he always kept his chin up and inspired respect when the Glorious Cause was in its darkest days. If you need to exude confidence, there is no better example than that.
B) As a Christian, reading 1776, I was impressed by how God used people like Henry Knox and Nathanael Greene to lead the American army, one of the most important causes in all of human history. Neither was born into wealth or an aristocracy. Knox was an overweight bookseller before the war, who became a highly decorated artillery commander. Greene had a limp from a previous accident, and was not even considered fit to drill with a militia company, yet he ended up being Washington's right-hand man and commanding Continental troops in the South later in the war.
The amazing thing is, the world had written these guys off. Who were they next to William Howe and Lord Cornwallis, rich noblemen who were some of the best military minds in the world? But we all know how the story ends. I believe it was God's hand that gave America its independence, and He used these two men, and so many others, so that we could be free today. This is a lesson too-no matter what your circumstances, no matter what you did before, just put your trust in the Lord and He will make a way. "With God, all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26 KJV).
C) No way to prove this, but there were so many miraculous twists and turns in the story of the American Revolution, that I truly believe God had a hand in it all. Just one example: when Washington's army was surrounded by the British on the edge of Long Island in New York, they were severely outnumbered and had to escape. On land, they were surrounded by the British army, and they had their backs to the East River, where the British fleet could come at any time and trap the army, thus the war would be over and the British would have won. Yet amazingly, the wind blew out of the northeast and kept the British fleet at bay, and shifted to blowing out of the southwest just long enough, and at the exact time, to allow the American army to escape across the river. Not only that, but when not all of the troops got across before dawn, a thick fog settled over the area, preventing an all-out British attack. Coincidence? I don't think it was.
I know this has been a long post, but I will be reading more books in the coming weeks, and posting on them again. Collapse and 1776 were both great, and I hope my schedule allows me to read more again soon.
Monday, March 20, 2006
Cincinnati, Ohio
Before I talk about the reason behind the title, I owe anyone reading this an apology for taking down a post recently. It was about the Blackstone Legal Fellowship, in which I will be participating this summer. It was partly because I had been told that people were ridiculing what I had to say, and partly because I didn't want to seem like I was boasting. This will be the last time that anything is deleted from here because of rumors or hearsay. When you have a blog, you have to be honest with yourself.
The Blackstone Fellowship is offered through the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal defense organization based in Scottsdale, Arizona. It consists of three phases. During Phase I, I will be heading out to Arizona during the latter part of June for education and training, where we will learn about the Judeo-Christian foundations of our legal system. For Phase II, I will be working for an attorney in Cincinnati who works with the ADF on constitutional issues. Finally, for Phase III, I will be going back to Arizona for a week, for further training and education. The program is designed to give Christian law students a solid grounding in God's Truth as it applies to the intellectual foundations and practice of law, and to network with other students and legal professionals as we gain practical experience.
A side note to any entering or current law students-this is a great opportunity if you are interested in serving God through the practice of law. A good place to start is with your school's chapter of the Christian Legal Society. It is a huge blessing to have other Christians with whom I can share the law school experience. And Blackstone interns work all over the country, with various attorneys, policy organizations, etc., so there are lots of opportunities to get involved.
I am really excited about the opportunities coming up this summer, and I am eager to get started with the work that lies ahead. I am not quite sure yet what exactly I will be working on, but one of the lessons I have learned this first year of law school is that the expectancy is sometimes the best part of the journey. One of my spiritual weaknesses has always been that I am overly analytical and try too hard to do everything by the book, instead of by God's book.
As hard as it is to have unanswered questions, as difficult as it is to walk by faith, I am going to reach out more often, because God's will for my life is infinitely beyond anything I could bring to bear or conceive.
"Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, / Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen." (Ephesians 3:20-21 KJV).
The Blackstone Fellowship is offered through the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal defense organization based in Scottsdale, Arizona. It consists of three phases. During Phase I, I will be heading out to Arizona during the latter part of June for education and training, where we will learn about the Judeo-Christian foundations of our legal system. For Phase II, I will be working for an attorney in Cincinnati who works with the ADF on constitutional issues. Finally, for Phase III, I will be going back to Arizona for a week, for further training and education. The program is designed to give Christian law students a solid grounding in God's Truth as it applies to the intellectual foundations and practice of law, and to network with other students and legal professionals as we gain practical experience.
A side note to any entering or current law students-this is a great opportunity if you are interested in serving God through the practice of law. A good place to start is with your school's chapter of the Christian Legal Society. It is a huge blessing to have other Christians with whom I can share the law school experience. And Blackstone interns work all over the country, with various attorneys, policy organizations, etc., so there are lots of opportunities to get involved.
I am really excited about the opportunities coming up this summer, and I am eager to get started with the work that lies ahead. I am not quite sure yet what exactly I will be working on, but one of the lessons I have learned this first year of law school is that the expectancy is sometimes the best part of the journey. One of my spiritual weaknesses has always been that I am overly analytical and try too hard to do everything by the book, instead of by God's book.
As hard as it is to have unanswered questions, as difficult as it is to walk by faith, I am going to reach out more often, because God's will for my life is infinitely beyond anything I could bring to bear or conceive.
"Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, / Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen." (Ephesians 3:20-21 KJV).
Sunday, March 12, 2006
On Pleasing God
Tonight is one of those times where I am overdue for some self-reflection. Once in a while, I need some time to step back and look at where I am going as a Christian, and how I am fulfilling my life's purpose of glorifying God.
Right now, this is timely because in five days, I am sitting down to take the second Contracts exam. It is the major part of the Contracts grade for the year, and is going to make a big difference as far as my overall first-year success, with getting onto a journal, class rank, etc. But before I sit for the exam, I need to address something that is much more pressing, that is on my heart as I write this. I need to figure out who I am trying to please by my life's actions.
I came to law school for one reason-to serve God by becoming a lawyer. Yet at the same time, I struggle with keeping my focus on that, and on Him, instead of the day-to-day worries over grades, what I am going to do next summer, and all of the things that consume us from the time we get up in the morning until we go to bed at night. This daily grind is a major factor in the "culture shock" I have received since I moved down here 7 1/2 months ago. I am not used to not being at the very top when it comes to academic achievement, yet this idea that I would always be the best, always be number one, is now gone forever. I have just now begun to realize that maybe, just maybe, coming here for law school was God's plan all along, to jar me out of my spiritual complacency by taking away what I had hidden behind for all those years.
This was the wound that had to be delivered.
I've just now begun to realize that a lot of my problems and shortcomings come from what amounts to disobeying God by trying to please people. Instead of focusing on God's will for my life, and what the Lord says I should be doing, I focus on what the world says I should be doing. The world says I should be examining myself as a human being according to my first semester's grades and the prism of achievement. The world says I should pursue women until I find someone who will complete me and validate me as a man. And this is what has been making me miserable all this time, when I should be joyful, expecting God's favor, and eager for the blessings He is bringing to bear in my life. For crying out loud, if you had told me I would get into law school at Ohio State, live on my own in Columbus, and receive the Blackstone Fellowship at this time 18 months ago, I would have jumped for joy. But I have let some abstract standard define what will make me happy and fulfilled, instead of really listening to myself.
That ends right now.
I want to add that I am not blaming anyone but myself for this; it is entirely self-inflicted. No one in the law school is forcing me to worry about whether I will get the kind of job I think I "should" have when I graduate; they are good and dedicated people helping us through a difficult three years. None of the people I interact with socially are forcing me to drag myself through the mud every time I start to think that I just might deserve something better than suppressing my self-confidence; they can listen and comfort, but not think for me.
The problem lies within, not without, and unless I open the door to something better, God will not come in. He gives me the free will to be as happy or as miserable as I choose. But now that I recognize what is going on, I can pray for God's help, and work to change. I wrote down what came to mind on this, and here it is, unchanged:
"Just remember, it's not your grades or your accomplishments that make you 'special'-it's the fact that God loves you, and what He has done for you, to save you. All these years, you spent thinking that it was what you did that made you stand out from everybody else-it wasn't. Those things are good and can be used to glorify God, but they are not what makes you the man you are. Who you really are comes from somewhere inside. It comes from your heart, and a soul and spirit that have been cleansed by what Jesus went through for you 2,000 years ago.
"Don't let how you do on this exam, or anything else, put you into a box or a percentile. You are a Christian. Be excellent, do your best, but keep your eyes on Him, and never lose focus of why you are here. That goes for life, not just law school."
Lord, let me never lose sight of You as my true focus. Let what I do as a law student be a prayer to You, as the best I have to offer.
Right now, this is timely because in five days, I am sitting down to take the second Contracts exam. It is the major part of the Contracts grade for the year, and is going to make a big difference as far as my overall first-year success, with getting onto a journal, class rank, etc. But before I sit for the exam, I need to address something that is much more pressing, that is on my heart as I write this. I need to figure out who I am trying to please by my life's actions.
I came to law school for one reason-to serve God by becoming a lawyer. Yet at the same time, I struggle with keeping my focus on that, and on Him, instead of the day-to-day worries over grades, what I am going to do next summer, and all of the things that consume us from the time we get up in the morning until we go to bed at night. This daily grind is a major factor in the "culture shock" I have received since I moved down here 7 1/2 months ago. I am not used to not being at the very top when it comes to academic achievement, yet this idea that I would always be the best, always be number one, is now gone forever. I have just now begun to realize that maybe, just maybe, coming here for law school was God's plan all along, to jar me out of my spiritual complacency by taking away what I had hidden behind for all those years.
This was the wound that had to be delivered.
I've just now begun to realize that a lot of my problems and shortcomings come from what amounts to disobeying God by trying to please people. Instead of focusing on God's will for my life, and what the Lord says I should be doing, I focus on what the world says I should be doing. The world says I should be examining myself as a human being according to my first semester's grades and the prism of achievement. The world says I should pursue women until I find someone who will complete me and validate me as a man. And this is what has been making me miserable all this time, when I should be joyful, expecting God's favor, and eager for the blessings He is bringing to bear in my life. For crying out loud, if you had told me I would get into law school at Ohio State, live on my own in Columbus, and receive the Blackstone Fellowship at this time 18 months ago, I would have jumped for joy. But I have let some abstract standard define what will make me happy and fulfilled, instead of really listening to myself.
That ends right now.
I want to add that I am not blaming anyone but myself for this; it is entirely self-inflicted. No one in the law school is forcing me to worry about whether I will get the kind of job I think I "should" have when I graduate; they are good and dedicated people helping us through a difficult three years. None of the people I interact with socially are forcing me to drag myself through the mud every time I start to think that I just might deserve something better than suppressing my self-confidence; they can listen and comfort, but not think for me.
The problem lies within, not without, and unless I open the door to something better, God will not come in. He gives me the free will to be as happy or as miserable as I choose. But now that I recognize what is going on, I can pray for God's help, and work to change. I wrote down what came to mind on this, and here it is, unchanged:
"Just remember, it's not your grades or your accomplishments that make you 'special'-it's the fact that God loves you, and what He has done for you, to save you. All these years, you spent thinking that it was what you did that made you stand out from everybody else-it wasn't. Those things are good and can be used to glorify God, but they are not what makes you the man you are. Who you really are comes from somewhere inside. It comes from your heart, and a soul and spirit that have been cleansed by what Jesus went through for you 2,000 years ago.
"Don't let how you do on this exam, or anything else, put you into a box or a percentile. You are a Christian. Be excellent, do your best, but keep your eyes on Him, and never lose focus of why you are here. That goes for life, not just law school."
Lord, let me never lose sight of You as my true focus. Let what I do as a law student be a prayer to You, as the best I have to offer.
Saturday, March 11, 2006
Due Diligence
I have decided to make more posts on this blog, regardless of the amount of sleep lost, and to try and make them about the Christian law student experience as much as I can.
I made this decision in response to a conversation with a friend this past week. It had to do with professional conduct, and after thinking about what he said, I realize that there are probably ways in which I can enrich my education and learn more for when I am a lawyer, which is in the not-too-distant future. I think one of the ways I can feel better about the progress I have made so far in law school is to update my blog more often, and make it relevant to my life as a law student. I was looking at random law student blogs listed on a law students' website (4LawSchool.com, it has some good information) and I realized that the quality of my own pales in comparison to many of the others, some of which are updated every day.
Yet at the same time, I want this blog to reflect my own experiences, opinions, etc., not those of the "typical" law student. I want it to be more like the kinds of blogs my classmates have, which don't fall into a pattern of just describing the daily grind. Yes, I will post about court decisions, but I would like for this to be a record of this time in my life, so that I will remember 2005-2006, my first year of law school, with all its ups and downs, and good and bad experiences. So this means that I'm not going to rule anything out as a post topic, whether it be Ohio State football or oil prices. Whatever it is that is on my mind, will be on here.
I made this decision in response to a conversation with a friend this past week. It had to do with professional conduct, and after thinking about what he said, I realize that there are probably ways in which I can enrich my education and learn more for when I am a lawyer, which is in the not-too-distant future. I think one of the ways I can feel better about the progress I have made so far in law school is to update my blog more often, and make it relevant to my life as a law student. I was looking at random law student blogs listed on a law students' website (4LawSchool.com, it has some good information) and I realized that the quality of my own pales in comparison to many of the others, some of which are updated every day.
Yet at the same time, I want this blog to reflect my own experiences, opinions, etc., not those of the "typical" law student. I want it to be more like the kinds of blogs my classmates have, which don't fall into a pattern of just describing the daily grind. Yes, I will post about court decisions, but I would like for this to be a record of this time in my life, so that I will remember 2005-2006, my first year of law school, with all its ups and downs, and good and bad experiences. So this means that I'm not going to rule anything out as a post topic, whether it be Ohio State football or oil prices. Whatever it is that is on my mind, will be on here.
Friday, March 03, 2006
Barrister's Ball
It's been almost a week now, but the Barrister's Ball (AKA Moritz Prom) was great. Last Saturday, we law students gathered at a really nice ballroom at Confluence Park, down by the arena district, and ate, danced, and had a really good time. One of the best things is that I got some pictures out of the whole thing, which are now on the Facebook. I used one to update that really old picture of me, which was from 2001.
Everything went really well that night. The food was good (I had a steak and mashed potatoes) although it was late getting to us, the ballroom was beautifully decorated, and the window had a spectacular view of the Columbus skyline (it's even better when Nationwide's headquarters has the blue light shining on it). I always like getting dressed up, but when it's going toward having fun, all the better. I think everyone that went had a good time, and I hope we get to hang out again soon.
Reading, pt. 1
For the past six weeks or so, I've been reading a book called "Collapse" by Jared Diamond. Basically, it talks about a half dozen or so classical societies, including the Greenland Norse, Maya, and inhabitants of Polynesia-and how their societies folded due to environmental factors. I'll talk about it if I ever decide to I finish it. It's taking a long time, because the only time I get to read is for 10-15 minutes when I go to bed.
Not the most interesting book for me. Even though it sort of deals with history, I'm more into military/political/economic history than environmental. The next book I read is going to be something more along the lines of the Civil War, Founding Fathers, etc.
Not the most interesting book for me. Even though it sort of deals with history, I'm more into military/political/economic history than environmental. The next book I read is going to be something more along the lines of the Civil War, Founding Fathers, etc.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
The Good, The Bad, and Justice Scalia
Observations on the Supreme Court:
1) Tonight I had a chance to catch part of a speech on C-SPAN. Normally, I avoid this channel like it's my job, but this was a speech by Supreme Court Justice Scalia, and it was really entertaining. I was really shocked by two things-Scalia's constant impatience with the crowd (interrupting, refusing to answer questions, etc.) and the rudeness of so many of the people who came to hear him speak. One student made some lame joke about Scalia going duck hunting with Vice President Cheney; another held on to the mic for several minutes, rambling about nothing before it was ripped away from him.
I just have two questions for anyone who acts like a 2-year-old at these events: how did you get invited, and how were you smart enough, and so uncouth, as to get into law school in the first place? I have to admit that it's funny to watch a kid who looks like Napoleon Dynamite get manhandled and thrown out into the hallway, but to treat any guest like that, particularly a Supreme Court justice, is idiotic and way out of line. Sometimes it worries me to think that these people are going to be my colleagues before long.
By the way....I'm a conservative and I tend to agree more with Scalia's point of view on a lot of issues, but I do think that he tends to invite confrontation with his rhetoric. Calling people who believe in a living Constitution "idiots" recently, even at a Federalist Society meeting, almost seems to egg these losers on.
2) The Court has decided to take up partial birth abortion again, in Gonzales v. Carhart. Just as a background, the Court ruled on partial birth abortion back in 2000, in Stenberg v. Carhart, striking down a similar ban for not providing an exception for the mother's health. There had been a ban on partial-birth abortion, and President Bush signed a national ban into law in 2003, but trial judges in New York, Nebraska, and California ruled it unconstitutional. Now the Court is ready to hear the case again, this time with Roberts and Alito in for Rehnquist and O'Connor.
I believe the Court is going to uphold the ban as constitutional. Justice O'Connor was the swing vote last time, and Justice Alito, her successor, is probably not going to rule the same way, if his opinion in Casey v. Planned Parenthood was any indication. Roberts is still a relative unknown, but I think his vote will be an even match for Rehnquist. If everyone else keeps the same vote, this ban is going to stick around in a 5-4 ruling.
My feeling is that pro-choicers are going to take the loss on this one. And I couldn't be more glad to get rid of partial-birth abortion. It's cruel, barbaric, and unnecessary, and there is something seriously wrong with our values when we allow late-term infanticide, but a rapist-killer in California doesn't get executed because he might feel as much pain as a booster shot.
3) Maybe I'm wrong, but is partial-birth abortion not the only issue where a "red herring" comes into the decision-making processes of these judges? Is it a red herring, or does the health of the mother really matter? And I don't mean that judges don't apply the law and legal reasoning, just that sometimes I think all this about "an exception for the mother's health" or "saving the mother's life" just ends up being a proxy for the real cultural divide. And I don't think anyone, not even the Supreme Court, can bring those two sides together right now.
1) Tonight I had a chance to catch part of a speech on C-SPAN. Normally, I avoid this channel like it's my job, but this was a speech by Supreme Court Justice Scalia, and it was really entertaining. I was really shocked by two things-Scalia's constant impatience with the crowd (interrupting, refusing to answer questions, etc.) and the rudeness of so many of the people who came to hear him speak. One student made some lame joke about Scalia going duck hunting with Vice President Cheney; another held on to the mic for several minutes, rambling about nothing before it was ripped away from him.
I just have two questions for anyone who acts like a 2-year-old at these events: how did you get invited, and how were you smart enough, and so uncouth, as to get into law school in the first place? I have to admit that it's funny to watch a kid who looks like Napoleon Dynamite get manhandled and thrown out into the hallway, but to treat any guest like that, particularly a Supreme Court justice, is idiotic and way out of line. Sometimes it worries me to think that these people are going to be my colleagues before long.
By the way....I'm a conservative and I tend to agree more with Scalia's point of view on a lot of issues, but I do think that he tends to invite confrontation with his rhetoric. Calling people who believe in a living Constitution "idiots" recently, even at a Federalist Society meeting, almost seems to egg these losers on.
2) The Court has decided to take up partial birth abortion again, in Gonzales v. Carhart. Just as a background, the Court ruled on partial birth abortion back in 2000, in Stenberg v. Carhart, striking down a similar ban for not providing an exception for the mother's health. There had been a ban on partial-birth abortion, and President Bush signed a national ban into law in 2003, but trial judges in New York, Nebraska, and California ruled it unconstitutional. Now the Court is ready to hear the case again, this time with Roberts and Alito in for Rehnquist and O'Connor.
I believe the Court is going to uphold the ban as constitutional. Justice O'Connor was the swing vote last time, and Justice Alito, her successor, is probably not going to rule the same way, if his opinion in Casey v. Planned Parenthood was any indication. Roberts is still a relative unknown, but I think his vote will be an even match for Rehnquist. If everyone else keeps the same vote, this ban is going to stick around in a 5-4 ruling.
My feeling is that pro-choicers are going to take the loss on this one. And I couldn't be more glad to get rid of partial-birth abortion. It's cruel, barbaric, and unnecessary, and there is something seriously wrong with our values when we allow late-term infanticide, but a rapist-killer in California doesn't get executed because he might feel as much pain as a booster shot.
3) Maybe I'm wrong, but is partial-birth abortion not the only issue where a "red herring" comes into the decision-making processes of these judges? Is it a red herring, or does the health of the mother really matter? And I don't mean that judges don't apply the law and legal reasoning, just that sometimes I think all this about "an exception for the mother's health" or "saving the mother's life" just ends up being a proxy for the real cultural divide. And I don't think anyone, not even the Supreme Court, can bring those two sides together right now.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Valentine's Day
Valentine's Day makes me sick. Or at least I used to think so.
When I was in elementary school, every year our school would have a Valentine's Day party. The kids would go buy their Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or My Little Pony valentines, write one for everybody in the class (and their teacher), and drop them in little paper bags on everyone's desk. And every year, my mom would go up to the school, pick up my valentine bag, and bring it home to me, because I was sick in bed. In five years of elementary school, this happened four times, plus again in junior high and high school.
The reason I thought it made me sick wasn't because I came down with something every February. Until this year, I thought the whole thing was just another exercise in conspicuous consumption. I thought everyone was struggling to keep up with the popular culture's pressure to spend money on dinner, flowers, jewelry, etc., or stay home and stew over not having a reason to. I would tell everyone who would listen about how Valentine's Day is an ancient Roman custom that has been hijacked by restaurant owners, card companies, and anyone else who wants to make a dollar at our expense.
But this kind of thinking misses the real point. Yes, the popular culture version of it is all red and pink, alcohol and fancy dinners, and diamond bracelets. But instead of focusing on how that conception is wrong, we need to look at what we should do instead.
If we are married, engaged, dating, etc., it should be a time to examine our relationship with the other person-whether we are showing them every day, not just one day, how important they are to us, and how we value them as a friend and a companion. Christians, we should all take the time to look at whether that relationship is glorifying God, and if we are putting Him at the center. He is the Author of every love story.
I'm single, but I'm not going to let Valentine's Day go by without taking a look at myself, and the kind of man God is creating to be a companion to my future wife. If it is His will that I be married one day, am I growing in the Lord, in holiness, so that I can provide what she needs from her husband? I don't bring this up to sound presumptuous, or get ahead of where I should be at this stage of my life, but I believe that just thinking about where I want to be later on will make me a better follower of God now, and a better husband and father when, and if, the time comes.
As individuals, whether Christian or not, we can always examine ourselves to see where our lives are headed, and if what we are doing now points us to that goal. And whether single, married, or otherwise, we can use Valentine's Day as a way to have fun and share a special day with others, but also to look at ourselves. And that's nothing to get sick over.
When I was in elementary school, every year our school would have a Valentine's Day party. The kids would go buy their Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or My Little Pony valentines, write one for everybody in the class (and their teacher), and drop them in little paper bags on everyone's desk. And every year, my mom would go up to the school, pick up my valentine bag, and bring it home to me, because I was sick in bed. In five years of elementary school, this happened four times, plus again in junior high and high school.
The reason I thought it made me sick wasn't because I came down with something every February. Until this year, I thought the whole thing was just another exercise in conspicuous consumption. I thought everyone was struggling to keep up with the popular culture's pressure to spend money on dinner, flowers, jewelry, etc., or stay home and stew over not having a reason to. I would tell everyone who would listen about how Valentine's Day is an ancient Roman custom that has been hijacked by restaurant owners, card companies, and anyone else who wants to make a dollar at our expense.
But this kind of thinking misses the real point. Yes, the popular culture version of it is all red and pink, alcohol and fancy dinners, and diamond bracelets. But instead of focusing on how that conception is wrong, we need to look at what we should do instead.
If we are married, engaged, dating, etc., it should be a time to examine our relationship with the other person-whether we are showing them every day, not just one day, how important they are to us, and how we value them as a friend and a companion. Christians, we should all take the time to look at whether that relationship is glorifying God, and if we are putting Him at the center. He is the Author of every love story.
I'm single, but I'm not going to let Valentine's Day go by without taking a look at myself, and the kind of man God is creating to be a companion to my future wife. If it is His will that I be married one day, am I growing in the Lord, in holiness, so that I can provide what she needs from her husband? I don't bring this up to sound presumptuous, or get ahead of where I should be at this stage of my life, but I believe that just thinking about where I want to be later on will make me a better follower of God now, and a better husband and father when, and if, the time comes.
As individuals, whether Christian or not, we can always examine ourselves to see where our lives are headed, and if what we are doing now points us to that goal. And whether single, married, or otherwise, we can use Valentine's Day as a way to have fun and share a special day with others, but also to look at ourselves. And that's nothing to get sick over.
Thursday, February 02, 2006
Motivation
It's February now, and I can't believe we're four weeks into this semester already. The way the schedule is set up at our school, we had exams in December, then we started class again the second week of January. I wasn't motivated then, and I don't feel motivated now.
I don't know what it is, but this semester has really felt like a drag. I know I said I was going to do things differently in 2006, but so far it feels a lot like 2005. The bottom line is, I just don't have a lot of motivation to do work. I got a lousy grade in one of my classes, and the exam is six weeks away, yet I only have 3 pages of the outline done (which will probably come to 30). I come back to my apartment from class at about 3:00, after our last class, and I sit on my rear end watching TV, playing video games, or doing anything but what I should be doing. It hurts to say this, but I have lost my mojo.
I don't know what I need to do, but I have to get a fire lit under me to work in law school. I do OK, but I need to be exceptional. What really hurts is that I know I am capable of great things if I can just overcome how overwhelmed I feel right now.
Today in class, one of our professors talked about a general principle of the legal profession (which probably applies to a lot of other professions too): the more time you put into being a law student, or being a lawyer, the more success you have. I understand that to be true, yet why do I handicap myself by not doing more? I should be 100% devoted to law school right now, yet I feel torn between spending time with family, recreation, time with God, and a host of other things. I know I am in law school for one reason, and one reason only, and that is to serve the Lord in some capacity. I just wish I knew how to light the fire, or to ask Him to help me get motivated, and I hope it will happen soon.
I don't know what it is, but this semester has really felt like a drag. I know I said I was going to do things differently in 2006, but so far it feels a lot like 2005. The bottom line is, I just don't have a lot of motivation to do work. I got a lousy grade in one of my classes, and the exam is six weeks away, yet I only have 3 pages of the outline done (which will probably come to 30). I come back to my apartment from class at about 3:00, after our last class, and I sit on my rear end watching TV, playing video games, or doing anything but what I should be doing. It hurts to say this, but I have lost my mojo.
I don't know what I need to do, but I have to get a fire lit under me to work in law school. I do OK, but I need to be exceptional. What really hurts is that I know I am capable of great things if I can just overcome how overwhelmed I feel right now.
Today in class, one of our professors talked about a general principle of the legal profession (which probably applies to a lot of other professions too): the more time you put into being a law student, or being a lawyer, the more success you have. I understand that to be true, yet why do I handicap myself by not doing more? I should be 100% devoted to law school right now, yet I feel torn between spending time with family, recreation, time with God, and a host of other things. I know I am in law school for one reason, and one reason only, and that is to serve the Lord in some capacity. I just wish I knew how to light the fire, or to ask Him to help me get motivated, and I hope it will happen soon.
Introduction
This is the first post on my blog. I just wanted to make an introductory post to tell a little bit about who I am. My name is Brian, and I am a law student at Ohio State University. I am 22 years old and as a born-again Christian, I am eager to become an attorney so that I can work as a litigator and, eventually, represent Christians and traditional values in the legal system.
Not a whole lot else to say right now. I will fill in the blanks as I make more posts.
Not a whole lot else to say right now. I will fill in the blanks as I make more posts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)