ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Appellate Law Blogs -> Appellate Law and Practice

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Appellate Law

: Appellate Law and Practice

Kozinski presiding over ?obscenity? prosecution

By S. COTUS

ADVERTISEMENTS

As most of you know, the DOJ?s biggest problem is too much money and not enough places to put it.  Apparently, they store their budget in a large Rubbermaid tub filled with cash.  This used to be a good idea, but recently, the tub has begun to strain.  The only way to fix this problem is to spend that money on an obscenity (not child pornography) prosecution from the ?Obscenity Prosecution Task Force?  that somehow came into existence during the current administration and rarely does anything, because nobody can really figure out what "obscene" means unless kids are involved.

The head of the task force is Brent Ward.  He is obviously a political appointee.  His claim to fame goes like this:

While practicing law and serving on the board of Utah Citizens for Positive Community Values, Ward fought for a state law aimed at strip clubs that would have required dancers, as well as art class models and others, to wear at least a bikini. The Legislature never
passed it.

At least?  Hurumph!  I think they should wear two bikinis at a minum.  Or four monokinis. 

He also thinks this.  How about this for a positive community value?  Leave your neighbors alone unless they bother you or want to talk to you.

So, what does this have to do with appellate law?  What makes it interesting is that Judge Kozinski is sitting by designation.  The ?art? involved involves the usual crap.

Update:  I can't believe I missed this one:

Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, acknowledged in an interview with The Times that he had posted the materials, which included a photo of naked women on all fours painted to look like cows and a video of a half-dressed man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal. Some of the material was inappropriate, he conceded, although he defended other sexually explicit content as "funny."

And, of course, Stephen Gillers says he shoudl recuse himself.  Whatever.

Full post as published by Appellate Law and Practice on June 11, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.012 secs (new cache)