Great question. I wanted to write a book that would be a first draft of the history of the long epidemics for the year of covid and beyond but that would speak to an interested reader, not just a specialist in the field. There are lots of specialists in the field and i thought my valueadded might be to translate from specialists in the field to reader who are fascinate by the blizzard of legal issues that werent really on most peoples anda until now. We never thought about pt epidemics but think about them now, particularly what we can learn from them andhat do we know when its going to be over. I want to begin, john, if i can, really at the end of your book, and then ill pivot book at the end of our interview to ask you more but this question. You write, america has two histories, one ugly,he other far more appealing. In the months and years ahead, americans will hold the power between them. Lets hope the make the right choice. Im going to be asking you more but what that right choice
Distance and fall other guidelines and regulations so thank you for your patience and following those. We have here today judge jeff sutton, he flew in last night, right through the storm, and so were grateful his flight made it here safely and were able to have this event today. Judge sutton is a judge of the u. S. Court of appeals for the six inch circuit where the served since 2003. Nominated by george w. Bush. He is a former solicitor general of ohio, hes been in private practice, has clerked for several judges, including justice ask Justice Scalia, the subject of his new book. The title of the occasion today is essentialal scalia. Were all about scalia in this chapter. Judge sutton revved hi ba from William College and law degree from the ohio state university. Chair of the federal Judicial Conference Committee on the rules of practice and procedure, appointed to that position by chief justice john roberts. He has taught constitutional law and other legal sums at a number of unive
The District Court held appellees would be injured because illegal aliens will be chilled from participating in the enumeration. But that counting is now over and whatever chill ever existed has odd thawed. Appellees therefore pivot to possible future injuries but as of this morning career experts at the Census Bureau confirmed with me that they still dont know even roughly how many illegal aliens they will be able to identify, let alone how their number and geographic concentration may affect apportionment. And if they dont know, certainly the other parties of the case do not david the court should therefore follow the course charted out by the District Court judge last week, vacate the judgment below, allow the secretary to comply with the memorandum, and allow any effect on apportionment to be litigated as it normally would be. Is no merits, there procedural problem with the memorandum. The directionmade in two sets of numbers to decide the numbers being the real fight is substantiv
Argument on legal access to online information and whether police and other enforcement officers can access information for personal purposes. Hear argument next in van buren versus united states. Mr. Fisher. Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court, the cfaa is an antihacking statute. To ensure comprehensive coverage, the statute prohibits exceeding authorized access. This ensures that the statute covers not just outside, but also inside hackers. In this case, however, the government seeks to transform the prong of the cfaa into a different prohibition. This prong covers obtaining any information via computer that the assessor is not entitled under the circumstances to obtain. It is no overstatement to say that this construction would brand most americans criminal on a daily basis. The scenarios are limitless, but a few examples will suffice. Imagine a secretary who says that her email or zoom account may be used only for businesses purposes or a person using a dating website whe
Mr. Chief justice, made please the court, it is an antihacking statute. Seatingprohibits the that succeeding access. It also covers not only outside but inside hackers. The government seeks to transform the prong into a different prohibition. It covers obtaining information by a computer that predecessor is not entitled under the circumstances to obtain. It is no overstatement to say this would brand most americans criminals on a daily basis. Scenarios are limitless. Imagine a secretary whose employee handbook says her emailers them account may be used only for business purposes, or a person using a dating site using false information to obtain information about a lossal mates, or student. If a government is right, any of these people commits a federal crime. Any employee that use the zoom account over the next giving to connect with relatives would be subject to federal prosecutors. The main argument is that a single two letter word in the definition under exceeds authorized access. T