Summer Job Opportunity: Paid Law Journal Editorship—Fully Remote

JOTWELL, the online journal of reviews of recent faculty scholarship relating to the law, needs a MiamiLaw 1L or 2L to join our editorial team for the summer.  Update: alas at present the job is only available to UM law students because of bureaucratic limits on how pay works….

The workload typically runs about 30 hours per week, and is paid at the law school’s research assistant scale, which in most cases is $15/hr.  The student editor supports faculty editors both at UM and elsewhere, and has a role that is a blend of a substantive editor and a managing editor.  All work will be carried out remotely.s

The ideal candidate will be sensitive to nuance and a careful editor, organized, and will enjoy reading legal scholarship. JOTWELL uses WordPress to publish, but it is easy to learn, so no experience needed.

Grades matter for this job, but a demonstrated ability to organize, to write, and to edit may substitute for grades. The job would start as soon as you are available after your Spring ’23 final exams—May 15 or earlier—and run to about when classes start in August. Once you get up to speed there would be no problem if you wanted to take one or more brief vacation periods during that time, as long as none of them was for a long continuous period.

In addition to the circa 30 hours per week for Jotwell, there may be an option to add on some extra hours to (sometimes) bring the work up to about 40 hours per week.  These entirely optional and somewhat unpredictable extra hours would be traditional research assistant duties supporting me in my summer research.

PLEASE NOTE: Assuming all goes well, the Jotwell Summer editor will be expected to transition into being one of three student editors next academic year, thus working 7-10 hours per week during the 2024-2025 Fall and Spring semesters.  Please indicate in your application whether you are willing to continue in this role in the next two semesters.

If you are interested, please email the following to michael.froomkin@gmail.com:

  1. Your c.v., aka “your résumé”.
  2. A copy (unofficial is fine) of your transcript,
  3. If you have a non-legal writing sample, please include that also. Please do NOT send your LCOMM paper.
  4. Please state some times when you would be free for a Zoom interview of about 30 minutes on Friday March 29th. If you are completely unavailable then we can try to schedule something Monday morning April 1 if that works for you.

Please put “JOTWELL Summer 2024” and your name in the subject line of your email. Also, please ensure that that all attachments to your email have file names starting with your last name.

Posted in Jotwell | Leave a comment

Real or Onion?

Time for another quiz.  Real or Onion: “GOP Stunned To Discover It’s Not Running Against A Cadaver In 2024”?

Answer below.

Continue reading

Posted in Onion/Not-Onion | 3 Comments

Lincoln Project Had a Good Weekend

I thought the Lincoln Project kinda lost its mojo after the 2020 election, and the major staff changes.  But this under-2-minute montage of all the highlights from the weekend is vintage stuff.

Now if only they’d post their latest videos on their website instead of ex-Twitter.

Posted in 2024 Election | Leave a comment

Man Bites Man

It’s an old truism that not only do people resemble their pets but Dogs and Their Owners Share Similar Personality Traits.

Reading the news that President Biden’s dog, Commander, bit Secret Service agents at least 24 times before being exiled from the White House made me wonder in what way the President might be likely to demonstrate aggressive behavior.

And here it is: Biden instructed aides to dial up attacks on Trump’s wild comments and Biden embraces bully pulpit as he escalates fight against Trump and GOP over Russia.  Expect more.

 

Posted in 2024 Election | Leave a comment

“Saving Democracy from the Senate” Published

Published on dead trees at last! David B. Froomkin & A. Michael Froomkin, Saving Democracy from the Senate, 2024 Utah Law Review 397 (2024).

Here’s the abstract:

It should not be surprising that Americans say they are frustrated with their national institutions. Congress, particularly the Senate, responds poorly to the public’s needs and wants because it is increasingly unrepresentative of the electorate. Reform is difficult, however, because each state’s “equal Suffrage” in the Senate is protected by a unique constitutional entrenchment clause. The Entrenchment Clause creates a genuine bar to reform, but that bar is not insurmountable. We first argue that the constitutional proscription on reforming the Senate has been overstated, identifying a range of constitutional reform options that would be permissible despite the Entrenchment Clause. Several of these approaches circumvent the restriction imposed by the Entrenchment Clause by reforming the Senate in ways that do not alter the equal representation of states: disempowering the Senate, abolishing the Senate entirely, or adding at-large nationally elected senators. A different approach involves repealing the Entrenchment Clause and then either passing a second amendment reapportioning the Senate or asking courts to democratize it under the Equal Protection Clause. We then canvass reforms that could move in the direction of democratizing the Senate without constitutional amendment, including admitting new states, breaking up the largest states, and (although we do not advocate it) a new Constitutional Convention. Throughout, we discuss the relative merits and difficulties of each of these options. Reformers and scholars need a clear understanding of the relevant legal frameworks to develop effective strategies. While we recognize that none of these options are easy, we conclude that action to fix the Senate’s democratic deficit is essential— and urgent.

 

Posted in Uncategorized, Writings | Leave a comment

I Know Who Won’t Be A Vice Presidential Candidate

Although in past years handicapping the Veepstakes has been one of my favorite pastimes, I find that this year I don’t much care who Trump’s running mate might turn out to be. I suppose it’s because they vary from quite bad to horrible, or because I think that, barring one of the candidates having a medical crisis, the election will be decided either in court or via Trump’s self-destruction as he says increasingly bizarre things and people start to focus on them.

But that doesn’t stop other people, and Trump added fuel to the flames today by naming six people he thought might be potential running mates. The list included Sen. Tim Scott, who seems like the obvious choice to me, as it offers the tantalizing prospect of peeling off just enough Black votes to move a few swing states.

More bizarrely the list also included Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. That’s bizarre not only because Trump spent so much time belittling him, but because they’re both residents of the State of Florida, and the US Constitution prohibits electors from a state from choosing both a president and a vice president from that same state. (Art II, Cl. 3: “The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves”.) Weirdly, nobody writing about Trump’s statement seems to be mentioning this. But then I think the entire press has pretty much given up on fact checking him anyway.

DeSantis, who attended Harvard Law School and presumably knows much more about the Constitution than Trump does — although probably that’s true of almost everyone — was quick to say he would never be Trump’s Vice President. He made it sound as if this was something of a principled choice, but I think he just knows it could never be, as the risk of a squeaker in which Vice President Harris is reelected when you don’t count Florida’s electoral votes is just too great.

Posted in 2024 Election | 4 Comments