I realize that this will come as a shock to SA readers, but for professional and personal reasons I have decided it is time for Southern Appeal to call it quits. In doing so, I cannot even begin to express how much I appreciate the contributions of my co-bloggers and many loyal readers/commenters over the past four years. I have learned so much from each of you, and you have all enriched my life in incalculable ways. Thank you so much for everything.

When I started SA, I never dreamed it would amount to anything. It was just a means for me to vent about political matters during the two years I lived the monastic life of a federal appellate law clerk.  But with my extensive commentary/coverage on Judge William H. Pryor Jr.’s nomination to the Eleventh Circuit, SA’s traffic went up dramatically (thanks in large part to Howard Bashman and NRO), and things have never been the same since then. Indeed, SA’s popularity provided me with a special gift: a soapbox to air my views on issues I care about deeply (e.g., abortion, Darfur). I have not always been the most eloquent or able spokesman, and I have often let my passion/temper get the best of me. But our readers have been gracious in forgiving me for my many shortcomings, and I can only hope and pray that I have done more good than harm over the years.  To those who I have offended, or been less than charitable with in my posts, please forgive me.  I am a work-in-progress; and I pray daily that God with shape me into the person I need to be.

There is much more that I could and probably should say, but right now I just don’t have the words. I know this all “sounds” a little too melodramatic, but as I write this post I am coming to terms with just how much of me is wrapped up in this blog (perhaps too much methinks). In any event, it has been a great run. Thanks for the memories, folks. And God Bless.

Oh, and please have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Administrative note: SA will stay up on the web for the foreseeable future. If there is a kind soul who would be willing to offer free webhosting, so that SA’s archives can remain on the web for an extended period of time, please contact me via email. Also, I will update this post in the near future with a list of my co-bloggers’ other blogging homes, so that you can continue to enjoy their respective talents.

Update: Thank you all for the gracious comments. As promised, here is a list of my co-bloggers’ other blogging quarters and/or websites. I have also established a personal blog that will not contain any commentary, but will instead merely make note of my speaking engagements, radio/television appearances, publications, and the like. I won’t be posting at this blog on a regular basis, so it is probably best to simply subscribe to the feed if you’re interested in getting updates.

Steve Dillard: Steve Dillard

Professor Mike DeBow: Links, Point of Law, Division of Labour

Quin Hillyer: AmSpec Blog

William Watkins: South Carolina Appellate Law Blog 

Patrick Carver: Southron Views

Nathan Hallford: Confirm Them

Major Joel Leggett: Grim’s Hall

Proximo: Dallas Sidebar

Portia: De Novo

Zach Brissett: In Toon With the World

Hunter Baker: AmSpec Blog

Professor Francis Beckwith: FrancisBeckwith.com and Right Reason

Jim Dunn: Do What Now?

Update II: Muchas gracias to Joshua LeBlanc of CyberCatholics for agreeing to host SA’s archives free o’ charge. If you have any webhosting needs, please consider using CyberCatholics.

Count me among those who try not to get too excited about various “insults” to Christmas and the advance of the godless heathen secularists.  But I have to chuckle - or maybe grimace just ever so slightly - when I get those catalogs and email solicitations that trumpet loudly that there are just a few days left for your “Holiday” shopping in order to get the items there before, oh, Dec. 23rd.  I understand the sentiment - surely there’s someone, somewhere who would find offense at an advertisement that actually suggested you should be buying for Christmas - but it’s still a bit, oh, silly.

Isaiah was on the money.  Hal Lindsey has a good article on the prophecies and the meaning of Christmas.

As far as I am concerned, rap is pollution.  It contaminates our culture and puts the wrong message in the minds of the young.  Props to prosecutors who are now using rap lyrics against the hoods who glorify gang violence and anarchy in their music.

 When police arrested Ronell Wilson, his pockets were stuffed with the type of violent poetry that boys have been scribbling in notebooks since the advent of gangsta rap.

In his lyrics, Wilson called himself “Rated R,” warned any challengers to wear a bulletproof vest, and boasted of leaving .45-caliber slugs in the heads of his enemies.

The clumsy verses may never land Wilson a record deal, but to prosecutors, they were solid gold.

Wilson went on trial in federal court in Brooklyn this month on charges he murdered two undercover police officers, and the government presented the lyrics to a jury as evidence that the 23-year-old is a remorseless killer.

Prosecutor Morris J. Fodeman asked jurors to take special note of one stanza: “Ain’t goin’ stop to I’m dead.”

The jury convicted Wilson on Wednesday, and he now faces a possible death sentence.

Yes, the bubble ain’t what it used to be, but there are still areas of the US where home values are on the rise.  Hats off to Birmingham for making the list.

Sounds like Cuba is already moving on.

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

More than two years after it nullified nearly 4,000 weddings of gay and lesbian couples performed at San Francisco City Hall, the court voted unanimously Wednesday to decide whether state law, which defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman, violates a constitutional right to marry the partner of one’s choice.

The justices granted a hearing on appeals by same-sex couples and the city of San Francisco after a state appellate court voted 2-1 on Oct. 5 to uphold the state law, which the Legislature passed in 1977 and voters reaffirmed in 2000.

Sorry, K-Lo, your man simply cannot be trusted.

(LvRS)

Eugene expresses my sentiments well regarding the inclusion of the ongoing Darfur genocide as a “top news story” of 2006.

He scares liberals to death.

Have no fear. The fedester will be coming your way this Spring to give y’all some of that sweet Southern-fried originalism that your chapter craves so much.

Details to follow soon.

This cracked me up.

This was the right decision by Brownback. Every judicial nominee deserves an up-or-down vote within a reasonable period of time, and it was inappropriate of Brownback to attempt to condition his vote on Neff agreeing to recuse herself from any gay marriage cases.

I have to say though, I am not at all heartened by what I’ve read about Neff thus far. In a nutshell, she does not strike me as a judicial conservative, and one is only left to wonder why in the world President Bush nominated her in the first place.

Well, the president did nominate Harriet Miers, so I guess that explains the Neff nomination (in part), now doesn’t it?

Sorry, Publius, I gotta agree with Ike.

Freedoms and liberties gained outside the rule of law always end up causing more harm than good in the long run. Therefore, while I certainly appreciate and embrace many of the results from the Warren Era of the Supreme Court, the fact remains that Warren was an awful Chief Justice, who penned and cobbled together some of the most pathetically-reasoned opinions in the Court’s history. Indeed, as some constitutional scholars have demonstrated, some of the Warren Court’s decisions can be justified on different grounds vis-a-vis the text, structure, and history of the Constitution. 

Thus, while Publius and I are in agreement that rogue Southern officials deserved to be smacked down with impunity by the feds for their outrageous, illegal, and immoral resistence to recognizing the natural/civil rights of African Americans, this governmental rebuke should have come from Congress and not the Supremes. We have three branches of government and separation of powers for a reason, folks, and if our elected legislators aren’t doing their jobs, then they need to be voted out of office by “we the people.”

The rule of law is not simply “abstract logic and interpretative theory.” It is (or should be) much more than that. As Cicero once remarked, “We are in bondage to the law so that we might be free.” And this “bondage” requires that we work to eradicate injustices, wherever we find them, through the system designed by the founders/framers, rather than by creating law out of wholecloth.

A “court” in Libya on Tuesday convicted five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor of deliberately infecting 400 children.  They are sentenced to death.  

From the news account, it appears to be anything but a fair trial.  Libya, nice job of discouraging medical workers from attempting to help the poor in your country. 

Yep, I’ve been writing about this danger on SA and the South Carolina Appellate Law Blog for some time.  Now, the Washington Times is picking up on the theme. 

Reason has a good piece up on the anti-discrimination measure recently approved by Michigan voters.  Here is a taste:

 The Michigan initiative prevailed even though its supporters were outspent 2 to 1, despite opposition from both Governor Jennifer Granholm and her Republican challenger, Dick DeVos. It won despite hysterical and deceptive ads that compared the proposal to Hurricane Katrina and Sept. 11, and despite false claims that the measure would end to public funding for breast cancer screenings.

The initiative’s opponents have depicted this victory as the result of white men fighting to retain their privilege. But maybe it’s really about Americans taking action to end a regrettable detour in the battle for true civil rights.

You gotta love Nino.

Well, I must say, I wasn’t at all prepared for this honor.

Joe Scotchie has a nice essay up on remembering the General. Scotchie concludes the article this way:

 ”Teach him he must deny himself,” the elderly Lee told the mother of a young child. Here again, is the code Lee strived to live by: Self-denial, the determination to live for others. That does lead to frustration. At Washington College, Lee posted only one rule: All students must behave as Christian gentlemen. Lee fell short, as do all who take up the cross. The effort, however, is important. In that sense, Lee is hardly a failure. His life remains a fascination to millions around the world. Two hundred years later, the controversies, the adulation, and the debates rage on. Every year, the books tumble out of the presses. General Lee lives.

I attended a Christmas pageant at my local church yesterday.  At first I was really impressed with the singing and dance steps the group of grade school kids performed.  But then the story emerged.

In this Christmas tale, the town mayor canceled the Christmas pageant within the pageant because of traffic concerns, but the play made it clear he was worried about losing votes from parties offended by Christmas.  The kids have worked hard and decide to go caroling and a’lobbying their neighbors to call the mayor to get the pageant back on in the town square.

At various houses we meet the people who celebrate Christmas, but don’t care about the reason for the season.  After being turned down for help by one couple, a child remarks, “I don’t understand it.  They have lights and decorations and everything.  I thought they liked Christmas.”  Another child responds, “They don’t have a problem with Christmas.  They just have a problem with Christ.”  A little more pointed than poignant, I thought.

Finally, the kids visit a house that is not decorated at all.  The woman who comes out says she didn’t put up lights because she has two small children and her husband is away in the military.  She loves Christmas for the right reasons and is thrilled by their visit.

Guess what, the pageant is on again.  The last lady visited was the mayor’s daughter and he can’t turn her down.  He is so touched by the Christmas pageant he is going to be in it next year as a wise man!

What troubled me about all this is that instead of straightforwardly celebrating the Christmas story, the local church turned Christmas into an affair of church, state, and political action.  Second, instead of winsomely reaching out to those who don’t believe, this tale impugns their motives and seeks to overcome them through lobbying.  Third, the words of this rather arch play are put into the mouths of young children.  I felt as though they were instruments of some strange reverse Soviet propaganda.

There’s a lesson here that shouldn’t be ignored.  Sure, you can lose the message of Christmas by giving in to consumerism and Santa Claus and colored lights, but you can also lose it by worrying too much about whether you’re getting your due in the public square.

O.k., I finally got around to watching Tombstone, and I have say that it is a national outrage that Val Kilmer did not receive a “Best Supporting Actor” Oscar (or even a nomination) for his portrayal of Doc Holliday.

What a great movie. And what a brilliant performance by Kilmer.

Well, it looks as though Senator Brownback just may be able to hang with the big boys when it comes to raising money after all.

(LvJoe)

In a blog-entry entitled, “Protest at SMU Targets Bush Library,” Paul Burka of Texas Monthly writes:

The likelihood that the George W. Bush presidential library will be located at SMU has not been welcome news for at least one segment of the university community. A letter, dated December 16, from “Faculty, Administrators, & Staff” of the Perkins School of Theology to R. Gerald Turner, president of the Board of Trustees, is now circulating not only on the SMU campus but also among a wider academic community, urging the board to “reconsider and to rescind SMU’s pursuit of the presidential library.”

Texas Monthly acquired a copy of the letter, about which Mr. Burka writes extensively in his blog entry here.

In the interest of full disclosure, Baylor University, my employer, is a finalist, along with SMU and the University of Dallas, for the George W. Bush Presidential Library. As SA readers would suspect, unlike my peers at SMU, I would welcome the Bush Library at my own institution.

Update: It looks like two SMU professors recently published in the United Methodist Nexus an essay, “The George W. Bush Library: Asset or Albatross for SMU?,” in which they voice their opposition to the prospect of their institution acquiring the library. I’m not sure whether the letter about which Burka has written had its origin in this essay.

Update II: I found a copy of the letter, which is entitled, “In Protest of the George Bush Presidential Library: An Open Letter to the President & Trustees of Southern Methodist University.“

Having spent the last week cramming the laws of evidence, mostly focusing on the 400s and the 800s, I came to wonder about the state of hearsay.  To give the two second intro (necessarily somewhat inaccurate) for those who don’t know, hearsay is an out of court statement offered for the truth of the matter it asserts.  It is generally excluded because such statements are presumed unreliable and it is also difficult to confront the witness against you (the statement). However, there are numerous (27 by my count) exceptions, 4 exemptions, and ‘offered for the truth’ and ‘the matter asserted’ are both read rather narrowly.  Further, there is a catch-all exception (807) which covers a statement that doesn’t fall into any specific category, but bears equivalent indicia of reliability (and other factors).  Whether a statement falls in any these categories or is otherwise admissible is largely at the trial judge’s discretion (FRE 104, 106, 403 et al.) and their rulings are rarely reversed (104 – ‘substantial effect’). 

With this being the state of affairs, wouldn’t it be more effectual just to revert to a general rule: hearsay is presumptively inadmissible, but subject to admission if a judge finds certain indicia of reliability and, in certain cases, notice is given to the opposing party.  This would put the hearsay rule on a similar footing as the rules governing privilege, to be decided by the judge in light of ‘reason and experience.’  Is there any reason in this age to consider dying declarations particularly trustworthy?  Studies have shown that the time it takes to formulate a lie can be the same as to repeating a ‘present sense impression’ (803(1)), and certainly is no more than a minute.  The problem of uncertainty for trial preparation in this case could be handled by motions in limine and a judicial practice, similar to under 501, to use the prior rules as evaluative standards for the judge to make their ruling.  The notice requirement, used as needed, would preserve adversary’s ability to prepare effectively.  Now, clearly, I have not practiced.  What think those who have – could this work?

I could certainly handle being buddies with the VP.

If anyone has the text of the Brownback piece in the latest issue of TNR, I would greatly appreciate you emailing it to me.

Thanks! 

That is the new title of my forthcoming book that will be published in 2007 by Cambridge University Press. It just appeared on Amazon.com here. According to the Leiter Law Rankings, Cambridge is one of the six leading academic presses. It is ranked number one by political scientists and is considered one of the top two publishers in philosophy. Because this book overlaps the fields of law, political science, and philosophy, I am deeply gratified with the forthcoming publication of this book.

Find out here. 

Will the real Mitt Romney please stand up?