On Monday, Blawg Review will be hosted by a group of federal law clerks, appellate lawyers, and law students. Some are members of the Federalist Society, others of the American Constitution Society.
But the only agenda on their group blawg, Appellate Law & Practice, they say, is to post summaries of recent appellate decisions. If there are any hidden agendas, they might only be gleaned from blog comments.
The cases discussed on Appellate Law & Practice present an interesting mix of fact and law. Case in point: "Did they really love each other when they got married? Another IJ remand." This recent post raises some important points of law, but the discussion about immigration judges really heats up in the comments thread, where an anonymous commenter takes on the anonymous blogger:
The disdain for IJs reflected by your post is common among law snobs.The appellate law blogger answers in kind:
That disdain (among law snobs) is exacerbated by the fact that the federal courts only see the decisions where an immigrant is denied relief. It is further exacerbated by the fact that when a published opinion is deemed necessary, it is usually because the IJ made an error in applying the law, and vacatur or reversal is necessary.
In short, "The more you know . . . " and all that jazz.
Yes, we are law snobs. IJs are lawyers. In fact, most of them were “law snobs” before they were IJs, as they would all make fun of immigration lawyers in private practice. Now, when they get a chance to operate on their own with some (unfortunately minimal) independence, they demonstrate that they can't take their job seriously.Zing! There's more said worth reading, but you get the ideathey don't hold their fire at Appellate Law & Practice.
And here's where it gets really interesting for us. The feisty folks at Appellate Law & Practice are accepting submissions now for their Blawg Review. Send in your best post this week. Or, surprise your friends and colleagues by sending in something great from their law blogs.