I saw that "Cathy" -- who we last saw married and pregnant ("Ack) -- is back in single panel segments for the Big V era. Also, there is talk of consideration of "grab and go" (hey, it works for food at schools) books at NYPL (closed since mid-March), which is something I was thinking about too. In lieu of libraries, I have been buying a few books and re-reading.
The latest was Charles Beard's famous defense of judicial review as a matter of original understanding (intent maybe back then), this version a 1962 edition with an interesting introduction by Alan Westin. Beard's book itself is more of long law article, under 100 pages long, and is fairly readalbe though at times a bit tedious. It also is fairly convincing and he even notes that he is not saying it is somehow now binding. It is just an exercise to show that it is as we would now say "originalist" and at the time of the first publication (1912), that was somewhat controversial for the left leaning crowd he was appealing to in other writings.
Now, I'm reading Holly Hope's 1980s reminiscences about growing up in Kansas (born in 1950s) with the second half a collection of interviews. The book was recommended as a way to understand the era, as I recall in a book about Harper Lee and her assistance in writing In Cold Blood. I could not find much on the book itself or what she has been doing after writing Garden City: Dreams in A Kansas Time. The book itself was probably received via Amazon (the owner reportedly might be a trillionaire too but sorry it is still rather convenient; plus someone told me one "alternative" -- AbeBooks was owned by them too!) and does provide a window at a run of the mill girl growing up in a Kansas town. As the review suggests, it is not comprehensive or anything though maybe that wasn't the point.
One thing that was noted here over recent years is that I have been less inclined to watch television than in the past, even though there are lots of new shows (even without other platforms, which I do not have) on various cable channels that are available. One thing I do sometimes watch are old syndicated shows, including as noted Friends. Without access to NYPL, I bought the last season cheaply on Ebay, buying the first there because the NYPL for some reason doesn't have that one. Meanwhile, no one (tried lots of times) seems to want to spend $5 total for that first season DVD set. Also, I'm watching a bit more of The Big Bang Theory, which is on repeatedly (including at night 11-12) on syndicated channels.
Anyways, even with Hulu no longer providing free stuff like when I saw the run of Major Dad there, online does provide a lot of free video too. I saw Madchen in Uniform, the classic German lesbian themed girls school film on YouTube. Not all of it, but much of it (the version I saw was split the video into like six parts), and it is rather good -- very good performances, insights at the girl school experience and not the sort of too slow/boring quality of some 1930s films. I checked out a bit of the 1950s remake and it really didn't seem as good, including the main girl looking more "movie star student" and the teacher not as good either.
The Supreme Court (6-3) recently determined unanimous juries are constitutionally required for state courts (Puerto Rico is starting to apply the new rule). In the 1970s, the Supreme Court allowed six person juries in state cases (is that rule next up?) including for purposes of the 7A. The case that first upheld that in passing noted that the right to a jury (to be specific, an impartial jury) from the beginning did not consistently have all the common aspects of a federal jury (twelve, unanimous and so forth).
As with other various cases, the case that drew the line at five had other non-criminal process implications. This often included equal protection and First Amendment issues, which thus fits into the general tenor of this blog entry. The case concerned a prosecution for the airing of the well known porn film Beyond the Green Door. Georgia had a few of such cases. The Supreme Court said that it was a bridge too far to prosecute Carnal Knowledge. OTOH, they left stand a prosecution of Deep Throat. Prosecuting all three is ridiculous. As to me was a prosecution summarized thusly:
The opinion of the Court here noted: "application of the community's standards and common sense is important in obscenity trials where juries must define and apply local standard." But, an argument that the 1A made special rules required here was not taken up specifically (four justices made clear they felt obscenity prosecutions are generally unconstitutional; four didn't join all the discussion, three in particular calling out Blackmun for "heavy reliance on numerology" and "studies relied on merely represent examined findings of persons interested in the jury system." Rather harsh. Justice White briefly concurred as is sometimes his wont. Only Stevens fully joined his opinion, himself referencing his earlier opinion against obscenity prosecutions. Why not have one of the other three write the opinion then? This business where they can manage to find something that five agree on is a bit annoying, especially when it is down to an opinion of two or three people.
One more thing: Last Week Tonight a few weeks back had a good segment on the post office, which is at risk now, especially with board members now leaning Trump. The US Post Office provides a means to order specialized stamps and the show has a sheet with stamps related to the show. I bought a sheet (20 stamps -- .55 each with a $3 S/H charge).
The latest was Charles Beard's famous defense of judicial review as a matter of original understanding (intent maybe back then), this version a 1962 edition with an interesting introduction by Alan Westin. Beard's book itself is more of long law article, under 100 pages long, and is fairly readalbe though at times a bit tedious. It also is fairly convincing and he even notes that he is not saying it is somehow now binding. It is just an exercise to show that it is as we would now say "originalist" and at the time of the first publication (1912), that was somewhat controversial for the left leaning crowd he was appealing to in other writings.
Now, I'm reading Holly Hope's 1980s reminiscences about growing up in Kansas (born in 1950s) with the second half a collection of interviews. The book was recommended as a way to understand the era, as I recall in a book about Harper Lee and her assistance in writing In Cold Blood. I could not find much on the book itself or what she has been doing after writing Garden City: Dreams in A Kansas Time. The book itself was probably received via Amazon (the owner reportedly might be a trillionaire too but sorry it is still rather convenient; plus someone told me one "alternative" -- AbeBooks was owned by them too!) and does provide a window at a run of the mill girl growing up in a Kansas town. As the review suggests, it is not comprehensive or anything though maybe that wasn't the point.
One thing that was noted here over recent years is that I have been less inclined to watch television than in the past, even though there are lots of new shows (even without other platforms, which I do not have) on various cable channels that are available. One thing I do sometimes watch are old syndicated shows, including as noted Friends. Without access to NYPL, I bought the last season cheaply on Ebay, buying the first there because the NYPL for some reason doesn't have that one. Meanwhile, no one (tried lots of times) seems to want to spend $5 total for that first season DVD set. Also, I'm watching a bit more of The Big Bang Theory, which is on repeatedly (including at night 11-12) on syndicated channels.
Anyways, even with Hulu no longer providing free stuff like when I saw the run of Major Dad there, online does provide a lot of free video too. I saw Madchen in Uniform, the classic German lesbian themed girls school film on YouTube. Not all of it, but much of it (the version I saw was split the video into like six parts), and it is rather good -- very good performances, insights at the girl school experience and not the sort of too slow/boring quality of some 1930s films. I checked out a bit of the 1950s remake and it really didn't seem as good, including the main girl looking more "movie star student" and the teacher not as good either.
The Supreme Court (6-3) recently determined unanimous juries are constitutionally required for state courts (Puerto Rico is starting to apply the new rule). In the 1970s, the Supreme Court allowed six person juries in state cases (is that rule next up?) including for purposes of the 7A. The case that first upheld that in passing noted that the right to a jury (to be specific, an impartial jury) from the beginning did not consistently have all the common aspects of a federal jury (twelve, unanimous and so forth).
As with other various cases, the case that drew the line at five had other non-criminal process implications. This often included equal protection and First Amendment issues, which thus fits into the general tenor of this blog entry. The case concerned a prosecution for the airing of the well known porn film Beyond the Green Door. Georgia had a few of such cases. The Supreme Court said that it was a bridge too far to prosecute Carnal Knowledge. OTOH, they left stand a prosecution of Deep Throat. Prosecuting all three is ridiculous. As to me was a prosecution summarized thusly:
The Illustrated Presidential Report of the Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, and an obscene advertisement, which gave information as to where, how, and from whom and by what means the Illustrated Report might be obtained.I guess the advertisement could be considered a form of pandering, a factor used to determine obscenity. But, though maybe this wasn't directly involved in the issues presented (Justice Douglas in his separate dissent referenced it but the other dissent relied on other matters), illustrating a major national report seems to meet the "whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" prong of the then new and so-called improved obscenity test. The other movies might have had prurient material that some find patently offensive, but why one could not go to a closed off public movie theater to see them -- home movies not quite a thing in the early 1970s -- is a tad clear, let's say.
The opinion of the Court here noted: "application of the community's standards and common sense is important in obscenity trials where juries must define and apply local standard." But, an argument that the 1A made special rules required here was not taken up specifically (four justices made clear they felt obscenity prosecutions are generally unconstitutional; four didn't join all the discussion, three in particular calling out Blackmun for "heavy reliance on numerology" and "studies relied on merely represent examined findings of persons interested in the jury system." Rather harsh. Justice White briefly concurred as is sometimes his wont. Only Stevens fully joined his opinion, himself referencing his earlier opinion against obscenity prosecutions. Why not have one of the other three write the opinion then? This business where they can manage to find something that five agree on is a bit annoying, especially when it is down to an opinion of two or three people.
One more thing: Last Week Tonight a few weeks back had a good segment on the post office, which is at risk now, especially with board members now leaning Trump. The US Post Office provides a means to order specialized stamps and the show has a sheet with stamps related to the show. I bought a sheet (20 stamps -- .55 each with a $3 S/H charge).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your .02!