Rachel's Bits and Briefs

Food Fight

If you have been out and about in Toronto lately, you may have noticed the A La Cart vendors that have been popping up.

If not, you’re in for a treat.

The Toronto Sun reported on a decision last December by Toronto City Council to allow the Toronto Public Health pilot project “A La Cart.”

For some, however, the decision came with a price. Existing hot dog vendors who have paid thousands of dollars in licensing fees have been excluded from the new project:

"We were hoping our menus could be changed as well," said Marianne Moroney, executive director of the Street Food Vendors Association, which represents about 100 Toronto hot dog vendors.

"They talk about ethnic diversity, well, we have 25 spoken languages in our membership. The project should've been hatched through our members who are highly regulated and already have street experience, but we were shut out of the process."

After presenting a business plan and paying $40,000.00 for the new A La Cart cart and location fee, eight vendors were chosen. One of the stipulations of this decision was that the owners had to agree to work 70% of the time and pre-cook their dishes in a kitchen.

Here are where some of Toronto's new street delicacies can be found:

Nathan Philips Square – Biryani and Souvlaki

Roadhouse Park – Inerja

St. Clair Avenue & Yonge Street – Jerk Chicken

Mel Lastman Square – Pad Thai

Metro Hall – Kebabs

Queen’s Park – Kebab Wraps

Yonge St. & Eglinton Avenue – Bulgogi with Kimchi

Unveiled: The Amended Canadian Citizen Act

On April 17^th, 2009 the Amended Canadian Citizenship Act (C.C.A.) came in to effect. The Lawyers Weekly reports that the new Act contains major changes.

Highlights of the new C.C.A. include granting Canadian Citizenship to those who lost citizenship as a result of the preceding amendments, restoring citizenship to those who were forced to renounce their Canadian Citizenship when they became citizens of other countries, and granting citizenship to those who were not previously qualified.

In addition,

“The new Act denies automatic citizenship to the grandchildren of Canadians living abroad. According to the Canadian government, by denying citizenship to second-generation children and beyond, the Act is protecting the value of Canadian citizenship.”

The amendments arose in response to recent U.S. immigration policy changes which included the tightening of border security. Due to these changes, many travelers, who had assumed they were citizens, were denied Canadian passports.

The article sets out additional changes enacted by the amendments:

The new law restores citizenship to those who had become citizens when the first Citizenship Act was enacted on Jan. 1, 1947, including people born in Canada prior to 1947 and war brides. It also restores citizenship to other British subjects who had lived in Canada for at least five years before 1947, became citizens on Jan. 1, 1947 and subsequently lost citizenship.

The new law restores citizenship to people who were born in Canada or who became citizens on or after Jan. 1, 1947 and then lost their citizenship as a result of becoming a citizen of another country (dual citizenship was not permitted prior to 1977). It gives citizenship to some people who were never citizens. This includes people who were born outside Canada on or after Jan. 1, 1947 and are first-generation descendents born abroad to Canadian citizens.”

Others will not gain citizenship:

...It does not include people who did not become citizens when the first Citizenship Act took effect on Jan. 1, 1947 or who were born in Canada but are not citizens because one of their parents was a foreign diplomat and neither parent was a permanent resident or citizen of Canada.

Those who did not gain citizenship under the new amendments include those who renounced their citizenship as adults with the Canadian government; who were born outside Canada to a Canadian parent and were not already citizens; who lost their citizenship in the past; who were born in the second or next generation abroad (this includes people who failed to retain citizenship); or who had their citizenship revoked by the government because it was obtained by fraud.”

Previously, the law permitted Canadians to pass their citizenship on to each generation born outside of Canada. A significant change referred to as the “first-generation limitation” allows children born to Canadian parents who were the first generation outside of Canada, to be granted Canadian citizenship if either parent was born in Canada or if one became a Canadian citizen by immigrating and being granted Canadian citizenship.

An interesting exception applies to all children born to a Canadian parent working for Canadian Forces or the Canadian federal or provincial governments, who will be granted citizenship.

The Green Energy & Green Economy Act

The Ontario Green Energy Act website notes the recent passage of the Green Energy & Green Economy Act (GE & EA) which has been said to be beneficial from not only a climate and environmental perspective, but also as an investment in new companies and employment.

The Act aims to improve conservation programs, promote investment in renewable energy projects through North America's first feed-in tariff program, and create green jobs. The Act, introduced in November 2008, is the cornerstone of the government's plan to put Ontario on a path towards reducing Ontario's greenhouse gas emissions, while becoming a leader in the emerging global renewable energy sector.

Various industries are on board with the new Act. Many see it as a positive step in combatting the Province's current economic crisis:

"With today's passage of the Green Energy Act, and the investments to support it, Ontario is starting down the road to a green jobs future," said Ken Neumann, National Director of United Steelworkers of Canada. "The members of our union are ready and eager to produce the next generation of clean energy products and parts, such as steel for windmills and glass for solar panels. The future of manufacturing in Ontario lays, in part, in the green jobs of the future."

- Rachel Spence, Legal Assistant, Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Increased Canadian Recognition for Law Degrees From India

The Hindu News Update Service reports on new, relaxed accreditation standards that will ease the way for lawyers from India and other Asian countries to qualify to practice law in Canada:

"The National Committee on Accreditation (NCA) has decided that three-year full-time law degrees from Common Law Countries including India, England and Australia should be treated equivalently regardless of their country of origin. It is a substantial reduction in barrier to entry into legal profession," Vern Krishna, outgoing executive director of the NCA, said on Sunday.

..."Law degrees from India, Australia, Bangladesh, England, Hong Kong, Ireland, New Zealand, Nigeria, Pakistan, Singapore, the U.S., Wales and West Indies are being treated equivalently," Prof. Krishna said.

He, however, said that professionals from these countries willing to practice law in Canada have to qualify exams in about six subjects depending upon the subjects they studied and grade obtained in order to achieve equivalence. Besides, they will have to write bar exams to practice as a lawyer here, he added.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Great Headline of the Day

Lawers' Cereal Litigation Suffers Crunching Blow from On Point News:

Froot Loops, Berry Berry Kix and Fruity Cheerios have all recently been the targets of false advertising lawsuits filed by three lawyers. But a judge may have ended this outbreak of cereal litigation by throwing out a case involving Cap'n Crunch's Crunch Berries.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Canada's Mayors Respond to "Buy American" Plan

Canada's mayors have announced their own plan for retailiation against U.S. "buy-American" mandates.

From CBC's Canadian mayors pass anti-'Buy American' resolution:

In response to the 'Buy American' provisions of the U.S. stimulus package, Canada's mayors narrowly passed a resolution Saturday that could potentially block U.S. companies from bidding on city contracts.

The resolution was passed at the Federation of Canadian Municipalities conference in Whistler, B.C., by a vote of 189-175.

The resolution says the federation should support cities that adopt policies that allow them to buy only from companies whose home countries do not impose trade restrictions against Canadian goods.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Law Professor "Outed" as Anonymous Blogger

A South Texas College of Law professor's identity has been "outed" by lawyer and National Review commentator, Ed Whelan, in apparent retaliation for a garden-variety, blogospheric row over Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's views on judicial policy-making.

John F. Blevens, no longer the anonymous 'Publius' at progressive blog Obsidian Wings, discusses his reasons for remaining anonymous over previous five years:

...I have blogged under a pseudonym largely for private and professional reasons. Professionally, I’ve heard that pre-tenure blogging (particularly on politics) can cause problems. And before that, I was a lawyer with real clients. I also believe that the classroom should be as nonpolitical as possible – and I don’t want conservative students to feel uncomfortable before they take a single class based on my posts. So I don’t tell them about this blog. Also, I write and research on telecom policy – and I consider blogging and academic research separate endeavors. This, frankly, is a hobby.

Privately, I don’t write under my own name for family reasons. I’m from a conservative Southern family – and there are certain family members who I’d prefer not to know about this blog (thanks Ed). Also, I have family members who are well known in my home state who have had political jobs with Republicans, and I don’t want my posts to jeopardize anything for them (thanks again).

All of these things I would have told Ed, if he had asked. Instead, I told him that I have family and professional reasons for not publishing under my own name, and he wrote back and called me an “idiot” and a “coward.” (I’ve posted the email exchange below).

So there you have it – I’ve been successfully pseudonymous since the Iowa caucuses in 2004. During that time, I’ve criticized hundreds of people – and been criticized myself by hundreds more. But this has never happened.

And yes – I criticized Whelan rather harshly. But that’s what the blogosphere is about. Blogging is not for the thin-skinned. And you would think that someone who spends their days trying to destroy other people’s reputations in dishonest and inflammatory ways wouldn’t be so childish and thin-skinned.

Anyway, I’m not sure whether I’ll start posting under my own name or not. And there were several people who already knew – it’s not like this is a state secret. But still, if I wanted my name out on this blog, I would have done so. It should have been my choice.

Professor Blevins' official biography is here.

Wikipedia has Mr. Whelan's background:

M. Edward Whelan III is an American lawyer and a prominent conservative legal analyst. He currently serves as President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative think tank.

Formerly, Whelan served as a legal clerk to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. He has also served in various roles in government, including in the Department of Justice. Previously, he worked as a lawyer in private practice and as Senior Vice President and Counselor to the General Counsel for Verizon Corporation.

Nasty stuff - blogging as blood-sport.

For what it's worth, even some of Mr. Whelan's conservative friends are unhappy with him over this:

Had Publius published Ed’s personal information, or had slandered him factually, I could understand the need to make his identity public and force him to bear responsibility for such attacks. However, as Rick says, calling someone a “know-nothing demagogue” doesn’t qualify. It may be annoying, and I think it reflects very poorly on Publius, but that’s the kind of ad hominem attack bloggers get from Day One. Truman’s Axiom comes into play here — if a blogger can’t take that kind of heat, he ought to reconsider blogging.

Ed’s a great blogger, but I think he let Publius get too far under his skin, and he reacted poorly in outing someone and risking their professional career. Outing Publius didn’t do anything to advance Ed’s argument, but made him look vindictive and petty instead. Bloggers should worry less about the anonymity of bloggers (which isn’t a “bane” at all) and respond to the arguments instead — or ignore them.

But Mr. Whelan does have at least one supporter in Canada's own Professor Michael Krauss of George Mason University School of Law. See his comments today at Point of Law:

On the propriety of hiding behind a pseudonym while sniping at a critic who is out in the open, I see no redeeming argument. I hope the South Texas tenure committee is watching and taking note.

"Off with his head..."

Freedom of speech, neocon style.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Taser Creep

Orin Kerr at Volokh reports on a Niagara County Court ruling against a motion for suppression of DNA evidence, forcibly obtained when police "tased" a suspect's to obtain his "compliance" with a warrant requiring that his DNA be collected for testing.

From the ruling:

The Defendant argues that the use of the Taser is per se unreasonable because of the excessive amount of pain it causes and the danger of serious physical harm it creates. However, while counsel has mentioned numerous times the device inflicts 50,000 volts, the Court must admit it does not have the scientific knowledge necessary to interpret that fact. It sounds like a high number but what is its relevance to the force imposed and the pain inflicted. There was absolutely no evidence presented to the Court that this is a dangerous amount of voltage and the defendant has presented no evidence of the actual effect or dangers of this device.

One must wonder how authorities ever obtained any compliance at all before these increasingly ubiquitous defensive devices were invented?

(And yes Orin, it's torture, even on the lowest setting - it is a high voltage fist to the face - or in this case, shoulder).

As they say in the movies, "we have ways to make you talk..."

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Neilson: Facebook Is Social Media Leader

Lawyers looking for the optimal point of entry into Web 2.0, take note.  Neilson reports Facebook still holds the web's social networking crown.  But Twitter is growing quickly:

According to Nielsen’s research, Facebook is still top dog when it comes to social networking, amassing approximately 13.9 billion user minutes in April, which is year-on-year growth of 699 percent when gauged against the 1.7 billion it gathered during April of 2008.

My Space sits in second position on the popularity scale, although the News Corp-owned service has seen its appeal eroded significantly in the last 12 months. In April of 2009, total user minutes logged on MySpace fell to 4.9 billion, which equates to a sizable drop of 31 percent against April 2008’s 7.3 billion minutes.

...Sitting in fifth place on Nielsen’s results, user minutes attributed to Twitter during April 2009 hit 300 million, which is a miniscule figure compared to Facebook. However, the service’s year-on-year improvement hit a staggering 3,712 percent when viewed next to the lowly 7.8 million minutes it logged in April of 2008.

...Blogger emerged as April’s leading blog-based platform, sitting in third behind Facebook and MySpace with 30 percent growth and 583 million total monthly minutes, while Tagged.com secured fourth with an impressive 998 percent growth and 328 million minutes.

The remaining players on the top ten list are MyYearbook (269 million minutes), LiveJournal (204 million), LinkedIn (202 million), SlashKey (188 million), and Gaia Online (144 million).

See Tech Herald's Nielsen: Twitter surges, MySpace plummets, Facebook still dominant: 

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

On Obama in Cairo

My friend, Avrum Rosensweig has a wonderul blog, with a very thoughtful piece today on President Obama's speech in Cairo - Obama’s Cairo Speech: Half the Room is Standing:

President Obama’s speech today was as powerful and groundbreaking as one could have expected. His presentation made for outstanding TV and his mastery with words, phrases and sentences will go down in history and no doubt grant him a place in the Oratory Hall of Fame.

The outcome of his words – which after all are only words according to some – will become evident one day – or they won’t. It is too early to tell. It is obvious however that there is not one universal response to the man’s speech in Cairo, nor one conclusion.

Once again the Middle East and American’s first Afro-American president are centre stage with an audience that is only partially giving them a standing ovation. Something new has been tried today, something possibly refreshing which may, like the war on Iraq, cast a new light on a region and people who have for years refused to grow with the rest of the globe and used this inability to perpetrate some very destructive and hurtful things.

Stay tuned, the best is yet to come! Peace might be around the corner. Or it may be way down the block, off to the left and then circling around to the right. Let’s wait and see.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

"Friending" the Judge

Another episode in our continuing series,  Facebook meets the judicial system and goodness knows where that will lead....

This time, a North Carolina judge has been reprimanded for "friending" husband's counsel in a pending family law case, and having the occasional chat about the proceeding on Facebook - while trial was in progress.

Needless to say, when mother's counsel learned of this, she decided to poke back - with a complaint to the state's Judicial Standards Commission, which has now issued a public reprimand against North Carolina judge, B. Carlton Terry Jr.:

Judge Terry agrees that he will not repeat such conduct in the future, mindful of the potential threat any repetition of his conduct poses to public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary and to the administration of justice.

Judge Terry agrees he will promptly read and familiarize himself with the Code of Judicial Conduct.

(h/t - Robert J. Ambrogi)

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Clinton and Bush: The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Summit in Toronto

Wise Law Blog's Garry J. Wise attended at the Bush - Clinton Summit at the Toronto Convention Centre on May 29, 2009. His report follows:

It was an event where cordiality would certainly trump controversy.

This, perhaps, was not surprising, given the conservative tone established by a banking executive's introduction of Bill Clinton. He lauded the former President's accomplishments in office, citing job creation stimulated by cuts in welfare payments to America's poor and Mr. Clinton's ability to move the Democratic party "back to the centre."

(Clearly, there would be no home-ice advantage for progressives at this arena, despite Toronto's typically moderate, liberal leanings)

For his own part, the dialogue's mostly-deferential moderator, Frank McKenna, a former Liberal Premier of New Brunswick, Canada's 21st Ambassador to the U.S. and currently Toronto-Dominion Bank Deputy Chair, did little to steer the discussion toward any seriously newsworthy comment by either former President on any questions lingering about his administration's legacy.

It was not to be an afternoon of the toughest questions - or newly-illuminating answers.

If there were certain elephants in the room - questions on impeachment, perjury and toxic partisanship, on the Bush administration's use of torture or former Vice President Cheney's recent, repeated accusation that current President Barack Obama is making America less safe - nobody was asking.

And neither former President was telling.

Thus, those hoping for any specific discussion on "enhanced interrogation methods" or a critical look at America's direction in the wake of 9-11 were destined to go home disappointed.

For much of the well-heeled crowd inside, who paid between $200 and $2500 for the privilege of attending the spectacle, self-styled as "history in the making," that seemed perfectly fine.

Outdoors, however, a throng of noisy but almost farcically well-behaved protesters (this is Toronto, after all) demanded that Toronto's police force immediately arrest Mr. Bush for torture and other alleged war crimes.

Their call was punctuated by an area in their cordoned-off protest zone where willing protesters politely lined up, waiting a turn to toss their footwear at an effigy of Mr. Bush that conveniently sat in as an undefended target for their pointed, but on this day, marginalized outrage.

Let's be clear - true controversy was avoided at all costs.

As a window, however, into the lives and minds of the world's two most powerful men of the last sixteen years, the event certainly delivered with ninety minutes of interesting and often-amusing political theater.

A revealing subtext, nonetheless, may well be in the degree to which the easy retreat by both to safe and common ground underlines the closed and narrow circle of policy and opinion occupied by America's two political parties - and the comfort with which its past leaders protect themselves, and each other from true accountability and scrutiny in the legacy years that follow their administrations' sunsets.

Thus, for those of us in the audience, it was a unique peak into the rules of the road in America's most elite group of all - its Past-President's Club.

Bill Clinton

"America has never had a better ally than Canada," Mr. Clinton stated, warming the audience at the opening of wide-ranging remarks that touched upon Canada's continuing military engagement in Afghanistan, the increasing, documented perils of global warming, and his Clinton Global Initiative, a project aimed at bringing together government, corporate and other leadership interests to address the world's pressing concerns.

Among his key points:

• It is his hope that Canada's military will "stay a bit longer" in Afghanistan;
• He stresses recent research at MIT that has concluded the effects of global warming by the end of this century will be twice as severe as previously estimated six years ago - and could be even worse than that;
• He commended Toronto Mayor David Miller for this City's participation in the Clinton Foundation's C40 Cities Initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by the world's largest cities;
• He highlighted his current work with the American Heart Association to combat alarming increases in the prevalence of juvenile diabetes and childhood obesity.

Anticipating the question and answer segment that was to follow the introductory speeches by each former President, Mr. Clinton noted - perhaps apologetically - the constraints imposed on his ability to be fully candid by his wife's appointment as U.S. Secretary of State.

"I have to worry what they will ask Hillary and President Obama if I mess up an answer."

He made it clear, however, that he was not in Toronto to engage in any dust-up with Mr. Bush, indicating that he would do his best to "thwart" any attempt by Mr. McKenna to encourage the event's two marquee guests to "devour each other."

"We'll have an argument, you'll think it's cute..," Mr. Clinton noted, perhaps derisively at the prospect of any conflict in the conversation ahead, making it rather plain that Hillary's role aside, he had no personal inclination to engage in any direct crossfire with his successor.

Instead, he addressed the existential challenge inherent in the life of any ex-U.S. President, noting the U.S. Constitution mandates no role for the nation's former chief executives.

"There is no job description for a former President," said Mr. Clinton. "You have to figure out what to do for the rest of your life." Noting the necessary adjustment after leaving office, he said, "It takes a while to figure out that you're not President any more."

But, he added, a former President quickly learns things have changed. "They don't play Hail to the Chief anymore when you walk into a room."

For Mr. Clinton, the solution lies in continued public service and in living in the present and the future, rather than the past. "I don't tell too many war stories."

Instead, his post-Presidential efforts aim to enhance the critical role of non-governmental entities in effecting necessary change.

People must "do something," he stated, whether that be about global warming, swine flu, or any current challenge in what he sees as our now, highly-interconnected world.

"Citizens can do their part in the 21st century," he urged.

He noted the internet's power as a fundraising tool, enabling individual participation in micro-banking via KIVA.org and disaster relief efforts, such as the Hurricane Katrina experience in which millions of donors combined to aid with average online donations of $56.00.

"How you contribute is the key," said Mr. Clinton.

On the legacy of a presidency he concludes, "The real issue is if the world is better when you leave than when you start."

For Mr. Clinton, "that depends on the how."

George W. Bush

Not surprisingly, George Bush is rather enjoying his immediate post-Presidency.

In a disarmingly jovial, even at times impish talk that did little to dispel the widely-held view that Mr. Bush may indeed be an enjoyable sort of fellow with whom to shoot the breeze, he began by drawling, "I like being in Texas again."

In fact, after commending former first lady Laura Bush on her acquisition of their new Dallas home, he noted jokingly that his initial reaction upon arrival in Texas, after departing the White House, was "Free at last!"

"I don't miss the spotlight," he said, noting he was enjoying the transition from moving at "a hundred miles an hour to zero."

His current activities include walking his dog Barney, and he noted the irony of a former President's engagement in the "stoop and scoop" duties now incumbent upon him in his new neighbourhood.

Beyond that, Laura Bush has mandated his new "domestic agenda," Mr. Bush deadpanned, including mowing the lawn and similar household chores.

Regarding his future plans, Mr. Bush advised, "I'm a Type-A personality - I need something to do." For the former President, that will in the immediate future include writing a book on his Presidency.

"There is no short-term, objective view of history," he stated. "I want people to understand why I made the decisions I made."

Mr. Bush also took a typically self-effacing, humorous jab at his many critics, noting that by becoming an author, he would be sending a message to those with doubts about his inclination - and perhaps, ability - to even read a book.

"I'm gonna prove 'em wrong," he joked.

Mr. Bush will also focus on building a policy centre and Presidential Library at Southwestern Methodist University in Dallas, where he intends to promote his continuing Freedom Agenda.

"Freedom is the alternative to the ideology of the haters. Freedom is tranformative. Freedom brings opportunity. Freedom brings peace," he said.

"I will keep talking about it until my dying day."

On Canada-US relations, Mr. Bush echoed Mr. Clinton's sentiments.

"America is lucky to have such a good friend on our northern border. Canada is our ally and trading partner." Underlining his continuing, staunch support for free trade, Mr. Bush reiterated his opposition to isolationism and "buy American" policies. "There should be no walls between Canada and the US."

Mr. Bush remains an optimist, unrepentant about the war in Iraq. "The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein," he argued, repeating a mantra that defined much of his Administration.

He seemed to relish the opportunity for a new role as an extravagently-paid keynote speaker.

"I believe in free speech," he punned with a grin, hinting at the considerable sums ponied up by the audience of 6,000.

"Thank you for coming."

Clinton, Bush and McKenna

The program's final segment featured its much-anticipated dialogue between the two former Presidents and Mr. McKenna.

The thirty-minute, three-way conversation touched upon:

• The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq;
• Barack Obama's moderating policy toward Cuba;
• Gay marriage, the Defence of Marriage Act and the US military's "Don't Ask Don"t Tell" policy toward gay servicemen and women;
  
• Mr. Clinton's failure to act in a timely manner to prevent the 1994 Rwandan genocide;
• New regulations requiring the presentation of passports at border points in order to enter the U.S. from Canada.

In perhaps its most jagged moment, Mr. Clinton expressed his remorse at failing to move quickly enough to stop the Rwandan genocide.

Reiterating his belief that had America acted expeditiously, hundreds of thousands of lives might have been saved, Clinton acknoweldged his administration's lapse.

"I will live with it for the rest of my life." he said, thanking Rwandans for their forgiveness, and stating his determination to continue his work in Rwanda to "make it up to them."

On signing the Defence of Marriage Act, which limits federal recognition of same-sex marriages, Clinton defended his 1994 decision as a compromise to stave off others' efforts to pursue a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Mr. Bush reiterated his belief that marriage is, in fact, limited to a sacred union between a man and a woman and was emphatic in his opposition to recognition of gay marriage. Mr. Clinton indicated his position continues to "evolve" on this issue.

On President Obama's relaxation on travel and other restrictions involving Cuba, Mr. Clinton deferred to the current Secretary of State, and indicated support for a moderated American policy toward Cuba.

Mr. Bush disagreed. "Diplomacy only works if there is leverage," he contended.

In a more personal moment, Mr. Bush commended Mr. Clinton for never openly criticizing his successor. Mr. Bush was less flattering about certain other, unnamed predecessors, however, who had been more vocal in opposition to his administration's direction.

"It was disrespectful. I didn't appreciate it," he said.

(It was unclear whether Mr. Bush was referring in this context to former President Jimmy Carter or his father, former President George H.W. Bush)

This dialogue presented an opportune moment for Mr. McKenna to enquire as to Mr. Bush's thoughts on Mr. Cheney's recent criticisms of the current Obama administration.

The question, of course, never came.

Mr. Clinton returned the favour of praise, commending Mr. Bush on his administration's financial support for AIDS relief in Africa. 

Noting that "To whom much is given, much is required," Mr. Bush framed AIDS relief as both a humanitarian necessity and a national security imperative that could reduce dangerous hopelessness in Africa and promote understanding of America as a caring nation.

On the election of President Obama, Mr. Clinton remarked that it serves as proof that "America is no longer a black/white nation."

An interesting moment came at the dialogue's conclusion, when Mr. McKenna delivered an impassioned plea for America to reconsider its decision to require that passports be presented by Canadian  visitors at U.S. border crossings. "We thought we were different," Mr. McKenna complained.

"That was a good speech, Frank," Mr. Bush responded. "You should think about getting back into the game."

Both Mr. Clinton and Mr. Bush appeared mystified regarding the border policy, admitting ignorance as to the passport-reqirement regulations, passed in December 2007, during Mr. Bush's tenure.

Mr. Bush queried, "What happened to the EZ Pass Program? I thought we were getting somewhere with that."

Mr. Clinton offered action on the issue. "I'm going back home to see what I can come up with."

Even in the Past-Presidents' Club, then, it apparently helps to have close contacts in Washington.

Many thanks to Omar Ha-Redeye, of Slaw and Law is Cool, who procured our tickets for the event, and Jennifer Smith, of Runesmith's Canadian Content, who also joined us, along with a colleague of Mr. Ha'Redeye's (who, perhaps surprisingly, has no blog to which we may link)

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

The Bush Clinton Toronto Debate

Our full report on this event is now online here.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Clinton and Bush Toronto "Debate Today

.. and Wise Law Blog will be there.  Expect our full report on the event later tonight.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

UPDATE:  May 30, 2009

Our report is now online here.

GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Sotomayor - Running A "Hot Bench"

On Justice Sotomayor's courtroom demeanour:

“They call it a hot bench when a judge asks a lawyer a lot of questions — well, she isn’t afraid of running a hot bench,” said H. Raymond Fasano, Republican immigration lawyer who has appeared before her 24 times, mostly in asylum cases, and is a fan. “When a judge asks a lot of questions, that means she’s read the record, she knows the issues and she has concerns that she wants resolved. And that’s the judge’s job.”

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

But It's Not Google

Microsoft intoduces Bing, its new search engine, and New York Times writer Miguel Helft observes:

Meanwhile, some tech people were already noting that Bing is also an unfortunate acronym: “But It’s Not Google.”

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Great Headline of the Day

Rahm "Hava Nagila" Emanuel Turns Springsteen Jewish.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Judging Sotomayor (in One Sentence or Less)

Scholars, lawyers and even one of our favourite U.S. law bloggers weigh in on Justice Sotomayor's judicial record in a New Yok Times article today.

See Sotomayor’s Appellate Opinions Are Unpredictable, Lawyers and Scholars Say.

The article falls quite a bit short.

Reducing complex appellate judicial opinions into single sentence decision-bites for the purpose of pigeonholing "whose side a judge is on" strikes me as neither an illuminating nor academically honest pursuit.

It may simply be an American rite-of-passage around Supreme Court nominations, but as Walter Olsen correctly implies in the Times article, such analysis is unlikely to lead to much more than uninformed caricature attacks. 

This brand of commentary is, of course, not without its own irony, given the ready propensity of Justice Sotomayor's critics to cast aspersions on the nominee's own intellectual depth.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Esquire's Worst Lawyer Ads Ever

Seeing is believing. 

More at Esquire's Five Lawyer Ads That Make Any Supreme Court Candidate Look Brilliant:

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

The Conservative Stacking of U.S. Federal Courts

As the silly season commences with full-tilt conservative attacks upon President Obama's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court, an L.A. Times blog article addresses the cumulative impact of the Bush adminstration's eight years of federal judicial appointments:

Legal scholars have observed that proponents of gay marriage have avoided taking the issue to federal court so far because of the dominance of conservative judges and justices on the federal bench after the eight-year tenure of President George W. Bush.

The U.S. Supreme Court has what usually results in a 5-4 majority against extending rights to gays by recognizing sexual orientation as a vulnerable class of citizens in need of protection.

And all but one of the 13 federal appeals circuits has a reliable conservative majority. Even the exception, the San Francisco-based U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, experienced a curtailing of its liberal orientation with Bush’s seven appointments.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Sonia Sotomayor to be Obama Supreme Court Nominee

According to CNN and New York Times, President Barack Obama will nominate 2nd Circuit Appellate Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court, at a 10:15 a.m. press conference today.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Back from Space

His Hubble Space Telescope repairs now safely behind him, Space Shuttle astronaut Mike Massimino (a.k.a. Astro_Mike) has returned to our planet, and continues to playfully tweet on his experiences:

Getting re-adjusted to gravity, let go of a small bag of groceries and must have expected it to float, luckily no damage.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

N.Y.Times: Not Enough Lawyers...

...to handle an expected General Motors bankruptcy:

How many lawyers will end up working on G.M.'s expected bankruptcy case still is not clear, but in legal circles, the joke is that there may not be enough experienced bankruptcy lawyers available to handle the filing.

In part, that is because so many top lawyers are already running up lots of billable hours working on the Chrysler bankruptcy case, while others have been hired by the government, which is financing the way through bankruptcy for Chrysler and, presumably, G.M.

It is not just lawyers who will be busy handling a G.M. bankruptcy filing, which would be perhaps the biggest and most-watched in legal history. 

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Blackberry Etiquette For Lawyers

In her recent article, Blackberry Behaviour: Is it Ruining Your Reputation, Allison Sheilds of Legal Ease offers a list of eleven behavioural tips for Blackberry users everywhere:

1. If you are attending an event, meal, meeting or presentation,turn off your electronic devices. If you MUST keep them on, turn them to silent or vibrate, do not place them on the table so that the vibration disturbs those around you;

2. If you are awaiting an important call or email,consider not attending the event so that you can attend to your important business;

3. If it is imperative that you attend the event, be sure that you keep your focus or attention on the event. Advise your companions at the outset that you are waiting for an urgent call, and sit near the door. Leave the room or the table discreetly if you absolutely MUST check your email or voice mail or return a call or email;

4. Remember that those around you are forming an impression of you AT ALL TIMES; if you are with a client and are checking your BlackBerry, reading emails, surfing the web, the client is going to think that you don't care about them and that they are not important to you;

5. Be aware that if you are replying to important emails while at dinner, a networking event or another meeting,you are not presenting your best self either at the event or in the email. Not only are you unable to devote your complete attention to the event and the people you are with, but you are also unable to devote your full attention to the email message. You may be making a poor impression on two groups of people at the same time.

6. Even if your device is under the table or you think you are being discreet others in the room are well aware of what you are doing. Regardless of what you think, you are NOT getting away with it!

7.The smaller the meeting, the more noticeable your behavior. But even in large meetings, be mindful of those around you, since they will certainly be aware of your behavior, so if your boss or an important client or colleague is sitting near you, refrain from checking your BlackBerry. And if the presenter, meeting facilitator or your boss is standing, seated on a dais or is behind you, they will be aware of your behavior even in a large room.

8.Reconsider your definition of what is an 'urgent' matter and what can wait. Think about your priorities, not just in the short term (answering this email immediately as opposed to 10 minutes from now), but also in the long term (if the client thinks I'm rude, I may lose the account).

9. Bluetooth is a great technology, but it isn't a fashion statement.Remove your headset when in the presence of others.

10.Just because you engage in an activity by yourself doesn't mean that you are alone. Be considerate of others in public places. Even if you are dining alone, other restaurant patrons, train riders, and people who work out at your gym don't want to be bothered with or interrupted by your telephone conversations. Not only do you run the risk of exposing confidential client information by making business calls in public, but the person riding next to you on the train or in line behind you at the supermarket could be your next great client - if they don't think you're rude, arrogant, annoying or insensitive.

11.To my fellow Twitterers: "live-tweeting" from an event may be great for your Twitter followers, but before you do it, make sure you're not hurting your reputation with others in the room. This behavior may be acceptable in a large conference or meeting which includes technologically savvy attendees, but it may be considered rude in other settings. Consider the impact of your tweets on those you're with, as well as those who follow you. (Will your client appreciate that you're tweeting from court rather than talking to him while you wait for the judge?)

OK, so maybe I am occasionally guilty of a few of the offences listed above.  

I'll try to do better in the future, Allison, really.

But first, give me a second - I have to check my email...

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG