Well, not quite but pretty close:
Famous legal trials have produced some unlikely partnerships: Clarence Darrow and John Scopes, Johnnie Cochran and O. J. Simpson.
Add Buju Banton and David Oscar Markus to that mix.
Hmm, I’m not sure which pairing is more intriguing — Scopes, OJ, and Banton, or Darrow, Cochran and Markus?
Actually, Darrow Cochran & Markus LLP — that has a really nice ring to it!
In other news, the NYT weighs in on the Supreme Court’s preemption-heavy docket:
In four cases, the court will address an obscure but significant debate on federal pre-emption of state law. The pro-pre-emption view is often pro-business, because it interferes with state efforts to protect citizens against corporate misconduct. Pre-emption can also protect against state interference with the national economy.
In AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, the cellphone provider claims that California contract law has been used to frustrate the Federal Arbitration Act. If the company wins, it will likely force unhappy customers to rely on an arbitrator to resolve their differences with the company. If the respondents win, they will likely be able to bring AT&T Mobility to court — to answer accusations of fraud for promising “free” phones, then charging for the tax on their retail value. That would be good for consumers.
It’s interesting how this year the preemption doctrine — normally a obscure battle between big business and consumers — is entwined with heavy duty political overtones, as two different federal courts have used the doctrine in opposite ways — one employing “states’ rights” to invalidate the Defense of Marriage Act; and the other finding the AZ immigration law to be preempted by federal statutes.
Oh yeah — happy Monday!