Fastcase Presents: The Law Review

For our first official The Law Review podcast, I'm joined by Fastcase CEO Ed Walters. These are the headlines we discuss: 1. While we typically embrace technology being the tech geeks we are, it’s always good to step back and think about how we’re using that technology. In a headline that sounds more like the introduction to a creepy dystopian sci-fi book, thousands of Ukranian protesters received a text message yesterday while protesting that read, “Dear subscriber, you are registered as a participant in a mass disturbance.” The overreaching future is creepy. 2. Former VA governor Bob McDonnell and his wife were indicted yesterday for allegedly accepting gifts valued at over $140,000 from a dietary supplement company. The couple claim they never accepted money with the intent of giving a government benefit, and instead allege the money was a personal gift (even though it’s since been paid back with interest). 3. Can emoji count as a death threat? A reporter recently wondered this after he initiated a drug deal, you know, for a story, and then backed out. It turns out drug dealers aren’t a fan of that. So the drug dealer tracked down the reporter’s real Instagram account and posted a threatening emoji on it. There’s no case pending, but it’s an interesting question – is it easier or harder for emoji to count as harassment. 4. Are more states going to start ticketing people for driving while wearing Google Glass? At least one person is looking at a ticket for driving while wearing the device. We’re going to talk a bit later on about whether or not these kinds of laws should exist, and when they might be appropriate. 5. The 9th Circuit held yesterday that a peremptory strike of a potential juror, just because he mentioned his same-sex lover in a case involving HIV medication pricing, was a violation of the equal protection clause. Striking counsel claimed he was unaware of the juror’s sexual orientation, but the authoring 9th Circuit judge rebutted, claiming that the attorney never asked him a substantive question about his ability to remain impartial. 6. The DC circuit isn’t giving any love to Common Clause’s attorneys seeking to overturn the filibuster rule. While their argument revolves around the majority rule language codified by the Constitution. It looks like this is going to a ripeness or lack of standing issue, especially given that it turns out none of the parties sued – including Vice-President Biden – has the ability to change the rules. Please also take note of our subreddit at reddit.com/r/thelawreview. Feel free to submit stories there or vote on the stories you'd like to hear us discuss that day. You can also email us at podcast /at\ fastcase /dot\ com. Thanks for listening!

So, amusingly, we made this podcast episode as a placeholder so that we could get placed onto the iTunes store, but before we could get it active, Apple already approved our podcast. Click here to subscribe on your various iOS devices and/or computers! While we polish up the podcast and get ready for Episode 1, this one will give you an idea of what you can expect from us going forward. Enjoy!

On May 12, 2012, Fastcase CEO Ed Walters delivered the commencement address at the University of Illinois College of Law, at the Krannert Center for Performing Arts in Champaign, Ill.  [audio at about 21:00]  The text of the address follows: University of Illinois College of Law Commencement Address May 12, 2012 Thank you, Dean Smith.  Members of the faculty, university administrators, distinguished alumni, parents, and members of the graduating class of 2012, it is an honor to serve as your commencement speaker today. Like most of you, when I was growing up, I had a recurring nightmare – that it was the morning of a test, and I hadn't done the reading.  I would sit bolt upright in bed, in a cold sweat.  I had this dream all my life. Until the day I graduated from law school.  On the night after graduation, I had the same nightmare.  I sat bolt upright in bed, and then I realized: I had taken the last exam of my life. Then I smiled, and went back to sleep.  And I've slept pretty peacefully ever since. Welcome to the end of that nightmare.  Welcome to the rest of your life. Your Toughest Grader Until now, you have constantly been tested by other people, evaluated by other people, and graded by other people. Your success has been measured by other people: your parents, your teachers, the SAT, the LSAT.  Your success was measured by their standards for you.  You had to constantly worry: am I passing? Am I failing?  Will my standardized test scores be good enough to get me into law school?  Will I make law review?  Will I graduate cum laude? But soon you will take the bar exam, the last major test of your life.  This will mark the end of the era in which other people will be testing you and grading you.  Starting today, you must prepare to enter a new era in which the primary judge of your success will be: you. And you are the toughest grader you’re ever going to face. So today, I’d like to share some things to consider as you’re defining, measuring, and achieving happiness and success on your own terms. The Fastest Hamster on the Wheel Shortly after law school, I learned an important lesson in defining happiness for myself.  In law school, I was very caught up in other people’s definitions of my success – getting good grades, making law review, getting a good job. I wasn't quite a gunner, but let’s just say that people couldn't put a hoop in front of me without me wanting to jump through it. I worked hard, and I was pretty proud of myself for it – a little too proud.  As we said in law school, "Anything worth doing is worth overdoing." Then I graduated and clerked for a judge for a year, and I carried that attitude with me to my clerkship. And my judge pulled me aside one day, and said very kindly: Ed, you’re doing good work here.  But if you take this attitude into a big law firm, they’re going to chew you up.  There’s no glory in being the fastest hamster on the wheel. That lesson landed on me like a bag of bricks – but the judge was right. I had been looking for other people to recognize how hard I was working.  So I spent my clerkship year letting go of what others expected.  I got out of the Habitrail and cleared all the wood shavings out of my life.  And I arrived at my firm ready to work hard, but also with my own ideas about what constitutes success. And because I learned to stop worrying about what other people think, I was better able to make the very difficult decision to leave my law firm job in 1999 to start a legal publishing company in my living room. Most of my classmates were on their way to making partner or getting great jobs as in-house counsel, and I was struggling to get a software company off the ground.  But it was liberating and thrilling to be contrarian, and ultimately right – to define success on my own terms.  It’s worth noting that I probably would not have succeeded without the full support of my family.  Parents out there: I’m talking to you.