Comments on: Public Citizen, the VA ACLU, and the TJ Center are representing me.

By: Waldo Jaquith

Waldo Jaquith — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 02:14:48 +0000

Eleëmosynary? That’s so cool. :)

By: Kathleen Seidel

Kathleen Seidel — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 23:08:07 +0000

Wow. You got yourself the A-Team! That Opposition to Motion to Compel is a thing of beauty. And speak of the devil, I was just thinking of Paul Levy today, and wondering what was going on with you, after reading a post on Denialism that used the word "eleëmosynary" (without the diaresis). Paul used that word (also without the diaresis) in the response to Clifford Shoemaker's justification for issuing his ridiculous subpoena against me last year. The Force is strong here.

By: Waldo Jaquith

Waldo Jaquith — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:32:01 +0000

Oy, with the two the Garretts in the case, I had to go and invent another one. :) Thanks, Adisa.

By: Adisa

Adisa — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:00:23 +0000

Waldo: The ALCU’s lawyer is Rebecca Glenberg, not Garrett. Please make correction. Thank you and keep up the great work. -Muse

By: Will M.

Will M. — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 23:13:38 +0000

I’m now even more fascinated by Sam and Genevieve’s secretive allusions than I am by the trainwreck that Garrett’s legal efforts have become.

By: Genevieve

Genevieve — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:49:17 +0000

The opposition to the motion to compel is awesome, Waldo. (it’s posted at Citizen Media Law Project).

Sam: Um. We can have this discussion somewhere that isn’t the Internet, yes? Besides, I’m pretty sure you can guess what the first was.

By: Sam

Sam — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:38:01 +0000

Dare I ask what the first was? ;)

By: Genevieve

Genevieve — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:34:49 +0000

“bestowed upon me, coincidentally enough, by Genevieve).” Second biggest mistake I ever made in my life… ;)

By: Waldo Jaquith

Waldo Jaquith — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:16:27 +0000

Hey, if I could go against Thomas Garrett in front of a judge, one-on-one, no attorneys? Sign me up. Hell, I’d sell tickets.

By: Sam

Sam — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:13:38 +0000

While I think it’s excellent that you have so many skilled people sticking up for you, from a completely abstract and nostalgic point of view, your pro se representation harkened for me back to a simpler time, when people discussed their grievances on their own behalf in a civil and unpretentious manner, and when folks like James Young would have been imprisoned–because it was illegal to earn one’s living by the practice of law in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

It’s a fun fact I gleaned out of an awesome book I received for Christmas (bestowed upon me, coincidentally enough, by Genevieve).

By: Genevieve

Genevieve — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 03:05:26 +0000

Good for you! Um, side note, part of my editorial board application for law journal involves a short proposal for our annual symposium (this year was the intersection of transgendered lives and the law), and I’m proposing a topic on anonymous speech on the internet. We probably won’t do it (especially because I’m not really going out for the symposium editor position, but we’re encouraged to apply for everything since the seats are so competitive), but it’s an incredibly interesting topic, so I’m happy just to learn more about it. Thanks for the inspiration, Waldo!

By: James Young

James Young — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 02:47:03 +0000

Glad to hear you’ve got counsel. I agree with your assessment about “playing lawyer” in these circumstances.

Here’s another one of those flippant quotations that we might see in one of your opponent’s briefs: “The man who represents himself has a fool for a client: — Abraham Lincoln.