This afternoon, the Federalist Society at the University of Chicago Law School sponsored an interesting debate. It featured Berkeley law professor John Yoo, author of the so-called “torture memos,” and Bob Barr, the prominent libertarian and former congressman, debating the following subject: “Presidential Power v. Civil Liberties in Times of War.”

(Executive power is the subject of Professor Yoo’s new — and well-reviewed — book, Crisis and Command.)

Reports on the proceedings from attendees — plus comment from Professor Yoo, who apparently accused the Bush Administration of “incompetence and stupidity” — after the jump.

UPDATE: Photos added, after the jump.

As we previously reported, a sizable portion of the art collection of defunct law firm Heller Ehrman was sold at auction yesterday. The auction took place at Bonhams in San Francisco, before a standing-room-only crowd.

We submitted absentee bids on the following:

• lot 1, Pale Orange Begonia (we bid $500; it sold for $1,159);
• lot 2, Glass of Water (we bid $500; it sold for $671);
• lot 99, Lover of Time (we bid $800; it sold for $1,830);
• lot 210, Bonsai and Bicycle (we bid $1,000; it sold for $4,575); and
• lot 290, Return of the Rice Cooker (we bid $2,000; it sold for $5,185).

All of the items we bid on went for well above their high estimates — bad news for us, but good news for Heller creditors.

So, how much dinero did the auction generate in total?

Here’s some good news about Edward DiDonato, the Villanova lacrosse star and son of a Fox Rothschild partner, who was allegedly shot by Gerald Ung, a Temple University law student. From Lacrosse News:

Former Villanova lacrosse captain Eddie DiDonato has cleared all serious life-threatening obstacles and has been taken off his ventilator following a ninth operation 17 days after being shot six times in an Old City altercation, according to his best friend.

DiDonato, a La Salle College High graduate, remains in the Intensive Care Unit and according to Thomas Jefferson University Hospital officials is still listed in fair condition.

Rob Forster, who has served as the DiDonato family spokesman, said his former teammate on the Explorers’ 2004 state championship team has continued to amaze doctors as well as family and friends with his resiliency. DiDonato was near death after the shootings early on Jan. 17 and survived a major scare 10 days ago when his condition became grave due to an infection.

We’re glad to hear about DiDonato’s improved state. We will keep you posted on his condition.

Meanwhile, a legal defense fund has been set up for the accused shooter, law student Gerald Ung.

We first heard about this months ago — back in September, from another speaker at the Lavender Law conference. We didn’t mention it at the time, though, since we’re not that comfortable outing people.

But now that the cat has been let out of the bag — or closet, as the case may be — by the mainstream media, let’s… go there. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

The biggest open secret in the landmark trial over same-sex marriage being heard in San Francisco is that the federal judge who will decide the case, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, is himself gay.

Many gay politicians in San Francisco and lawyers who have had dealings with Walker say the 65-year-old jurist, appointed to the bench by President George H.W. Bush in 1989, has never taken pains to disguise — or advertise — his orientation.

Shocking? Not exactly. Judge Walker is a professionally successful white male, with great job security and a six-figure income, who’s in his sixties — and has never been married. A confirmed bachelor, if you will. Who lives in San Francisco. Umm, yeah.

(On the other hand, we hear His Honor’s favorite drink is a Maker’s Mark Manhattan — a fairly butch beverage, despite the maraschino cherry. We’ll stick with our cosmos, thank you very much.)

So this brings us to the question that Ashby Jones posed over at the WSJ Law Blog earlier today: If Judge Walker is gay, what should we make of that fact?

If you’ve always wanted to own a piece of defunct law firm Heller Ehrman, today is your lucky day. A sizable portion of the firm’s art collection is hitting the auction block in about an hour, at Bonhams & Butterfields in San Francisco.

We previously covered a prior Heller art auction, here in New York, but that sale involved just a handful of pieces. The auction taking place today — and starting very soon, at 10 a.m. Pacific time (or 1 p.m. Eastern time) — is much larger in scope.

So what’s up for sale? And how can you get a piece of the action?

Our coverage of the London legal market tends to be episodic. We tried offering more regular coverage for a while, with our Letter from London column, but we put the feature on hold to focus on domestic developments. (We might revive the London column if we can find a sponsor for it.)

We will, however, cover major news out of London — such as last week’s massive defections from White & Case to Latham & Watkins.

This is not a typical lede for a post on the Wall Street Journal Law Blog. Ashby Jones writes:

Cornell is the Lady Gaga of the law-school world. Both are white hot, but the explanations behind each’s popularity don’t fully add up.

Dem’s fighting words, Ashby. You’re not a bad guy, but Lady Gaga has more fabulosity in a single fake eyelash than you will ever possess. Her popularity is entirely explicable — due to her delightfully danceable music, and her genius as a performer — and richly deserved.

(Just watch the video for Poker Face. Res ipsa loquitur.)

Now, what about Cornell Law School? And other leading law schools — which celebrities do they most closely resemble?

* Unemployment falls to a five-month low of 9.7 percent. [Reuters]

* Ten Americans have been charged with child abduction and criminal conspiracy after trying to take 33 Haitian kids out of Haiti without government permission. [New York Times]

* The legal battle over a John Edwards sex tape, which allegedly shows the disgraced politician and trial lawyer having sex with a pregnant Rielle Hunter (ick), arrives in a North Carolina courtroom today. [CNN]

Many job seekers would love to work as lawyers for the federal government but haven’t had luck landing a position. Openings for attorneys on USAJOBS attract hundreds of applicants. In light of massive law-firm layoffs and the relative stability of government employment, high demand for federal jobs is unsurprising. You have to be a positively brilliant lawyer to land a government gig these days.

Or not. If you’ve applied to the U.S. Department of Justice without success, ask yourself: Do I have a normal or above-normal IQ?

If you do, you might be… overqualified. From a Justice Department job posting (emphasis added):

The Civil Rights Division encourages qualified applicants with targeted disabilities to apply. Targeted disabilities are deafness, blindness, missing extremities, partial or complete paralysis, convulsive disorder, mental retardation, mental illness, severe distortion of limbs and/or spine.

Quips former DOJ lawyer Ty Clevenger: “Having worked there, I think CRD has plenty of mentally retarded lawyers already. Mostly in supervisory positions.”

Says another tipster who brought this to our attention: “I understand how you can have a few missing limbs or be partially paralyzed and still be a trial lawyer, but someone with an IQ less than 70?!?!!?”

Recruiting mentally retarded lawyers to litigate civil rights cases for the DOJ may take the expression “good enough for government work” too far. But, in fairness, there is a caveat to all of this….

Earlier this week, at the PLI Law Firm Leadership and Management Institute — which was excellent, by the way (and not just because we presented there) — Dean David Van Zandt, of Northwestern University School of Law, offered some reflections on the future of legal education. (We used one of his comments as a recent quote of the day.)

Dean Van Zandt’s presentation was thoughtful and thought-provoking. He analyzed a number of recent reforms made by leading law schools. He also explained the changes that Northwestern Law School has made to its academic program.

One of his most interesting tidbits was the starting salary that would constitute a “break-even point” for going to law school. In other words, what salary would you have to earn upon graduation in order to make going to law school an economically rational decision?