Procrastination is a terrible habit, and the internet is truly the great enabler. How many hours of productivity are lost to YouTube each year?

Judging from Law Firm March Madness traffic, lawyers are definitely among the office workers looking for distraction. Slate has gathered "procrastination rituals" from various professionals. One of the contributors is Judge Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit. His ritual is not to procrastinate:

Procrastination is very unhealthy. It causes problems for the people who are counting on you to complete things in a timely fashion and it makes your own life more difficult.... It helps to be a little compulsive. Then you feel uncomfortable if something is hanging over you -- that's the opposite of procrastination, a compulsion to complete things and get rid of the albatross hanging over you.... I have that compulsion.

And that's why he's Richard Posner: circuit judge, law professor, author of almost forty (40) books, prolific blogger, and one of the world's top 100 public intellectuals. And he even manages to sleep, about six hours a night on average.

"Don't procrastinate." Like so much good advice, it's hard to follow. But we'll try. Just after we're done reading this article about a scientific formula for procrastinating, searching the videos that come up on YouTube when you search "procrastinate", listening to the Posner-Lat podcast, and playing our turn in Scrabulous...

Procrasti-Nation [Slate.com]

In the current issue of Foreign Policy magazine, you'll find their list of the world's top 100 public intellectuals. The list appears here (and you can vote for your top five). Bios of the honorees -- and we must confess, some of these names didn't ring a bell -- appear here.

The public intellectuals explicitly identified on the list as lawyers, judges, or legal scholars are (in alphabetical order):

-- Aitzaz Ahsan, president of Pakistan's Supreme Court Bar Association, and a leader in the Pakistan People's Party;

-- Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian human rights lawyer and Nobel laureate;

-- Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig; and

-- Judge Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit, who wrote the book on public intellectuals.

And here are two other honorees with legal links:

-- University of Chicago law professor and philosopher Martha Nussbaum; and

-- journalist, Harvard Law School graduate, and Kennedy School of Government professor Samantha Power.

What do Professors Nussbaum and Power share in common? Cass Sunstein, as you may recall.

Professor Nussbaum is a former flame of Professor Sunstein, while Professor Power is his current main squeeze. Rumor has it that his move to Harvard Law School from his longtime academic home, the University of Chicago Law School, was prompted by a desire to be closer to the center of power -- Samantha Power, that is.

In their paper Six Degrees of Cass Sunstein: Collaboration Networks in Legal Scholarship, Professors Paul Edelman and Tracey George declared Cass Sunstein to be the "Kevin Bacon" of the law. But it looks like his influence extends beyond the narrow world of legal academia, into the World of Ideas, writ large.

In sum, two percent of the world's top 100 public intellectuals are former or current lovers of Cass Sunstein. This should provide consolation for Cass, who didn't make the list himself.

Professor Sunstein, you are the man.

The Top 100 Public Intellectuals [Foreign Policy]
The Top 100 Public Intellectuals: Bios [Foreign Policy]
Six Degrees of Cass Sunstein: Collaboration Networks in Legal Scholarship [SSRN / Green Bag]

Earlier: The Real Reason Cass Sunstein's Going to Harvard? He's Got the Power

Greetings from the great -- but frigid -- city of Chicago. We're hanging out with friends and doing some sightseeing, but the main reason for our visit is this event, taking place on Thursday (and open to the public):

Judges As Public Figures
Thursday, February 21, 2008, 4:15 PM
University of Chicago Law School, Room II

Judge Richard Posner
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

David Lat
Above the Law
Underneath Their Robes

Professor Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School

While in Chi-town, we will also be meeting readers at an ATL "Happy Hour," similar to the event we held in Miami last year. It will take place on Wednesday, February 20, sometime after work (time and place to be determined).

Update: The Chicago "Happy Hour" will take place on Wednesday, February 20, from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., at Miller's Pub (134 S. Wabash). Hope to see you there!

Schedule of Events [University of Chicago Law School Federalist Society]

You can find the weirdest s**t on Craigslist:

I'm creating a proposal for a downtown performance art show based on US sex laws - the quirkier the better. There are many lists online of these laws, but it's really hard to find the actual statute or case number. In some cases, they either don't exist or are changed to sound funny but the actual law is not so strange. Like, if its illegal to bring an animal into a public space, you could say that porcupines are not allowed at the opera but then neither is a dog. So much for your funny porcupine law.

The strength of the show is based on the truth - like the real Texas law where having 7 or more sex toys in your possession is "intent to distribute". I'm looking to see if some defunct laws ever existed - like the supposed Florida law that banned unmarried women from parachuting on Sundays.

If you even understand what I'm going for and have access to a law library (online or brick&mortar), please contact me.

Cheers,
Gabrielle

Our tipster writes: "I'd take it on myself, but I'm not sure how I'd bill it. I know Loyola 2L is pretty hard up; perhaps he could use the extra bucks. Plus, something tells me Gabrielle's gotta be hot (Roissy would surely agree)."

Gabrielle: you might want to drop Howard Bashman a line. He is a recognized authority on sex toys (as a legal if not practical matter).

Update: A diligent associate at a bonus-bestowing firm recommends A Guide to America's Sex Laws, by no less an authority than the eminent Judge Richard Posner.

But this sex law compendium might come with a big red flag over it, in the wake of Lawrence v. Texas. The diligent associate points out: "Note that it's out of date, coming as it did in the Bowers era."

RESEARCH - Strange Laws for Performance Piece (Lower East Side) [Craigslist]

Well, not in Illinois. In Cavel International v. Madigan (PDF; via How Appealing), the Seventh Circuit upheld an Illinois law making it unlawful to "slaughter a horse if that person knows or should know that any of the horse meat will be used for human consumption."

It's a quirky and interesting case. Howard Bashman provides a concise summary and more discussion over here.

Don't miss page 11 of Judge Richard Posner's slip opinion, which features a photograph of a "birthday cake" made of horse meat. YUM!!

Cavel Int'l v. Madigan (PDF) [U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit]
Horse meat was until recently an accepted part of the American diet [How Appealing]

The rail-thin Judge Richard Posner (7th Cir.), who favors grapefruit for dessert, has this to say about fat people over at his blog:

It makes sense, as the recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine finds, that friends' fatness would have an influence distinct from that of the culture as a whole....

In my own ingroup of 16 judges (11 active members of my court, 4 senior members, and 1 nominee, who will replace an active member who will be taking senior status), only 2 are overweight (12.5 percent), compared to a nationwide average of 66 percent. Among my other friends, judicial and otherwise, the percentage who are overweight is probably no greater than 12.5 percent.

When we read this, we guessed that one of the two overweight judges was Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook. After all, a fondness for Arby's Melts is not a recipe for thinness. But one ex-Seventh Circuit clerk we contacted disagreed:

Actually, Easterbrook has lost a lot of weight. I am not sure who [Posner] meant. Also query whether he used the rigorous BMI > 25 test.

Good point. Did Judge Posner run around the Dirksen Courthouse with a pair of body-fat calipers? Or did he just eyeball his colleagues in the robing room, to see who was sporting muffin tops?

To Seventh Circuit groupies: Which judges are packing a few extra pounds underneath their robes? Please enlighten us, in the comments. Thanks.

Social Obesity -- Posner's Comment [The Becker-Posner Blog]

What do you get when you put the three smartest judges on the Seventh Circuit -- Frank Easterbrook, Richard Posner, and Diane Wood -- on the same panel?

In this case, something weird. Very weird. It's amusing to imagine this trio of legal geniuses wrapping their minds around such a bizarre fact pattern.

Questions Presented:

(1) How can you tell when a gay co-worker is cruising you at the urinals?

(2) Is he checking you out -- or does he just have a lazy eye?

For more details, check out Keeping Up With Jonas.

Gay Guy Harasses Straight Co-Worker at Urinal? [Keeping Up With Jonas]
Bernier v. Morningstar, Inc. [Keeping Up With Jonas (PDF)]

Meet Adrienne (at right), a 22-year-old hottie from South Carolina -- and a current student at Boston College Law School.

Adrienne graces the cover of the current issue of Barstool Sports. We are not familiar with this publication, but we are advised that it is "a prestigious biweekly magazine."

In our opinion, the cover photograph isn't even the best picture of this comely young lawyer-in-training. We think this shot and this one are both superior. To review Adrienne's photo gallery for yourself, click here.

Adrienne -- who will be making an appearance next Thursday, March 15, from 9 to 11 p.m., at an establishment called "Whiskey's" -- is studying for a JD. But based on her interview, it sounds like she's also pursuing her MRS:

Honestly, my dream job would be being a housewife and stay at home Mom. I should have been born in the 1950s I love to wear dresses and aprons, cook, clean, sew, and take care of other people.

I'm a total homebody. That doesn't mean I won’t still put my law degree to good use, but being an amazing wife and mom is definitely going to be my first priority.

Hmm... What would Judge Richard Posner think of "Adrienne, Esq.," becoming a stay-at-home mom? Click here for his thoughts.

Personally, we think it would be a pity for Adrienne's legal skills to go unused:

7. What's your best spring break memory?

I plead the fifth.

Someone certainly knows her criminal law!

Meet the Model: Adrienne [Barstool Sports]
Elite Universities and Women's Careers -- Posner [Becker-Posner Blog]

A quick follow-up to yesterday's post about Judge Richard Posner's opinion in the "Giftes" free speech T-shirt case.

Thanks to the commenter who brought the two drawings in the opinion exhibits to our attention. We reprint them after the jump. And we look forward to seeing them in the august pages of the Federal Reporter.

A detailed excerpt, plus a link to the full opinion, can be accessed here (via How Appealing). Money quote:

[T]he picture and the few words imprinted on the Brandt T-shirt are no more expressive of an idea or opinion that the First Amendment might be thought to protect than a young child's talentless infantile drawing which Brandt's design successfully mimics. Otherwise every T-shirt that was not all white with no design or words... would be protected by the First Amendment, and schools could not impose dress codes or require uniforms without violating the free speech of the students, a proposition sensibly rejected in the Blau case.

"[T]alentless infantile drawing"? Judge Posner, that was way harsh.

You had to rule against the plaintiffs based on the caselaw; fine. But did you really have to insult their artistic abilities? Kids are like district judges: their feelings are easily hurt.

(If you're not familiar with this bizarre but amusing litigation, read our earlier post, available here.)

Rulings of Note from the Seventh Circuit [How Appealing]

Earlier: Lawsuit of the Day: Gifties v. Tards

Here's an interesting appeal that was recently argued before the Seventh Circuit. From the Chicago Sun-Times (via Ted Frank):

Four years ago, the "Gifties" of Beaubien School lost in the principal's office. Then, this class of gifted eighth-grade students lost in U.S. district court.

Undeterred, Thursday the group went before one of the highest courts of the land, arguing their principal violated First Amendment free speech rights when he punished them for wearing T-shirts with the word "Gifties" on them.

"There's a certain point when you have to stick up for your rights," said Michael Brandt, one of 24 gifted students who sued their principal and the Chicago Board of Education. His mother, Irene Dymkar, is representing the students in the class action lawsuit.

At oral argument, Judge Richard Posner sounded unsympathetic to their cause:

"Why do people bring lawsuits for such trivialities?" Judge Richard Posner, a notoriously tough jurist, asked Dymkar during a three-judge hearing of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit Thursday. "Have they been harmed, these 'Gifties'?"

Chicago Public Schools lawyers say Kotis was protecting the kids from possible attacks by regular education students. They argue there were tensions between the groups and Kotis had outlawed the word "gifties," as well as "tards," used to refer to regular education students....

The gifted students claim there was no safety issue.

We admire the appellants' chutzpah. It takes guts to label your classmates "tards."

But we question their assertion that there was no safety issue. They might as well have worn T-shirts reading, "I'm a nerd. Please beat the crap out of me."

Kids pit principle vs. their principal [Chicago Sun-Times via Overlawyered]
T-shirt battle before Seventh Circuit [Overlawyered]

* Having your cake -- and screwing it, too? [Overlawyered]

* If your cake contains trans fats, Judge Posner -- who's rumored to enjoy grapefruit for dessert -- will take it away from you, and dump it in the trash. [Becker-Posner Blog]

* Marty Lipton's theory of executive compensation: "I make tons of money, and I'm just the hired help. So client CEOs should make even more!" [Reuters]

* Chief Justice John Roberts: the boy who cried "constitutional crisis"? [Slate via How Appealing]

* This is lame. If everyone's a name partner, then no one's a name partner. [WSJ Law Blog]

* We suspect that the percentage of bad bosses is higher in the legal profession. Lawyers aren't trained to be managers. And suck at it. [Workplace Prof Blog]

* The New York Court of Appeals: some tricky picking for Eliot Spitzer. [Judicial Reports]

* It's about time that we had a litigatrix in the White House! [New York Times]

As previously mentioned, we're on a reduced publication schedule this week. We'll be doing a daily news round-up (and maybe a few other random posts here and there). We'll return to our normal diarrhea of the keyboard publishing schedule on January 2.

* Civil libertarians, just raise the white flag. The Justice Department knows what you're doing RIGHT NOW. [Washington Post]

* His father always knew there was "something special" about Judge Frank Easterbrook. And litigants who have appeared before FHE feel the same way. [Buffalo News via How Appealing (of course -- no offense, but we aren't regular readers of the Buffalo News)]

* In other Seventh Circuit news, Judge Richard Posner delivers remarks about maritime law to an audience of supermodels. We swear we're not making this up. [Washington Post]

* Following up on our prior report, here's a clear sign that Chadbourne & Parke partners don't have enough business. [WSJ Law Blog]

* If McDonald's french fries never taste the same, blame it on the anti-trans-fat legislation. [UPI]

* Complications of diabetes: not just medical, but law-related, too. [New York Times]

* If you're a judge with unfulfilled literary aspirations, try writing something safe and non-controversial. Ideally it should be something nobody would want to read. We suggest a pop-up book about the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. [St. Louis Post-Dispatch via How Appealing]

* Even more fun than charades: take Peter Lattman to a party, start reading out random newspaper headlines, and challenge him to find a legal angle to the stories. [WSJ Law Blog]

Check it out here.

We haven't had a chance to read the whole transcript yet. We've spent the afternoon chasing down bonus news and mystery smells.

But if you have read it, and have some reactions or favorite parts, please share them in the comments. Thanks!

Update: The Washington Post comments on Judge Posner's foray into cyberspace in this article.

The Second Life of Judge Richard A. Posner [New World Notes]
Posner: First Judge in Cyberspace [Eminent Domain via How Appealing]

* It's all about the benjamins, baby. Bonus season is upon us. And we're standing by to broadcast every move. So please email us with any news, rumors, and leaked memos about bonuses.

* Truthful tips are especially welcome. Look for the first wave of bonus announcements in the coming week.

* And check out the most anal retention letter ever.

* In non-Biglaw developments, it was a busy week for the Supreme Court. They heard all about EPA regulatory discretion, the Federal Circuit's recondite jurisprudence, and other fun topics.

* On tap for the SCOTUS: Ken Starr and a bizarrely fascinating case. It's like Bill 'n Monica, all over again. But is it sexy enough for same-day audio-cast? Probably not.

* Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, the imminent Democratic takeover is already being felt at the Senate Judiciary Committee. The big white-collar shops are eagerly anticipating lots of new business.

* Speaking of elections, please cast your vote for November 2006 Couple of the Month. And if you're an NYU Law School student, please forward us the results of voting in the 3L hottie contest.

* In federal appellate judge news, Judge Morris Arnold is recovering nicely, Judge Richard Posner is getting testy, and Judge Frank Easterbrook is now Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook.

* And over in the district court, Judge Lee Rosenthal (S.D. Tex.) is probably out of the running for a promotion to the Fifth Circuit (despite being very highly regarded).

* Finally, in state court land, some judges are getting a little big for their britches robes. They're mouthing off, railing against immigrants, and making spectacles of themselves. Pipe down, Your Honors, and stay out of trouble.

Because this distinguished and brilliant jurist seems rather grumpy as of late. Last week, in a published opinion, he slapped around the IRS.

And now Judge Richard Posner -- who, by the way, will be assuming virtual form later this month -- delivers stinging benchslaps to lawyers for playing fast and loose with jurisdiction:

[T]he lawyers have wasted our time as well as their own and (depending on the fee arrangements) their clients' money. We have been plagued by the carelessness of a number of the lawyers practicing before the courts of this circuit with regard to the required contents of jurisdictional statements in diversity cases.

It is time, as we noted in BondPro, that this malpractice stopped. We direct the parties to show cause within 10 days why counsel should not be sanctioned for violating Rule 28(a)(1) and mistaking the requirements of diversity jurisdiction. We ask them to consider specifically the appropriateness, as a sanction, of their being compelled to attend a continuing legal education class in federal jurisdiction.

Ouch. But query whether forced attendance at a CLE class on federal jurisdiction constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment" under the Eighth Amendment.

Continued commentary, after the jump.

Today we have TWO judges of the day. Both win the prize for their honesty and fearlessness. These jurists aren't afraid to speak their minds, and for that we salute them.

First, there's Judge James Brooks, of "the O.C." -- Orange County, California.

An Orange County judge with a sharp tongue and a history of making insensitive comments about ethnic minorities was publicly admonished by the Commission on Judicial Performance.

The commission cited [a] contempt hearing where litigant Arnold McMahon told Brooks that he didn't attend a scheduled Oct. 15 deposition because he had gone to the hospital with chest pains.

"Gee," Brooks responded. "I wonder what's going to happen when we put you in jail, Mr. McMahon. Your little ticker might stop, you think?"

Come now -- that's a bit tepid. We've heard harsher words from federal appellate judges at oral argument. This was more compelling:

[T]he commission noted that Brooks had been privately chastised three times since 1996 for similar conduct. The commission-cited punishments include: a 1996 advisory letter for referring to Hispanic defendants as "Pedro," and issuing a bench warrant for an Asian defendant for "ten thousand dollars or twenty thousand yen"...

Second, there's Judge Wilbur Mathesius, a Superior Court judge in Mercer County, New Jersey.

New Jersey's Supreme Court on Thursday handed Judge Wilbur Mathesius a one-month suspension without pay for making shoot-from-the hip comments that undermined the judicial system....

[Judge Mathesius allegedly] berated a jury for acquitting a defendant of illegal handgun possession. According to the complaint, Mathesius went to the jury room and said, "What the hell were you thinking?" He then told the jurors the defendant had a prior criminal record and chose to not testify because of that record; that another witness would have testified for the prosecution had he not been threatened; and that the prosecution's principal witness was the most credible he had ever seen.

This was only one of several incidents for which Judge Mathesius was disciplined. He also made some over-the-top comments about the death penalty. When criticized for these comments before the New Jersey Supreme Court, he responded as follows:

Mathesius observ[ed] that Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner "has written on many of the same subjects," [and Mathesius] suggested that members of the New Jersey judiciary do the same.

Judge Mathesius, we know Judge Richard Posner. We have corresponded with Richard Posner. And you, sir, are no Richard Posner.

You are a state court judge. In the trial court. In New Jersey. In a word: ICKY.

(We mean no disrespect to the Garden State, from which we hail. But the "state court" and "trial court" aspects are proper subjects of disdain.)

Vociferous Judge Is Suspended a Month Without Pay [New Jersey Law Journal]
Judge Scolded for Insensitive Remarks [NYLawyer.com]

Although we mentioned it in passing, we didn't give adequate attention to Anna Schneider-Mayerson's delightful profile of Tim Wu when it appeared earlier this month in the New York Observer. (It was discussed on several other prominent blogs.)

Now we have an excuse to double back and correct the error: We've received an email from the good professor! Here it is (reprinted with permission):

Hi this isn't exactly a tip -- I just read your entry for above the law and the FedSoc conference, and wanted to say sorry I couldn't meet you at the Net Neutrality panel.... It turned out I had the wrong date and it conflicted with my Thursday copyright class, so I couldn't come....

I hope to run into you in person one of these days.

Best,
Tim

Wow! When we received this email, we giggled girlishly with excitement. First, Professor Wu is brilliant. As noted in the profile, he was nicknamed "the Genius Wu" by no less an authority than Judge Richard Posner, who knows genius when he sees it (e.g., when he looks in the mirror).

Second, Professor Wu is quite handsome (see photo). How many other Columbia Law School professors have earned themselves a music video tribute ("Ain't No Other Man But Wu") from their students?

(Our only grooming suggestion to Professor Wu: Have those eyebrows thinned. We go to someone very good for ours, but she's probably not convenient for you given that you're in New York.)

Finally, we were glad to learn why Professor Wu missed the Federalist Society panel: he misread his calendar. It's nice to know that a member of the Elect -- and not just any old Supreme Court clerk, but one who has been called "indefatigable" and "a valuable man in chambers" by his former boss, Justice Breyer -- makes scheduling mistakes. How utterly charming!

Wu-Hoo! Nutty Professor Is Voice of a Generation [New York Observer]
Tim Wu, Voice of a Generation [Volokh Conspiracy]
George Clooney’s Got Nothing On Tim Wu [WSJ Law Blog]
"I Heart Wu" [YouTube]

* Another week, another Borat lawsuit.

* Wow -- it doesn't take much to get lawyers all hot and bothered. But ATL readers were evidently untroubled.

* Merry Christmas. There will be no O.J. Simpson book.

* But no Britney sex tape, either.

* Wesley Snipes has some harsh words for the IRS. And Judge Posner does, too.

* We hung out a lot with the Federalist Society. We watched the social conservatives and the libertarians slug it out over cultural issues. And we learned that Judge Edith Jones isn't the woman we thought she was.

Few things make us happier than when judges administer benchslaps to either colleagues or litigants. When the judicial power of the United States is deployed to diss, the result is fun for the whole family.

Heck, bench-slaps can even make tax law enjoyable! If you doubt this proposition, check out Judge Posner's recent opinion in Kohler Co. v. United States (PDF).

Here are a few excerpts. We've pulled them out of context, and we won't bother to get into the complex facts of the case; but the benchslappery is still evident:

"How to choose between adversaries’ valuations when both are manifestly erroneous?"

"[The IRS's effort] to prove that the pesos were indeed worth $19.5 million fell pathetically short of the mark...."

"[C]linging stubbornly to its untenable valuation, [the IRS] suggested no alternative to $19.5 million. It played all or nothing, lost all, so gets nothing."

Way harsh -- but at the same time, direct and matter-of-fact. The straightforward nature of Posnerian benchslaps is what makes them so elegant, effortless, and enjoyable.

This latest benchslap from Judge Posner calls to mind our prior observations about his writing style:

The Posnerian prose style is wonderfully dry, and Judge Posner's amazing writerly feat is his generation of delight from desiccation. The Giant Hedgehog doesn't laugh at his own jokes, which just makes them funnier. And when he cuts you down, with a clean slice of his linguistic lightsaber, his face bears no expression. It's all done with a clinical elegance; disdain is a dish best served cold. Magnificent!

With most judges, you can see the benchslap coming a mile away. They take forever to wind up that slapping arm, and when they make contact with their target, you can hear the "whack" for miles. With Judge Posner, in contrast, you're benchslapped before you even REALIZE you've been benchslapped.

This makes perfect sense. Why? Judge Posner's hand is too good for your face. And the national treasure known as the Posnerian Brain shouldn't be wasted on benchslappery, since it really could be put to more productive use.

Like having electrodes hooked up to it, so we can finally end America's dependence upon foreign oil.

Kohler Co. v. United States [Seventh Circuit (PDF) via How Appealing]
Posner Slams IRS's "Pathetic" Position in Mexican Debt-Equity Swap Case [TaxProf Blog]
The Hilarious Hedgehog: Judge Richard Posner [Underneath Their Robes]