LLTC Trivia Game update

Thank you for making the 2011-2012 edition of the LLTC’s Trivia Game a great success. We had approximately 50 participants and awarded over $400 in cash and prizes.

Congratulations to Darla Grondin, the overall point leader for the 2011-2012 academic school year. She earned over 700 total points and will be awarded a $100 Visa Gift Card as a result of her efforts. Congratulations to Christina Lehm, who finished a close second, and is also the winner of the final trivia period, a feat for which she will receive a $25 Visa Gift Card. Finally, congratulations to Mike Leonard, who was this semester’s overall point leader, a feat for which he will receive a $50 Visa Gift Card.

This year’s five trivia topics were as follows:

1)      Name that Movie

2)      Name that Professor

3)      Name that Library/Legal Resource

4)      Name that Case

5)      Name that Pop Culture (Person/Place/Thing)

Each week (Mon-Fri) 5 clues are released daily, once every 24 hours regarding a particular movie, professor, resource, case or pop culture.

Sample Trivia Series:

Name that Case: Dad is a nonbeliever. #trivia

Name that Case: Dad wanted to force schools to quit long-time practice. #trivia

Name that Case: Mom does not mind the recitation of certain words. #trivia

Name that Case: Dad loses 8-0 in the SCOTUS. #trivia

Name that Case: “[U]nder God” stays; sorry pops. #trivia

Answer: Newdow v. United States Congress, Elk Grove Unified School District, et al., 542 U.S. 1 (2004) (or one of its other procedural incarnations).

Please remember to check the LLTC’s Twitter and Facebook accounts every Monday (during the academic school year) at 8:00 P.M. for the initial clue regarding that week’s trivia series. Clues are posted weekdays and correct responses are worth up to 50 points if submitted to owensw@nsu.law.nova.edu on the day of release; points awarded for correct submissions will decrease by 10 points daily e.g. Monday (from 8:00 P.M. until Tuesday at 7:59:59 P.M.) =50 points, Tuesday (from 8:00 P.M. until Wednesday at 7:59:59 PM)=40 points, etc… No points will be awarded for incorrect responses or for responses submitted after 7:59:59 P.M. on the Saturday following the release of that week’s final clue. All responses MUST be submitted to owensw@nsu.law.nova.edu.

Please DO NOT post your responses to the LLTC’s Twitter or Facebook accounts.

Each period (approximately 5 weeks), a $25 prize (gift certificate) will be awarded to the point leader.  Each semester, a $50 prize (gift certificate) will be awarded to the point leader.  At the end of the school year, the overall point leader will receive a $100 prize (gift certificate).  At all stages of play, tied players will be entered into a drawing to determine the final disposition of the prize.

Once again, thank you for your participation and please be sure to join us for the next installment of the LLTC’s Trivia Game!

Have a great summer!

I’ll Have a Caramel Macchiato and So Will Everyone Else

Last weekend, I attended the annual meeting of the Southeastern Chapter of the American Association of Law Libraries (SEAALL) in Clearwater Beach, Florida.  While I could devote an entire discussion to the many things I learned at the conference, I will instead discuss an idea I had en route from the conference, while driving on Interstate 75.  Well, the first idea that came to me, while on my drive, was to stop for some coffee.  This was not unusual for me, as I like coffee very much, especially at Starbucks.  Sprinkled across the state, there are a number of these coffee shops, and I was determined to see other parts of Florida, so I based my stops on the location of these particular coffee shops.  Using my GPS, I located a number of coffee shops to stop at along the way.  While advertising takes many forms, once you have actually entered the coffee shop, you’ll notice that at Starbucks, they tend to promote items on the menu using posters or chalkboard drawings.  That way, if you don’t readily know what a Tazo® Green Tea Crème Frappuccino® is, you might explore that option, and it’s a delicious option indeed.  Upon approaching the register, I noticed that the sign this month was promoting a caramel macchiato, one of the more expensive drinks on the menu.  It was a simple sign, with an attractive photo of two beverages, one with ice and one with steam.  I wondered how effective these simple advertisements were in helping customers select a menu item, or even whether it would make them aware that this was an item on the menu available for purchase (and had been for years).  I decided to ask the barista if he had noticed an increase in sales of the caramel macchiato.  He replied that sales at his store had increased significantly for the caramel macchiato, likely due to the signage.  It wasn’t being advertised as a special for that month; rather the message was just that you could have one, if you wanted, at Starbucks, in the morning or afternoon, iced or hot, as you always could.  After the conference, which was all about law libraries, teaching, service, and scholarship, I had been left thinking about various ways to promote resources in our library, and of course there should probably be a number of different strategies used to disseminate information; but I wondered about the Starbucks method.  Clearly, a retail store does not have the same goals as a library, but we do share some things in common.  Signage is relevant in both contexts, and getting the word out about our offerings is also important.  We’re not interested in sales, but we’d be very happy to let our patrons know about databases that have always been available and have always been great, but might be new to them.

But, when is signage most effective?  I discussed this topic with a librarian colleague, and we came to the conclusion that signage can be more effective when the audience already wants something, as in the case of the coffee shop customer, who has already entered the store in pursuit of something, whether a beverage, food item, or a place to sit for hours to think; or in the case of a library patron, who is looking for information, guidance, or a place to sit for hours to think.  Where is the best place for a sign?  It’s been my experience that signs tend to be missed when people are in motion (although billboards seem to be effective, but it’s likely that there are other explanations for that).  Therefore, signs might be more effective for promotion purposes, if they’re placed where a person will be stationary, at his/her final destination or rest point, in a place where you’d like them to end up, either at the register or at the reference desk.  For example, a sign, simply drawn or visually captivating, placed in front of the reference desk, might be just the right location to encourage a patron to ask about the highlighted resource.  I’m sure there are many other ideas that I could take away from observing the signage at Starbucks (I immediately think about how Starbucks has to make the language of coffee accessible to its customers, a venti white chocolate mocha no whip, what’s that?, as we have similar concerns about terminology in libraries, e.g., interlibrary loan, SuDoc numbers, subject headings, etc.).  I welcome your suggestions.  I probably wouldn’t have had six caramel macchiato beverages this month but for the effective signage at Starbucks, and I am sure that there are others who’ve responded similarly.  In fact, the moment I stepped away from the register to collect my beverage, the very next person put in her order for a caramel macchiato.

SAME-SEX DIVORCE: UNEQUAL ACCESS UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS

                     

SAME-SEX DIVORCE:  UNEQUAL ACCESS UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS

                Gay rights are advancing at an increasingly rapid pace.  Recently, the United States Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeal declared Proposition 8 (which banned gay marriage in California) to be unconstitutional (click here for article).  Even more recently, Maryland passed legislation enabling same-sex couples to marry (click here for article).  On a larger level, Countries around the world are  recognizing the rights of same-sex couples to marry.  Gay marriage is now legal in ten countries (Canada, Argentina, Belgium, Iceland, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa and Sweden).  While there is a long way to go towards equality for same-sex couples, in general, an atmosphere of hope, optimism, and excitement grows stronger every day.

Enthusiasm may be partly to blame for the problems that occur when same-sex couples wish to divorce.  Many same-sex couples, overjoyed at the prospect of being able to get married after constantly being told that their relationships would not be legally recognized, jumped at the opportunity to be wed.  Such couples now face significant barriers if their marriages break down and they wish to file for divorce.  NPR featured a very informative broadcast available here which provides great background information.

Attorneys who work with same-couples are increasingly advising their gay and lesbian clients not to get married because of the difficulty involved in getting divorced (click here for article).  Equality in terms of same-sex marriage has come a long way, but in terms of divorce lags far behind.  Same-sex couples, while they may wish to marry for all of the same reasons as opposite-sex couples, are often stopped from doing so by the practicalities posed by laws which make access to divorce difficult if not impossible.  For instance, how do married same-sex couples divide their property if their marriage breaks down?  How can they seek alimony or custody rights?

The gay divorce issue poses problems not only for jurisdictions which recognize gay marriage, but also for those that do not.  Recently, in Canada, a “firestorm of outrage” arose after government attorneys challenged the validity of a same-sex marriage performed in Canada on the grounds that it was not legal in their current places of residence (U.K. and Florida) (click here for article).  The Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, was quick to react stating that he has no plans on re-opening the same-sex marriage issue.  Comments suggesting otherwise seem to be largely based on misinformation by those who are quick to attack the Conservative government (click here for article).  In fact, since this story broke in January, the Justice Minister, Rob Nicholson, released a statement confirming the validity of same-sex marriages saying:  “I want to make it clear that, in my government’s view, those marriages should be valid” (click here for article).

Last week, the Federal government proposed new legislation that would declare same-sex marriages “valid for the purposes of Canadian law” and provides rules for same-sex divorce of non-residents (click here for the full text of the Bill).  In short, the bill provides rules for non-resident same-sex couples to obtain a divorce in Canada if they were married in Canada.  What the bill does not provide these couples with is a forum to deal with all of the attending issues that accompany a divorce (ie: alimony, child support, custody, property division) (click here for article).  The government simply cannot pass a law that would deal with all of these issues because it would both overwhelm the judicial system and also involve the courts stepping outside of the purview of their jurisdiction.  In short, divorce granted by this legislation is a symbolic act at best and does nothing to address the more practical concerns associated with divorce for non-residents.

One of the Problems – Residency Requirements

Most countries and states that allow same-sex marriages do not easily allow couples to divorce.  This problem arises due to residency requirements.  A residency requirement essentially requires an individual who seeks divorce to be a resident of that jurisdiction for a certain period (typically 6 months to a year).  Residency requirements for divorce make divorce a lengthy battle for heterosexual couples and same-sex couples alike.  To seek a divorce, one spouse must be a resident of the state in which they seek divorce for a minimum of 6 months in general, but often longer.  The problem is compounded for same-sex couples who marry in a jurisdiction that recognizes gay marriage and subsequently move to one that does not.

Another Problem – D.O.M.A. (Defense of Marriage Act)

On the federal level, The Defense of Marriage Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1738C, came into effect in 1996 and defines marriage as between a husband and a wife while ensuring that states do not have to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions.   On the state level, states either:  recognize gay marriage (as in Massachusetts); neither allow nor forbid it; or specifically forbid it through legislation or constitutional amendments to their respective state constitutions.  Courts (in states which do not recognize same-sex marriage) claim to lack jurisdiction to hear a divorce case because to do so would effectively mean that they would have to recognize gay marriage.  (For an excellent and current article describing the various constitutional principles involved, see Elisabeth Oppenheimer, No Exit:  The Problem of Same Sex Divorce, 90 N.C. L. Rev.73).  Oppenheimer notes the inherent contradiction in these non-recognizing states stating “it certainly is bizarre for gay marriage opponents to argue that a gay couple must remain married” (Oppenheimer 81).

Several late night talk show hosts have been quick to pick up on this issue and have featured reports which do a good job at exposing the confounding nature of this argument.  The Daily Show, with John Stewart, recently featured this special report in which correspondent Jason Jones interviews a religious figure who is completely against the idea of same-sex marriage.  It simply makes no sense for someone who is so vehemently opposed to same-sex marriage to want to keep such a couple together should their marriage break down.  Not to be outdone, The Colbert Report also featured a segment on same-sex divorce highlighting the same lack of coherence (see this clip @ time 3:25-4:40).

Potential Solutions – There Is No “Quick Fix”

After thoroughly researching the issue of same-sex divorce, Oppenheimer (infra) proposes several solutions but notes that “there are no obvious solutions” (73).  Judges are limited in what types of cases they can hear both by constitutional and statutory rules.  I agree with Oppenheimer when she concludes that any meaningful change is going to have to come from the legislature.  Until then, same-sex couples face a tough decision.  They will need to decide if the idea of marriage – something they have long struggled for – is worth the hassle considering the legal and logistical nightmares that could result if their relationships fall apart.  Those who advocate against same-sex marriage will continue to do so, but they should bear in mind that by refusing to provide a same-sex couple, who was validly married in another jurisdiction, with the option of divorce and everything that goes with that (ie: property division, custody orders, etc.), they are implicitly condoning gay marriage by keeping the couple together.

Photo 1:   found here on February 28, 2012.

Photo 2 found here on February 28, 2012.

24 days until the Annual Meeting!

 

- By: Robert Hudson

Dealing with depression in higher ed

Although it focuses on the undergrad experience, NPR has an interesting story about college students coping with depression with the added pressure of their studies.  The sidebar includes some tips and some advice for getting a feel for your school’s mental health services.

Hat tip: Touro Law Center Office of Student Affairs

- By: Meg Kribble

Message to Ike: stay away from the Hebert boxes!

But what’s a Hebert box, and why should Ike stay away from it? 

Hebert boxes are two 335×335 mile areas, one on each side of the Caribbean.  They get their name from National Hurricane Center forecaster Paul Hebert, who observed that hurricanes that pass through them are more likely to hit South Florida hard. Conversely, many hurricanes that have appeared to be targeting South Florida that go around the Hebert boxes have a tendency to swerve and miss south Florida at the last moment.  However, it’s not a hard and fast rule: 1995′s devastating Hurricane Andrew tracked just outside a corner of the eastern Hebert box. 

From a 2001 Miami Herald article:

Hebert himself acknowledged that the boxes are not a guarantee of
hurricane landfall either way, but cautions that if a hurricane passes
through one, “really, really pay attention. We worry plenty in August
and September when one goes through that box, and we have a certain
comfort level when one misses the box.

It looks like we could get lucky with Ike, whose predicted path seems safely above 20 degrees north latitude for the moment, but it’s still not a bad idea to fill up your gas tank and make sure your hurricane kit is fully stocked this weekend.  There’s still another three months of hurricane season, and Tropical Storm Josephine is on the map!

- By: Meg Kribble

AARP: Isn’t it ironic?

ABA Journal reports that the AARP is being sued for age discrimination.

- By: Meg Kribble

Speech Wars

In case you’re undecided about the upcoming presidential election, or curious to compare the candidates’ use of words, Ben Reis has compiled a neat website. Speech Wars allows you to search speeches given by John McCain and Barack Obama for specific words to see how often they have been used over the course of their respective campaigns.

Hat tip: Library Stuff

- By: Meg Kribble

“My name is a footnote in American legal history…

…which I’m perversely kind of proud of,” George Carlin said in an interview in February. 

In memory of Carlin, here’s a link to Oyez’s presentation, including the written opinion and audio oral arguments, of F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation 438 U.S. 726, the 1978 Supreme Court case that resulted from a New York radio station’s afternoon airing of Carlin’s “Filthy Words” monologue.

A transcript of the monologue itself is available at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law’s Exploring Constitutional Conflicts: Regulation of  Indecent Speech webpage.

- By: Meg Kribble

How to stop cellphone text spam

Cellphone text message spam is especially annoying because
in addition to having to delete it, those of us without unlimited texting plans have to pay for it.

Fortunately, some of the major carriers have
created ways that you can block text messages from the Internet, the main spam source, while still receiving text messages from friends and family with cell phones. Check out Pogue’s Posts for information on
each provider and step by step directions for stopping this annoying intrusion.

Note that if you want to prevent voice spam, aka telemarketers, you may also register your cell phone number at the National Do Not Call Registry.

Photo: The Spam Mascot by dalangalma

- By: Meg Kribble