palsgraf_polka (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
palsgraf_polka) wrote2009-03-31 11:39 pm
palsgraf_polka) wrote2009-03-31 11:39 pm
That wasn't so bad...
Ok...I made it through 6 cases and 3 articles tonight. Tonight was concentrated on divorce and the divorce cases were much easier than the marriage cases I was doing yesterday.
So, that leaves me with one short divorce case I can do tomorrow at lunch and then 8 pages of articles to summarize and I'm good for class for tomorrow night.
Then I get a few days break, as we don't have class for 2 weeks due to spring break. So, I have 2 weeks to brief 8 cases. If I have time, I might brief ahead so I don't feel rushed later. I need to seriously try to break myself of this procrastination, as I won't be able to do this come Fall and I'm taking 3 classes and have to brief 20 a week.
I do find it interesting though that just in a couple of weeks of reading case after case my brain is whipping through legalese much better than it was before. Before I agonized with the writing and had to read something 2 or 3 times before I got the meaning, but now it reads like a novel, which is good. I'm hoping by the time Fall comes around this will be so easy it'll be a snap.
Anyway, I know I'm probably boring you with this stuff. But some of these cases are really interesting. I read one tonight, Aflalo v. Aflalo where an Orthodox Jewish woman wants a divorce from her Orthodox Jewish husband, but he won't give her a get which is a traditional Jewish decree, in writing and in Aramaic, that releases her from being his wife/property/slave and allows her to remarry. If he does not give her the get, if she has sex with or remarries another man, she is considered an adulteress, any subsequent children are considered illegitimate and cannot marry Jews, and she will be shunned by her peers and social groups. Usually this is used as a ransom so that the husbands can get more money or custody of children, but in this case, the husband genuinely did not want a divorce, but to reconcile. He did say though, that if the Beth Din, the Rabbinical court ordered him to give his wife the get he would, but that case wasn't being heard yet before the Beth Din. The wife wanted the court to order her husband to give her the get before the Beth Din ordered him to do so (among a few other items which I won't go into because it's boring and legal), but the court refused on 1st Amendment grounds saying that they cannot interfere with one's practice of religion (unless it is a dire possibly life threatening situation). The justice quoted Thomas Jefferson and it was a very interesting and well written opinion.
I tell you, I love this shit.
So, that leaves me with one short divorce case I can do tomorrow at lunch and then 8 pages of articles to summarize and I'm good for class for tomorrow night.
Then I get a few days break, as we don't have class for 2 weeks due to spring break. So, I have 2 weeks to brief 8 cases. If I have time, I might brief ahead so I don't feel rushed later. I need to seriously try to break myself of this procrastination, as I won't be able to do this come Fall and I'm taking 3 classes and have to brief 20 a week.
I do find it interesting though that just in a couple of weeks of reading case after case my brain is whipping through legalese much better than it was before. Before I agonized with the writing and had to read something 2 or 3 times before I got the meaning, but now it reads like a novel, which is good. I'm hoping by the time Fall comes around this will be so easy it'll be a snap.
Anyway, I know I'm probably boring you with this stuff. But some of these cases are really interesting. I read one tonight, Aflalo v. Aflalo where an Orthodox Jewish woman wants a divorce from her Orthodox Jewish husband, but he won't give her a get which is a traditional Jewish decree, in writing and in Aramaic, that releases her from being his wife/property/slave and allows her to remarry. If he does not give her the get, if she has sex with or remarries another man, she is considered an adulteress, any subsequent children are considered illegitimate and cannot marry Jews, and she will be shunned by her peers and social groups. Usually this is used as a ransom so that the husbands can get more money or custody of children, but in this case, the husband genuinely did not want a divorce, but to reconcile. He did say though, that if the Beth Din, the Rabbinical court ordered him to give his wife the get he would, but that case wasn't being heard yet before the Beth Din. The wife wanted the court to order her husband to give her the get before the Beth Din ordered him to do so (among a few other items which I won't go into because it's boring and legal), but the court refused on 1st Amendment grounds saying that they cannot interfere with one's practice of religion (unless it is a dire possibly life threatening situation). The justice quoted Thomas Jefferson and it was a very interesting and well written opinion.
I tell you, I love this shit.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
It's food for thought.
no subject
But...if they're religious fanatics AND other religious fanatics of the same faith were engaging in terrorist activity that was driven by said fanaticism AND the men in question had been in contact with proven terrorists...
...then yeah, lock'em up and schedule a probable cause hearing. It was the lack of those hearings that made detentions in Gitmo illegal.