Making of a Murderer Appellate Decision Shows American Police State at Work

Image -Kathe Kollwitz, (1867-1945). Kollwitz is a major
anti-fascist artist who lived in Germany.

Update: Judges David Hamilton, Frank Easterbrook, Michael Kanne and Diane Sykes of the Seventh Circuit are dishonest people. Hamilton in his rush to reverse the federal court decision that would have freed Brendan Dassey confused Bobby Dassey with his older brother, Brendan Dassey. JFC. Critical reading.
---
When Richard Posner announced his resignation from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in September 2017, it was clear real people would get hurt in his absence from the bench.

Posner blew the whistle on the federal judiciary, telling Adam Liptak in the New York Times that judges are not-so-judicious and often vicious: "there are others who are just, you know, reactionary beasts. They’re reactionary beasts because they want to manipulate the statutes and the Constitution in their own way," said Posner.

Posner had people like the innocent-and-convicted-anyway Brendan Dassey in mind.

Dassey was railroaded by east-central Wisconsin human garbage and convicted of crimes of which the cops knew Dassey to be innocent. The case drew outrage after it was featured in Making of a Murderer.

The conviction was reversed this year in federal court. Now, reactionary beasts on the Seventh Circuit reinstated the conviction in (16-3397), Dassey v. Dittman last week.

There is almost never accountability for the inhumane infliction against the innocent. Police and prosecutors remain immune to virtually any crime they inflict.

In Dassey v. Dittman, Judges David Hamilton, Frank Easterbrook, Michael Kanne and Diane Sykes of the Seventh Circuit are reactionary beasts, dishonestly and indifferently snuffing out an innocent, young life.

I wish Posner had been around for just a few months more.

Writes James Warren:

It's ironic — maybe tragic — that Richard Posner, generally conceded to be perhaps the most influential judge-academic of his generation and the most influential judge not on the Supreme Court, suddenly and surprisingly quit the Chicago appeals court and retired in September at a still prolific 78. If he were around, the odds are that he would have voted with the dissenters, made it 4-4 and thus affirmed the earlier reversal of Dassey's conviction.

But no. Dassey will remain in prison, it would appear, until he dies. It might prompt you to download the Netflix series. And, as you watch, be reminded of the strengths of journalism — but how even the most meticulously detailed conclusions can lead ultimately to exasperation, not satisfaction, and precious little attention. 

So, an innocent life is extinguished, Dassey is gone, unless the United States Supreme Court accepts his case when it's appealed.

Exasperation, disgust, and revulsion are features thinking people note in examining the United States criminal justice system. These are not emotions in this context, they're a formless creature of malice and indifference that is the American criminal justice system that exudes what it inflicts.

Whether the victim is Penny Brummer, or Brendan Dassey, the perpetrators are cops and prosecutors, and we are mostly by-standers.

Wrongful Confession Dassey Case Goes to Oral Argument This Morning Before Full Fed Court

Oral argument this morning in 16-3397; Brendan Dassey v. Michael Dittmann

Oral argument before the full, (en banc) United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, will be held this morning on the coerced confession of Brendan Dassey of Wisconsin, featured in Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos' documentary series, Making a Murderer (on Netflix), (16-3397; Brendan Dassey v. Michael Dittmann).

The coercive questioning, dubious confession by the young and cognitively challenged Dassey, arrest and conviction of Dassey shows the Wisconsin criminal justice system as a vicious leviathan run by liars, criminals and jackals, and the Wisconsin Dept of Justice officials who will go to any lengths to protect the conviction of innocents.

The Wisconsin Dept of Justice en banc petition was granted by the federal appellate court on August 4.  

A named litigant in (16-3397; Brendan Dassey v. Michael Dittmann) is Michael A. Dittmann, the warden at the Columbia Correctional Institution in Portage, Wisconsin.

Dassey's outrageous conviction was overturned in federal court by U.S. Magistrate Judge William Duffin on Aug. 12, 2016. But Dassey remains in prison while the Republican-dominated Wisconsin DoJ continues its work to protect Dassey's conviction for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach, (Thompson, USA Today, Wisconsin).

A definitive ruling would expose the Wisconsin criminal justice system to widespread ridicule. The case is expected to be appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

Richard Posner Blows Whistle on Federal Judiciary

Readers note persuasively that career-changing federal appellate Judge Richard Poser blew the whistle on the federal judiciary as a whole as intellectually dishonest pols pursuing results in federal litigation.

Judge Richard Posner announced his resignation from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit earlier this month.

In an exit interview with Adam Liptak in the New York Times, Posner made comments implicitly and explicitly critical of federal judges, in response to Liptak's questions: 

'Judges are simply applying rules, and the rules come from somewhere else, like the Constitution, and the Constitution is sacred. And statutes, unless they’re unconstitutional, are sacred also.'

'A lot of the people who say that are sincere,' he said. 'That’s their conception of law. That’s fine.'

He said he had less sympathy for the second camp [of his critics]. 'There are others who are just, you know, reactionary beasts,' he said. 'They’re reactionary beasts because they want to manipulate the statutes and the Constitution in their own way.'

That judges at every level of the judiciary seek results over the law is obvious.

Judges because their actions matter to real people are a destructive and worrisome force, largely unexamined in American society, and actors whose duplicity is cringe-worthy.

Judge Richard Posner Quits Bench, Hits "Reactionary Beasts" as Unfaithful to Constitution

The sudden news this month that an intellectual is resigning from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit should cause alarm about the future of liberty claims in federal litigation.

Judge Richard Posner announced his resignation as the federal judiciary branch is populated by ever-more brazen rightwingers and politicians.

Notes Adam Liptak in the New York Times this morning in a column on Posner's resignation:

In emphasizing social utility over, say, principles of fairness and equality, he gained a reputation as a cold and calculating conservative.

That changed over time, and his recent opinions on voter ID laws, abortion, same-sex marriage and workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation have been decidedly liberal.

Liberal as in recognizing the Constitutional rights of American citizens that used to guide consideration of litigation in the federal courts.

New York Times is worth a read this morning on the career and influence of this public intellectual.

Despite the self-importance with which the federal judiciary, and most judges, conduct themselves, Posner casts most judges as anti-intellectual, especially rightwingers of whom he says, "There are others who are just, you know, reactionary beasts. They’re reactionary beasts because they want to manipulate the statutes and the Constitution in their own way."

Judge Posner Rips Milwaukee County Killer Cops

James Franklin Perry - Killed by Milwaukee
police in 2010. Perry is a human being, not
an "animal."

Human Decency v. 'Beyond Stupid' Milwaukee Killer Cops;
Federal Civil Rights Case on Cops Calling Black Man an "Animal" Before Watching Him Die in Custody

"Do you understand? Do you understand? ... Don't you understand?" Judge Richard Posner was offended by a fool, the 'defecating on himself is not unusual' Susan Lappen of the Milwaukee City Attorney's office, defending the 2010 death of a human being, James Franklin Perry, in the custody of indecent police.
---

Updated - How do people get to the point where they willfully inflict injury and trauma onto another, to the point of death?

One journey for this type of human garbage ends in a supportive institution, the Milwaukee cops—racist, brutal thugs. Human malignancy has a home in the Milwaukee County Sheriff's office and the city of Milwaukee Police.

If you live in Milwaukee County, you can become a cop and kill a black man with no accountability, reveling in the sick satisfaction cops take in these pursuits, (Vielmetti, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel).

Republicans and other assorted racists on the bench such as the late Rudolph Randa will back you up.

James Franklin Perry died in police custody in Milwaukee in 2010. Bet the cops enjoyed a nice laugh, though their cheer may have been cut short as Mr. Perry's control over his body ceased when he suffered the fatal epileptic attack, documented in the hospital from which he was being transferred.

The estate of James Franklin Perry is suing the city and county of Milwaukee.

The case is Estate of James Franklin Perry v. Cheryl Wenzel, (16-2353).

Reports Bruce Vielmetti:

Federal appeals judges tore into Milwaukee police handling of a prisoner who died in custody during an epileptic seizure in 2010, during oral argument on an appeal of his family's civil rights case last week.

'I must say, I don't think I've ever seen such bad police work,' said Judge Richard Posner, part of a three-judge panel at the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals hearing the case in Chicago.

It was a rough morning Thursday for the city's attorney, Susan Lappen, who was interrupted repeatedly by Posner and Judge Ann Williams during a session that lasted more than an hour, about double the time normally allotted for oral argument.

The estate of James Franklin Perry, 41, sued city, county and hospital officials in 2012. In May, U.S District Judge Rudolph Randa dismissed all the claims against city and county officials and sanctioned the plaintiff lawyers, saying they pressed their case even after it became clear the county had no liability.

Randa's typically ludicrous edict won't survive appellate scrutiny.

Decency from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

In oral arguments in James Franklin Perry last week, Judge Richard Posner in particular would have nothing of what he called Milwaukee's "ridiculous" arguments offered by Susan Lappen of the Milwaukee City Attorney's office. Lappen has a history of defending indecent conduct by Milwaukee cops.

Posner, clearly appalled by the recounting of Mr. Perry dying and writhing on the floor, called the cops "beyond stupid" in oral arguments, and excoriated the shameless Susan Lappen. Beyond human would have been more apt. Posner called police conduct "grotesque" and "pointless."

All Milwaukee cops involved will be cleared of any wrongdoing.
---
On a personal note, I admire Richard Posner's powers of logic, and commitment to rigorous empirical investigations in hearing federal litigation. I admire more Posner's decency in hearing Estate of James Franklin Perry v. Cheryl Wenzel, (16-2353). Posner is offended and angry. He should be, we should be. Bear witness.

Listen to oral arguments at the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit from last week.

You'll be sickened, and then inspired by Judges Richard Posner and Ann Williams, and believe it or not by Judge Daniel Anthony Manion.

Wisc DoJ Won't Seek SCOTUS Review, Another Win for Voting Rights v. GOP

Via One Wisconsin Now, "The Wisconsin Dept. of Justice announced late yesterday they will not appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to prevent our victories in court from being in place for this November's election. 'As we said before, we hope municipalities across the state will quickly move forward in offering expanded in-person absentee voting hours to ensure all Wisconsinites are able to exercise their right to vote,'" said Scot Ross of the One Wisconsin Institute.

Good week for voting rights prognosticating and analysis by our friends at Election Law blog:

Patrick Marley: 'AG Brad Schimel will not seek SCOTUS review of 7th Circuit’s early voting decision. Madison/Milwaukee plans for early voting in Sept stay in place.'

I had pegged the chances of emergency relief from the Supreme Court in this case as quite low.

A regular appeal of these rulings will go to the 7th Circuit.

Smart move by WI not to create additional uncertainty about early voting at this point.

UPDATE: Marley has more.

Voting begins Sept. 23.

Judges Reject Republican Move to Keep Wisconsin Obstruction Laws

A federal appellate panel has rejected a Republican, (Wisconsin DoJ), challenge to the judicial order stopping the enforcement of seven Republican-enacted voter obstruction laws in Wisconsin.

This means numerous Republican voter obstruction schemes will not be in effect for the period leading up to and including Election Day. The ruling is a defeat for anti-voting rights Republicans. Voter ID remains in effect.

The case is One Wisconsin Institute v. Thomsen, (U.S. District Court of the Western District of Wisconsin (Case 15-cv-324) (Moritzlaw).

Election law expert, Rick Hasen reports:

The 7th Circuit has just denied a request for a stay in the second voting case involving WI rollback of early voting etc.

This ruling is from the same panel that granted the stay in the affidavit voter id case (Judges Frank Easterbrook, Diane Sykes, Michael Kanne). If Wisconsin could not convince these judges to order a stay in this case, there is no hope of going to the 7th Circuit en banc. The only hope would be an emergency stay request at the Supreme Court. Given the closeness to the election, the state would have to move very soon for the Court to even consider such a stay. Even then, getting over the 4-4 ideological split seems iffy.  If you can’t get Easterbrook, you likely can’t get Kennedy.

The fact that the court denied the stay without issuing an opinion could be a sign that the court recognizes the urgency of the time.  An opinion can come later when there is an appeal on the merits. It could be a sign that the issues raised by Wisconsin [Republicans and only Republicans] are frivolous.

Hasen notes the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports Wisconsin "'[A]ttorney general [Brad Schimel] is reviewing Monday’s decision, said Johnny Koremenos, a spokesman for Schimel.' That shouldn’t take too long as it is one sentence long, (Election Law)."

Writes Mark Joseph Stern in Slate: "As election law expert Rick Hasen notes, the same panel’s willingness to let Peterson’s ruling stand is rather revealing. Even for these conservative-leaning judges, it seems, Wisconsin’s race-based early voting cuts go beyond the pale. And thanks to their willingness to peer beyond the Legislature’s laughably pretextual justifications for disenfranchisement, thousands more Wisconsin voters will be able to cast their ballots this November."

Pretextual implies deceit. Lot of that going around from Wisconsin Republicans.

Wisconsin's Jarrett Adams: From Wrongfully Imprisoned to a Clerk Fellowship at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Mark Godsey has the story at the Wrongful Convictions blog.

Prosecutors' Absolute Immunity Takes Another Hit in Second Circuit

"The U.S. Second Circuit has ruled that a prosecutor can be held to a standard of 'qualified immunity,' and thus can be sued, for knowingly presenting false information to a Grand Jury," notes Phil Locke in a case decided earlier this month (Wrongful Convictions) (Kaiser, Above the Law).

The case follows last year's ruling from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Fields v. Wharrie (2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 1333) which knocked absolute immunity as well.

The Second Circuit case is Morse v. Fusto.

Morse comes as a flurry of political work across the nation challenges policing in a democracy and the police-prosecutor state resulting in mass incarceration and massive fining of the citizenry to fund local communities' budgets, emphatically in minority communities.

Prosecutorial misconduct and malicious prosecutions are routine. In Wisconsin, one can just cast a glance at Iron County, for instance.

Notes Judge Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a foreword to Sidney Powell's Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice (Brown Books Publishing Group, 2014), Brady violations by prosecutors are rampant and the nation needs "a serious conversation about whether our criminal justice system continues to live up to its vaunted reputation."

The Morse case may also interest Scott Walker and allies' attacks on Wisconsin law enforcement probes of misconduct in Walker's office while serving as Milwaukee County Executive, and Walker's scheme coordinating campaign funds and independent expenditures against the 2011-12 recall campaign.

Richard Posner Hits Absolute Immunity for Prosecutors

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit's Richard Posner hit prosecutors who violate defendants' rights in an important case just out.

The case is Fields v. Wharrie, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 1333.

Jonathan Turley has the scoop.

Jesus Wants the Senate to Filibuster Judge Hamilton

Update: Senator Inhofe Will Filibuster Judicial Nominee, Hamilton for Ruling Against Sectarian Prayers in Indiana Legislature

From some of the folks who brought you the Tea Parties, now comes an appeal in the name of Jesus to filibuster federal Judge David Hamilton nominated by President Obama for the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The seventh circuit comprises the states of Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin

Hamilton was nominated in March and has been hailed by the president of People for the American Way, and reportedly reads into U.S. law such notions as liberty, equality, and justice.

Human Events, a rightwing journal and activist group that is a major go-to organization for the latest GOP snake oil, is sending out a mass e-mail letter asking for a Senate filibuster because of concerns that Hamilton, chief judge of the Southern District of Indiana, is in favor of "banning public prayers offered 'in Jesus name,' and hastening the abortion of unborn children," in addition to being "Anti-Jesus, but Pro-Allah." [Aside from those indiscretions, the guy has a pretty impressive biography.]

Makes for fun reading so I posted the Human Events-Pray in the Name of Jesus Project letter below.

I wouldn't worry too much about how our Senators Kohl and Feingold, who sit on the Senate Judiciary Committee, are going to vote on this one and whether Hamilton gets confirmed by the full Senate.

Just sit back and enjoy this battle against the Allah-loving, Jesus-hating, baby-killing, ACLU-loving, former ACORN-working Judge Hamilton. By the way Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN), that RINO (Republican In Name Only), endorsed Judge Hamilton's nomination to the tears of Jesus and perhaps the wrath of Archangels who can be a vicious lot if crossed on a bad day.

God bless.

---
Dear Citizen Activists,

Barack Obama continues to push his nomination of federal Judge David Hamilton, who has issued controversial rulings (banning public prayers offered "in Jesus name," and hastening the abortion of unborn children), to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals (the same court that has reversed his aggressive decisions for many years).

To oppose Hamilton, we've already put in 240,000+ fax petitions to the U.S. Senate, but to the delight of many liberal groups (including the National Abortion Rights Action League who is actively campaiging FOR Hamilton), ZERO REPUBLICAN SENATORS have yet promised to filibuster this bad nomination of the most dangerous liberal extremist, anti-Life, anti-Liberty, anti-Jesus Judge David Hamilton to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. We must demand a filibuster to oppose him. Can you please help us reach our goal of 1,000,000 faxes against Hamilton?

PLEASE CLICK HERE TO SIGN AND WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY FAX YOUR PERSONALIZED PETITION TO ALL 100 U.S. SENATORS, OPPOSING THE ANTI-LIFE, ANTI-CHRISTIAN JUDGE DAVID HAMILTON.

Judge Hamilton is the worst of Obama's 15 new liberal appeals court appointees. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals covers Wisconsin, Indiana and Illinois. Since most cases never reach the Supreme Court, the federal appellate circuits often provide the last word on cases affecting life and liberty.

READ THE FACTS:

The Judicial Confirmation Network quickly opposed Hamilton's nomination, stating that "President Obama's first nominee to the federal appeals courts -- specifically the appeals court based in Chicago -- is an ultra-liberal named David Hamilton who is a former fundraiser for ACORN and former leader of the Indiana chapter of the ACLU. He was nominated to the district court bench by President Clinton even though he had no judicial experience and was rated as 'not qualified' by the American Bar Association ."

Hamilton ruled in 2005 to ban the practice of opening the chamber's business with prayers mentioning Jesus Christ or using terms such as "Savior." He said that amounted to state endorsement of a religion. (But he ruled prayers to "Allah" were perfectly lawful.)

ANTI-JESUS, BUT PRO-ALLAH?

Judge Hamilton wrote: "The injunction orders the Speaker...that the prayers should not use Christ's name or title or any other denominational appeal...If those offering prayers in the Indiana House of Representatives choose to use the Arabic 'Allah'...the court sees little risk that the choice of language would advance a particular religion or disparage others.

In other words, Judge Hamilton ruled the words "Jesus" or "Christ" are illegal words, prohibited for public speech, banned by the First Amendment, which somehow prohibits freedom of religious expression, and makes Christian prayers ILLEGAL in a public forum. (What crazy version of the First Amendment is he reading?)

Thank God, we took action in 2007 and provided legal arguments to the Indiana Attorney General who appealed to the 7th Circuit Court and WE WON a 2-1 decision overruling Hamilton, restoring the right to pray "in Jesus name" in Indiana.

PLEASE CLICK HERE TO SIGN AND WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY FAX YOUR PERSONALIZED PETITION TO ALL 100 U.S. SENATORS, OPPOSING THE ANTI-LIFE, ANTI-CHRISTIAN JUDGE DAVID HAMILTON.

ANTI-LIFE BUT PRO-ABORTION?

In 2003, Judge Hamilton struck down part of an Indiana law on abortion. The reasonable law had required abortion clinics to simply give women information about alternatives to abortion in the presence of a physician or nurse, 18 hours before the procedure, until Hamilton ruled to hasten abortions . But thank God, the 7th Circuit Court also reversed Hamilton's bad decision in that case.

If confirmed now Hamilton will sit on that 7th Circuit Court (the same court that frequently overruled him) with terrible power to rule the heartland with his anti-life, anti-liberty, anti-Christian agenda.

WE CAN WIN THIS BATTLE!

We've already sent thousands of faxes to the full Senate, and we're getting results! On April 1st, Senator Orrin Hatch led all Republicans to walk out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in protest against the Democrat "rush job" to confirm Judge Hamilton.

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, said he was troubled by Hamilton's ruling against a sectarian prayer to open the Indiana House of Representatives.

Even Senator Arlen Specter expressed concern. But will they vote unanimously against Hamilton?

Unfortuantely retiring RINO Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) endorsed Hamilton, endangering his own state of Indiana and ruining his own legacy. Lugar's five phone numbers are: Indianapolis (317) 226-5555, Evansville (812) 465-6313, Fort Wayne (260) 422-1505, Valparaiso (219) 548-8035, DC Office (202) 224-4814.

Everybody please call all five numbers today, and especially ask your Indiana friends to call Sen. Lugar . You might even call both U.S. Senators from your own state, at 202-225-3121. But remember, 100 emails = 10 phonecalls = 1 fax in political capital, since the Senate staffers must handle each paper and usually write a reply.

So please join our automated fax-petition campaign first. Then please forward this email to your Indiana-Illinois-Wisconsin friends, and to all pastors in all 50 states, and click here to download a church flyer that pastors can copy and distribute. But first, take action right now!

I pray you will not hesitate, but sign the petition and WE WILL FAX your petition right away, automatically to all 100 U.S. Senators.

PLEASE CLICK HERE TO SIGN AND WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY FAX YOUR PERSONALIZED PETITION TO ALL 100 U.S. SENATORS, OPPOSING THE ANTI-LIFE, ANTI-CHRISTIAN JUDGE DAVID HAMILTON.
God Bless you, in Jesus' name,





Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt

P.S. Time is urgent! The Senate could vote on this confirmation as early as mid-April. If you click and sign today, we will forward your name immediately. Please don't wait another minute. Life, Liberty, and Jesus are too important to be banned by one extremist judge.
###

"Beyond Thin" Judge Draws Notice for a SC Vacancy

Justice Diane P. Wood is drawing attention as a leading candidate to fill the first vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Wood is famous in some circles (especially in Wisconsin) for her judicial equivalent of voiced disgust shown towards Stephen Biskupic, former U.S. Atty for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, who launched several political prosecutions during his tenure with the Bush administration's Department of Justice, including the repulsive political prosecution of an innocent woman, Georgia Thompson.

Wood was nominated to serve as an appellate judge by President Clinton and confirmed in 1995.

As Mark Pitsch notes in a State Journal piece in 2007 [largely an it's-not-what-Biskupic-did-that-really-matters piece]:

Georgia Thompson, a state purchasing agent for Doyle's Department of Administration, was indicted in January 2006 and convicted six months later in the midst of a heated gubernatorial election.

She spent four months in prison before the federal appeals panel reversed the conviction and ordered her immediately set free - with one judge saying the evidence was 'beyond thin.'

The same judge, Diane P. Wood of the 7th U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago, also had harsh words when the panel rejected a 2005 voter fraud conviction won by Biskupic's office against a woman who voted despite having a felony record, The New York Times reported.

'I find this whole prosecution mysterious,' Wood said. 'I don't know whether the Eastern District of Wisconsin goes after every felon who accidentally votes. It is not like she voted five times.'

Biskupic said he hasn't prosecuted for political reasons.

The evidence for the conclusion that Biskupic was an apolitical US atty is beyond thin, and Wood was not shy about pointing out the many deficiencies in Biskupic's prosecutions.

Wood's name has been mentioned in numerous news reports on President Obama's likely leaning toward appointing a woman to the court, and Wood came up again today in a piece in the Washington Post by Carrie Johnson:

At the White House, advisers already had begun drafting a short list for the court in case one of the several aging justices decided to retire this summer. Speculation has been that the list includes Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan, who has been nominated to serve as solicitor general; Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit; Judge Diane Wood of the 7th Circuit; and Stanford University law professor Kathleen M. Sullivan.

-

via mal contends