Via SoCalLawyer comes word that the Tenth Circuit has upheld the Do Not Call list in this decision.
I can’t help but point out that the Tenth Circuit’s reasoning echoes what Patterico said about the lower court decision back in October. The Do Not Call list is distinguishable from the governing precedent (striking down a Cincinnati ban on newsracks) because: 1) telephone calls invade people’s homes; 2) the Do Not Call list is an opt-in provision; and 3) the Do Not Call list goes a long way towards accomplishing the government’s objective. When you read the Tenth Circuit decision, you’ll see that these points are prominent.
I’m sending my judicial application form to President Bush right now.
I learned today that Patterico has a twin: SoCalLawyer. This blog and the SoCalLawyer blog were both born on the same day: February 17, 2003.
SoCalLawyer’s first post, a one-liner concerning the statutory period of notice for motions for summary judgment, was perhaps not as self-indulgent as my first post — which declared that this site was “destined to be the hottest blog since that one put out by that guy. You know who I mean.” But even identical twins often develop unique personalities. (I have sisters who are identical twins, so I know a little about this.)
I have enjoyed the SoCalLawyer blog for several months now, and encourage all Patterico readers to pay him a visit. Happy Blogiversary, SoCalLawyer!
Today is the blogiversary of this blog, which began on February 17, 2003, with this post.
In my second post, I set forth the basic goal of this blog. That goal remains simple and straightforward: having my opinions “forced upon people who don’t want to hear them.” I am not there yet, but the number of folks who willingly subject themselves to my screeds is always humbling and surprising. Thanks, as always, to those who stop by.