Mike Steenson
In Smartmatic USA Corp. v. Lindell,[1] Smartmatic sued Michael Lindell and MyPillow, Inc. in Minnesota federal district court, alleging defamation and violation of Minnesota’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act based on Lindell’s claims of fraud in the 2020 presidential election, including that Smartmatic voting machines were rigged. This post focuses on Smartmatic’s defamation claim against Lindell and MyPillow.
Continue reading “MyPillow Lands Hard in Judge Wright’s Court”
As an Indigenous person, I know introductions are important. Introductions place you. They provide others with an understanding of where you come from and what values or perspectives you might have
because of this placement. Introductions provide your legitimacy, your credibility, and your “authenticity” as an Indigenous person. The introduction of myself has changed throughout my life because of this placement of self. It has shifted as I have shifted from place to place, from space to space, and have gained and lost “knowledge” and family. Therefore, this Article will start with an introduction of myself to you.
This Article is a reflection on some of my experiences as a Métis law student and assistant professor on the subject of Indigenous legal education in Canada. I introduce myself and what brought me to law school and describe some of my experiences as a law student, as a co-president of an Indigenous Students Association, and as a student organizer for an Indigenous law camp. I argue that a significant barrier to Indigenization and decolonization of Canadian legal education is the perseverance of an ideology rooted in settler colonialism and an individual affective commitment to its future, which is facilitated by racism. The existence and nature of this barrier is highlighted through an exploratory discussion of some of the experiences that are commonly shared by Indigenous law students and professors. I describe my approach to Indigenous legal education at the Lincoln Alexander School of Law (“Lincoln Alexander”) at X University in Toronto, Ontario, as one way to work towards facilitating
efforts towards Indigenization and decolonization
In January of 2021, the American Association of Law Schools (“AALS”) theme was Freedom, Equality and the Common Good. The Indian Nations and Indigenous Peoples Section of the AALS embraced the theme and announced a call for personal reflections incorporating the experiences of Native Americans in law schools. The theme of striving for academic freedom and equality allows for an in-depth questioning of
whether Native Americans have been adequately and appropriately represented in legal curricula in the nation’s approximately two hundred law schools. The aspirational goal of realizing the common good must be inclusive of Native American voices as students, faculty, staff, and graduates and in curricula choices in law schools across the country.
To become a licensed attorney, law school graduates must pass the dreaded bar exam, a two or three-day, grueling exam that has been characterized as a brutal and hellish experience. Many attorneys describe the exam as “among the most painful experiences of their lives.” But, there is a lesser known yet equally as important hurdle that bar applicants also must overcome—the character and fitness inquiry. Applicants have the burden to show that they are morally fit to practice law. They must reveal a plethora of personal information, dating back years or even decades, depending on the age of the applicant. They must reveal arrests, convictions, speeding tickets, bankruptcies, court judgments, employment discharges, and much more. For some applicants, this may prove to be the most challenging part of the admission process.
Continue reading “The Other Bar Hurdle: An Examination of the Character and Fitness Requirement for Bar Admission”You are bickering with your significant other during the height of an argument as your partner begins to hurl corrosive, malicious, and fraudulent accusations your way. You seemingly become more and more confused as your significant other asserts you have done the unthinkable: cheated. As thoughts and concerns swirl around your baffled mind, you offer yourself some comfort as you know it is not true, and hopefully a thorough explanation can clear the air. As you begin defending your chastity, your significant other pulls out their cell phone and shows you something you cannot fathom. There, right there, in physical, audio, and video form, on the six-inch screen of their phone, a video plays of you engaging in salacious acts with another person who is clearly not your significant other. The video is crisp, clear, and undoubtedly looks, acts, and talks like you. But is it me?
You then realize that the confidence you held minutes ago in your own candor is useless. Somehow, someway, there is video proof of you committing an act you are positive you did not do. Was I drugged? Did I blackout and not remember my actions? Your brain is trying to comprehend and protect itself from the trauma and deceit presented to it, but you realize that this video—this horrifying, false, and life-changing video is real, at least to the beholder. You know that the video bears a resemblance to your likeness, but you also know it is not real.
Nevertheless, the video is real, and that is all your significant other needs to know. The damage is done, and now it appears there is irrefutable proof you have committed the abominable act of adultery that you know you did not do. You begin to question your own reality and the world around you. If this false video exists but appears to be genuine in every way, what else in our world is simply a distortion of the truth? What other forms of false media dwell in the world that will swindle and deceive even the most intelligent minds?
This Article explains deepfake technology and reviews deepfakes in modern society.3 Next, this Article discusses the evidentiary implications of deepfakes and how they are analyzed and authenticated within the courtroom.4 Finally, this Article discusses potential methods of combatting deepfakes, their effect on the courtroom, and prospective avenues of redress for deepfake victims.
A guest speaker at school discusses personal safety and the sensitive subject of child maltreatment, informing the group of second-graders that some secrets do not need to be kept. Impacted by the lesson, a student approaches his instructor and asks, “if my friend told me a really bad secret, should I tell?” After a handful of follow-up questions, the child shares that his best friend, Billy, told him that Billy’s father was touching his butt with his “private part.”
Having a reasonable suspicion that Billy is being sexually abused, the teacher makes a mandated report to social services. The case is screened in, and Billy is brought to a Children’s Advocacy Center (CAC)—one of hundreds of facilities accredited by the National Children’s Alliance to assess child maltreatment allegations.
Billy is questioned by a forensic interviewer, someone specially trained to speak with children about abuse, and the interview is audio and videorecorded. The interviewer spends time building rapport with Billy and practices getting the child to speak in a narrative style6 by asking for details about a neutral event from beginning to end. The interviewer also asks the child about family, people the child lives with, and things they may do with the family and other people in their lives.
David, we miss you dearly. We loved your friendship, your passion for the law, your affection for
your family, your curiosity about life, your charisma and virtues, and the joy you brought to our lives. You
were easy to admire, although we did have to struggle with your occasional sarcasm, overly helpful advice,
and wry attempts at humor. You were a delightful character, for all ages.
Technology has evolved and raided our personal and professional lives. Although the courts are not immune to the advancement and integration of technology, the courts are not keeping up with relevant technological advancements. Historically, courts have been hesitant to embrace new technologies despite the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure creates the right to a “just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.” Likewise, the American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct have determined attorneys must “keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology . . .” to maintain competence. The bench and bar have a responsibility to keep up with the advancement of technology because technology affects the administration of justice. With the practice of criminal law being far behind in technological advancements and new technology entering the legal field now, criminal lawyers, judges, and other legal community members need to start incorporating this technology and be comfortable using it in their everyday lives.
Continue reading “Virtual Hearings and Blockchain Technology Solutions in Criminal Law”
