February 16, 2001 - Virginia Law Weekly
Transcription
February 16, 2001 - Virginia Law Weekly
Virginia Law Weekly The Newspaper of the University of Virginia School of Law Since 1948 “Freedom of religion, freedom of the press; freedom of persons under the protection of the habeas corpus; and trial by juries impartially selected, — these principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us, and guided our steps through an age of revelation and reformation.” THOMAS JEFFERSON Around North Grounds The J.B. Moore Society would like to remind students to attend next weekend’s symposium, “Contemporary Challenges in International Law and Security: Improving Frameworks for Legal Responsibility.” Details are available on the J.B. Moore Bulletin Board or at http://calendar.yahoo.com/public/jbmsociety. A big thumbs up to the those unlikely bastions of creativity from the class of 2001’s Section B for setting a new standard in Feb Club promotion by creating impressive online movies. (www.members.tripod.com/ sectionbeta) Highlights included stop-action Darth Vader and L u k e Skywalker action figures battling for the fate of the universe while discussing how everything hinges on Saturday night’s Feb Club party. Section Beta Strikes Back. ANG respectfully requests that the Mighty Bagel Distributor provide a more diverse selection to include more bagel varieties at all times. Please do not take our overprivileged whining as justification for ripping all bagels away from us again. The Law School community could not withstand that trauma again. Vol. 53, No. 17 Friday, February 16, 2001 Journals Debate, Reverse Course on Tryout Pr ocess by Amy Collins ’01 After heated debates between the heads of U.Va. Law’s eight journals, this spring’s tryout and selection process will be held under the system utilized before this past year. Under the returning system, applicants indicate two journals to which they are applying, and may receive offers from both. Under the system used this past year, students could apply to Virginia Law Review and two other journals, indicating their preference between the other two. None of the journals, however, advocated retaining this past year’s system without modification. “Four journals want[ed] to go back to the way it was [one year] ago — Social Policy, Sports and the Law, Environmental, and Law and Politics,” said third-year Law Review member Lisa Milot, who observed the voting. The remaining four journals, the Virginia Journal of International Law, the Virginia Journal of Law and Technology, the Virginia Tax Review and the Virginia Law Review wanted to retain the current system, though adding mandatory caps on the number of editorial board members journals could accept as well as making applicants’ decisions of their first choice jour- nal binding. An initial vote of the journal editors-in-chief (EICs) was held last week, resulting in a five to three vote to revert to the twochoice system. Unhappy with the result of the vote, members of the Law Review and Virginia Journal of International Law began to solicit vote changes from those EICs that voted against them. “[Amy Payne] came to me and lobbied me to change my vote,” said third-year Caleb Jaffe, EIC of the Virginia Environmental Law Journal. “I said I think it’s unfair for us to change our votes one by one, but that I would be happy to reconsider if [all the EICs] met together.” After speaking with a number of other EICs, Payne, a third-year member of Law Review and Chairperson of the Joint Tryout Committee, decided to hold another meeting this past Monday evening, complete with a revote. Payne explained that she convened the second meeting “because there were enough people who came to [her] that had changed their minds or were uncomfortable with how they voted.” Payne admitted, however, that personal motivation played a factor in her decision: “Part of the reason I approved the revote is Thumbs down from facilities management to the many able-bodied people who step on the pedals that open the handicapped doors. The result is that the batteries powering the radio transmitters opening the doors are burning out at a rapid rate, increasing the “down time” of the handicapped mechanism and with it the likelihood that the doors will not open for those who need it. And by the way, a hangover does not count as a disability. Thumbs up to Arent Fox for both sponsoring Tuesday night’s discussion on “Becoming a Partner: A Female Perspective” and providing enough food to feed A.E. Dick Howard’s subsequent class. In this issue: BeVier on Napster Ruling ..................... p. 4 U.Va. Men’s Basketball Special .................... p. 6 SBA Runoff Today None of the four candidates running for SBA President received more than the requisite 50 percent of all votes cast, triggering a runoff election. The top two candidates were Kendall Day and Scott Fink. Runoff voting will continue until 4 p.m. today, Feb. 16. The results of the runoff will be announced Friday as soon as all votes are counted. Only four of the remaining ten elections were contested. Scott Strohbridge and Laura Soong were elected the Law School’s Honor Committee Representatives. Stacy Dawson and Stacey Rose will be the Judiciary Committee Representatives. In uncontested elections, Mandy Biles was elected SBA Vice-President, Lee Miller was elected Treasurer, and John Adams was elected Secretary. The ABA Representative will be Catherine Connor. The two Student Council Representatives, also uncontested, will be Lesley Pate and Sarah Berger. Five hundred and eightyseven students voted in this year’s hotly-contested election, a substantial increase from last year’s turnout. QualChoice’ s Pill Coverage Sparks Debate Professor Sighting: Professor Kevin Kordana, leaving Club 216 at 2:30 a.m. on Friday night. Things that make you go ‘hmmm.’ The Dillard Fellow tryout can be completed during any consecutive three-day period before Mon., Feb. 26. The tryout packet may be picked up from Phyllis Harris in room WB348a. The tryout is open to first- and second-year students. that it had not come out the way I thought was right — but that’s really a secondary reason.” The revote resulted in a four to four tie, which Payne felt she had to break in favor of the original vote, for the two-choice system. Both sides of the debate advanced justifications for the system they advocated. Proponents of the past year’s system argued that it allowed people to apply to more journals and have a greater chance of making one, in addition to providing an automatic opportunity to apply to Law Review. Proponents of the prior system favored it for what they saw as a simpler method, which allowed journal applicants to change their preferences after completing the tryout and allowed the journals to take as many or as few board members as they desired. They disagreed with the idea that the past year’s system gave first-years a greater chance of making a journal. Third-year Usha Rodriguez, EIC of the Virginia Law Review, explained the position of the four journals who voted to keep the past year’s system: “First-years are stressed in general, and the journal tryouts are a big deal to them. I worry that risk-averse see JOURNALS page 3 Subscriptions Available photo by Howard Chang Third-years enjoy their last Barristers night. Dressed-up Hunks, a Little Funk and a Room Full of Drunks by Darcey Rhoades ’03 Recipe for Barrister’s Ball: Take one prom. Add alcohol. Subtract adult chaperones. Add U.Va. Law students. Jitterbug for four hours. Makes 800 servings. The hugely successful 2001 Barristers Ball was held at the Omni Hotel in Charlottesville last Saturday, February 10. Before the big event, most of the attendees went out to dinner at such C’ville hotspots as the Ivy Inn, Southern Culture, and the Blue Bird Café, attracting numerous stares from dressed-down locals. But really, isn’t that what going out to dinner before a formal event is all about? The event itself got off to a slow start, due in part to the cash-only bar only that was open between 9:30 and 10:30 p.m. Once the bar opened, the law students descended upon the Omni in swarms. The dance floor quickly filled up with students shaking their groove thangs to the oldies-but-goodies belted out by the band. However, some of the best music of the night was mixed by the DJ during the band’s breaks. Shaggy’s “Wasn’t Me” was such a huge hit that the DJ hit the replay button right after it ended. The dance floor was crazy. Chances are that you left the floor each time dripping of water — not necessarily from dancing up a storm, but from the water guns one second-year was kind enough to pass out to a dozen people. Also, you may have seen more than you bargained for when a first-year busted a move that busted his pants. Several groups held parties in suites on the second floor during and after the ball. The BLSA suite proved to be extremely popular with its fine arrangement of champagne, strawberries and great music. Most of the guys dressed to impress, with about half of them wearing tuxedos (and looking see BARRISTERS page 3 by Rich Bland ’01 Last Tuesday evening, a bit of the 1960s revisited the Law grounds. In 1960, the FDA approved the Pill for widespread use, providing the catalyst for the tumultuous sexual revolution. Today, it isn’t legality of the pill but accessibility and affordability that stir the debate. Before a capacity crowd in Caplin Pavilion, a panel of concerned insurance, medical and university administrators — including some self described “ex-hippie types” — attempted to answer a list of questions posed by a group of concerned law students as to why, QualChoice, the Universityendorsed health insurance plan does not include less expensive access to oral contraceptives. “I thought the forum went very well,” said second-year law student Susan Burgess, one of the organizers of the event. “Students were able to get their concerns addressed.” Students on the panel, along with the majority of students who voiced their concerns contended that the range of options QualChoice currently offers to students is inadequate because, while one option does include oral contraception, its cost for students exceeds that of insurance available at comparable public universities. The two other primary student concerns centered on how Qual Choice and the University compute what is and what isn’t affordable for all student subscribers under various models of student plans and how QualChoice might in the future include other costs like unplanned pregnancies in the models so as to balance out the increase in average premium costs for all subscribers for the cost of including oral contraception. Many panelists pointed out that the decision not to include oral contraception in all options was made by a joint student/administration committee last year. While on the surface, the debate revolved around costs of potential health options available through QualChoice, many of the panelists also referenced what they felt was a double standard that exists throughout the debate. “If men got pregnant, you could get oral contraception at the local 7-11!” said one exasperated local community activist who works on family planning for Martha Jefferson hospital. Likewise, an unsigned letter that was handed to attendees of the session read in part: “The exclusion [of affordable contraception] raises issues of gender discrimination in violation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. As I understand your program,” the letter read, “[the Qualchoice current options] cover medication for conditions related to sexual activity, such as prescriptions of Viagra for sexual dysfunction, that apply mainly or entirely to men...it must also provide similar coverage of medication for conditions related to sexual activity, such as contraceptives that apply mainly or entirely to women.” Moderator George Rutherglen raised the issue of gender disparity as well and asked panelists to comment on their reflections on that underlying theme. The formal question and answer period heightened the tenor of the debate. In particular, the only major point on which the two most vocal see PILL page 3 2 Student Voice Virginia Law Weekly Jury Box Do you think John Jeffries would be a good Dean? Steve Phelan, 3L: “He certainly has a strong academic reputation, and from what I’ve heard he has the requisite administrative skills as well.” photo not available Terrance Rasmussen, 2L Transfer: “I think he’d be fine, but based on personal experience, he’s got nothing on Dean Garrett of Chicago.” Woody Wood, 3L: “I don’t give a damn about bagels, but I am concerned about how receptive to student concerns the Law School administration is. I’m worried that with Jeffries as Dean, student concerns would not be a priority.” Carolyn Meade, 3L: “I don’t know anything about him...perhaps if a present U.Va. professor is going to be Dean, he should be known by the students.” Editorial Policy The Virginia Law Weekly publishes letters and columns of interest to the Law School and the legal community at large. Views expressed in such submissions are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Law Weekly or the Editorial Board. Letters from organizations must bear the name, signature, and title of the person authorizing the submission. All letters and columns must either be submitted in hardcopy bearing a handwritten signature along with a disk containing the file, or be mailed from the author’s email account. Submissions must be received by 5 p.m. the Monday before publication and must be in accordance with the submission guidelines posted on the door to the Law Weekly office in Rooms SL277 & SL279. Letters over 500 words and columns over 700 words may not be accepted. The Editorial Board reserves the right to edit all submissions for length, grammar, and clarity. Although every effort is made to publish all materials meeting our guidelines, we regret that not all submissions received can be published. Virginia Law Weekly Editorial Board Rich Bland Editor-in-Chief Sarah Shalf Amy Collins Senior Editor Executive Editor Tarah Grant Managing Editor Howard Chang Amy Kobelski Columns Editor Reviews Editor Jonathan Riehl Jackie Sadker News Editor Features Editor Associate Editors Dan Brozost Associate Columns Editor Will Homiller Associate News Editor Staff Deborah Prisinzano Treasurer Jeremy Gott Associate Production Editor Courtney Masini Associate Production Editor Megan McLaughlin Associate Features Editor C ONTRIBUTORS: Tillman Breckenridge, Brian Gist, Stephen Galoob, Jessie Heners, Tom Warburton. C OLUMNISTS: Nina Allen, Ben Block, Dana Foster, Adam Green, Jean Marie Hackett, Brendan Johnson (SBA Notebook), Darcey Rhoades, Eric Tepper, V ANGUARD, Jon Woodruff. R EVIEWERS: Drew Cannady, Mindy Cupps, Amanda Galton, Julie Jordan, Jason Heep, Amber Husbands, Larae Idleman, Jeff Kessler, Carsten Reichel, Kelley Riddle, Genevieve Schaab, Courtenay Seabring, Tristan Snell, David Stuckey, Seth Wood. Published weekly on Friday except during holiday and examination periods and serving the Law School community at the University of Virginia, the Virginia Law Weekly (ISSN 0042-661X) is not an official publication of the University and does not necessarily express the views of the University. Any article appearing herein may be reproduced provided that credit is given to both the Virginia Law Weekly and the author of the article. Advanced written permission of the Virginia Law Weekly is also required for reproduction of any cartoon or illustration. Entered as second class matter at the Post Office at Charlottesville, Virginia. One year subscriptions are available for $25.00. Subscriptions are automatically renewed unless canceled. Address all business communications to the Managing Editor. Subscribers are requested to inform the Managing Editor of change of address at least three weeks in advance to insure prompt delivery. Mailing Address: Virginia Law Weekly, 580 Massie Rd., University of Virginia School of Law, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903-1789 Phone: (804) 924-3070 Fax: (804) 924-7536 E-mail Address: [email protected] Website: http://www.student.virginia.edu/~law-wkly Printed on recycled paper by theVirginia Law Weekly and the University of Virginia Printing Office. © 2001 Virginia Law Weekly Friday, February 16, 2001 Letters to the Editor “ To the Editor: When I initially read the Law Weekly last week, I found myself nodding my head in approval of [Nina Allen’s column] concerning Professor John Jeffries’ candidacy for the deanship. Like the other columns that have run on the issue, I thought the author accurately portrayed the average student’s apprehension and valid concern over the search process, and specifically the possibility of attending U.Va. Law under a “Dean Jeffries” administration. But upon further consideration, and a long talk with a friend, I’ve changed my mind and now wonder: What are we doing to ourselves? The fact is, John Jeffries is the leading candidate for Dean for a reason: He is a nationally recognized and leading scholar in his field, has given nearly three decades of his career to U.Va. Law, is well respected and supported by his peers, is a valuable asset in the ongoing campaign for alumni support, and would serve as an example to young faculty that a commitment to this institution for the long haul will not go unrecognized. Yes, Jeffries lacks that intangible quality that Dean Scott seems to slide through the halls on. And yes, the students who attend U.Va. Law are a legitimate constituency whose concerns deserve to be recognized and addressed. But we are one of many constituencies that any dean must deal with, and we certainly can’t expect that our bagels, no matter how much school spirit they drum up, will always be priority number one. The student body of Virginia Law is without question one of the most talented in the country. As future attorneys, we are being trained on a daily basis to make persuasive and reasoned arguments. Is “you took away our bagels” and “you don’t say hi to me” really the best we have to offer? If we want the future Dean Jeffries to take us seriously, and frankly give a damn what we think, we are not going to win him over with weekly bashings in the Law Weekly. Believe me, I’m not suggesting I don’t agree with the sentiments expressed in the article — I do. The author’s points are well taken. I also think Professor Jeffries would do well to make an honest effort to allay concerns that students do not and will not matter to him. But the fact remains that there is about a 99% chance John Jeffries will be our next dean. Maybe we should all let the bagel thing go and attempt an adult conversation with the man now, before we ruin any chance for a harmonious relationship in the future. —Kristen R. Fournier ’02 To the Editor: I was amazed by the story “Math Brings Down Law Grades,” which addressed Prof. Paul Mahoney's memo to faculty about the B+ mean, for several reasons. First, the B+ mean did not just get harder to hit. The math has been the same for quite some time, unless there was some recent change in the rules of arithmetic that I missed. Second, I find it incredulous that there are members of the faculty who could not figure out how to get their grades to average to 3.3. Why is it okay to be incompetent at basic arithmetic, but it's a national tragedy if someone can’t read? Regardless of how “mathematical” a professor is or is not, he or she should be able to grade exams with a rough idea of what the curve is, see what the class average is after the initial grading, and then tweak some of the grades accordingly. Of course, as long as it takes some professors to merely grade our exams, asking them to pull out a calculator on top of that might be asking a bit much. Third, I am troubled by the implication that handing out more grades below B+ is some sort of crime against humanity. The B+ curve is not a holy right, and getting a B+ or above is certainly not guaranteed—for anyone to maintain that we “deserve” to get grades at or above the curve is to argue that there should be no curve at all. Fourth, the fact that this even merited mention in the Law Weekly surprises me. Actually, it doesn’t, and that’s my problem. An overdeveloped sense of entitlement pervades our student body, and we often confuse privileges with rights. Free printing is a privilege, and yes, bagels are a privilege. It is only when these privileges begin to be taken for granted that we students distort them into rights and whine like spoiled brats when they might be taken away. So let's not whine about math dictating that there should be more Bs than A-minuses. Would you prefer a return to a B curve? —Matt Branson ’02 SBA Notebook As many of you know, my time as SBA President is coming to an end. Brendan Johnson, a third-year law student, is SBA president. During my tenure as president, I received several personal gifts from the Law School administration. I would like to thank Dean Scott for the fancy desk and computer that he left for me in the SBA office. These generous gifts will help to decorate my new home in South Dakota and will help ease my transition into private life. Thank you, and I will also be taking the cool SBA stationary. With my time winding down, I want to give you a better idea of what have been my responsibilities as SBA President. One of my most important responsibilities was to serve as a sort of spiritual advisor. Each week, I received numerous letters from students asking me for advice or personal guidance. Like having twin sons who insist on always holding hands in public, this started off as cute behavior, but eventually began to scare me. Nevertheless, each week I have attempted to answer all letters. What follows is a brief sampling of the letters I received and my responses. Hey Brendan, I was just wondering where all the good men have gone? This year, all of the 3L men are lame. They no longer attend Bar Review and rarely appear at Feb Club parties. This is a serious problem because Barristers Ball is right around the corner. Do you have any thoughts on who I, and the rest of my female roommates, should take to Barristers? —Sick Of Lame 3Ls Dear Sick, I don’t think you should take anyone to Barristers. Instead, wait until midnight and then find the drunk Duke law students who always crash our parties. That ought to be a good time. Don’t waste your time with 3L guys, usually they just hook up with random friends of Melissa Hutson who also have a tendency to crash our parties. Dear Brendan, I am a first-year law student in serious trouble. My girlfriend lives thousands of miles away, and last WhitebreadLegacy: FacultyQuotesofthe Week And the Winner Is... J.Mahoney: “I mean, what are the medical risks of sperm donation? Hairy palms and blindness?” Runners-up... E. Kitch: “I got shafted. I would have said ‘screwed,’ but I decided I should increase my self-censorship... Do any of you work for the Law Weekly?” L.Walker: “So sorry about those jackhammers. I used to do that, by the way. Terrible job — couldn’t get any worse. I didn’t last long.” P.Stephan: “My son aspires to be a hip-hop DJ after graduating from college, and let’s say I were to co-sign a $50,000 note to take out a loan for my son in order to finance his hip-hop business. And let’s say that consumer tastes then become rational, and the hiphop industry is wiped out. His equipment and records are now worthless, since now all people want to do with them is burn them.” K.Kordana: “You know, I really don’t need to pick out my own pectoral implants.” S.Goetz: “[My wife] would point to my son, who looks just like me, the poor guy.” S.Smith: “Johnny Cochran in a cape couldn’t have gotten this guy anything but the death penalty in this case.” J.Setear: “You’ve got a wireless, right? Type this in and find it...real-time teaching!” S.Henderson: “The Board, like the Blues Brothers, was on a mission.” L.BeVier: “People give lectures in math? What do they say?” A.Johnson: “It’s got some steamy sex scenes...I’ll put it on reserve.” ” week she randomly showed up at my doorstep. The problem is that I’m currently in a relationship with an undergraduate here at the university. What should I do? —Casanova Dear Casanova, What a tangled web we weave. Don’t worry, this has happened to other first-year men who discover that, for the first time in their lives, women are attracted to them. Like yourself, these men have found the pressure of being “law school cool” burdensome and they also made a mess of their personal lives. In the past, these men have solved their problem by engaging in an activity that could not possibly be construed as cool or sexy, like becoming SBA Treasurer. Perhaps you should consider getting involved in student governance. Dear Brendan, I am having a difficult time adjusting to being the only second year law student living on Brown’s Mountain. At first I enjoyed the notoriety, but recently I’ve noticed a lack of respect. I’ve been forced to live in the basement behind the bar, see NOTEBOOK page 3 Virginia Law Weekly BARRISTERS JOURNALS continued from page 1 very sharp, I might add!). Surprisingly, most of the women did not wear black. Colors and patterns were everywhere — on dresses, shawls, and even cowboy hats. You may think that only a Texan woman would wear a cowboy hat to a formal, but one leopard-print hat was spotted on the head of a first-year from (gasp!) Columbus, Ohio. continued from page 1 PILL continued from page 1 participants agreed was that the high level of student activism on a given subject hasn’t existed on North Grounds to this degree since the panelists themselves were in graduate school in the 1960s. Key speakers on the panel included: Alison Montgomery, Director of Administration at U.Va. Student Health; Dr. Christine Peterson, Associate Director, Gynecology, U.Va. Student Health; Martha D’Erasmo, CEO, QualChoice; and Lise Adams, Valerie Nannery and Susan Burgess, Law School organizers of the event. NOTEBOOK continued from page 2 and this has seriously hurt my game with the ladies. Do you have any advice? —Cellar Dweller Dear Cellar Dweller, First of all, there is nothing embarrassing about living in the basement behind the bar. In fact, some Law School roommates reserve that spot for the most esteemed member of the house. As far as the as the lady situation is concerned, you should probably look into purchasing a PlayStation 2. Special Thank-You A serious thank-you to Susan Baldwin for all of her efforts to make Barristers Ball a huge success. first-years will choose two journals [rather than Law Review] in order to maximize their chance of making any journal, and miss out on what could be their only chance to make Law Review — they can try out for the other journals in the fall.” Milot added that many people were unhappy with the way journal tryouts used to work, because they would have to make strategic choices that sometimes prevented their application to the Law Review: “I have friends from first year who didn’t try out for Law Review because they were so afraid not to make any journal — and they kicked themselves for two years.” Another argument advanced by members of the Law Review was that the system used this past year allowed students to apply to more journals: “It is in [first-years’] interest to have a shot at as many of the top journals as possible,” said third-year Law Review member Johan Conrod. Under the twochoice system, he added, “some people will never get to play pool.” Third-year Helen Mould, EIC of the Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, explained the motivation of the four journals who voted to revert to the two-choice system: “This is a restoration of the original system — we had an experiment last year that failed, so we’re going back. It failed to bring about the benefits that journal leaders thought it would, in terms of affording more students an opportunity to participate on journals and spreading students more evenly among the journals that exist at the school.” Mould added that last year’s system was an administrative nightmare, very costly to many of the journals, and less fair. Third-year Andrew Graziani, EIC of the Virginia Journal of Law and Politics, disagreed with Law Review’s argument that the News Friday, February 16, 2001 3 News Analysis past year’s system helped students: “The reason last year’s experiment didn’t work is because it resulted in a lot more uncertainty both for first-years and journals, and didn’t reduce people from strategically choosing journals.” The EICs of Social Policy, Sports, Environmental Law, and Law and Politics all agreed that students are not disadvantaged by reverting to the old, two-choice system: “Some journals fare better under one option, other journals fare better under the other option — but the students fare equally well under either,” said Jaffe. Third-year Joe Asaro, EIC of the Virginia Journal of Sports and the Law, said that the mandatory caps on the size of journals’ editorial boards was the biggest problem he saw with the option supported by the Law Review: “The cap played more of a role in my vote than the number [of choices allowed] did.” “The reality we were faced with was cap or no cap,” agreed Graziani. Members and EICs of all journals strongly encouraged students to try out for journals: “I really encourage first-years to try out for journals they are really interested in,” said International Law member third-year Susannah Stroud. “I hope that none of this discourages first-years from trying out for journals — I think that journal participation can be a wonderful, rewarding experience,” agreed Mould. Jaffe summarized: “I think if there’s one comment I have on this, it’s Florida, Florida, Florida.” Journal tryouts will be held on three weekends, beginning at the end of this month. The three pickup Fridays are Feb. 23, March 2, and March 9. The turn-in Mondays are, respectively, Feb. 26, March 5, and March 12. Turn-ins and pickups are both from 9 a.m. to noon. Is Bush Really President? by Stephen Galoob ’02 Last Thursday, more than 120 students and faculty gathered to hear a panel of scholars discuss who is the legitimate ruler of our country. The talk, entitled “Bush v. Gore: Rule of Law or Rule of Judges?” featured Mike Klarman and John Harrison of the U.Va. Law faculty as well as Alan Meese of William & Mary. Although the panel was designed to present the conflicting views of the decision that granted Bush victory, all three ultimately agreed that some aspect of Bush’s selection was illegitimate. Professor Klarman discussed the majority’s equal protection arguments in the Supreme Court case of Bush v. Gore. His theory, admittedly not empirically verifiable, is that the outcome of the case would have been different if the parties had been switched. This is unlike the legal issues we more commonly associate with “partisanship,” like abortion, federalism, and school prayer. Those opinions are a result of the political ideology of the Justices, and Klarman has built a career arguing that such decisions are legitimate because the outcomes, if not the reasoning, have been widely accepted. Bush v. Gore, on the other hand, was based on the political preferences of the majority; according to Professor Klarman, this case was an example of “new law good for this day and train.” Indeed, the equal protection argument in Bush v. Gore would invalidate almost every election. The popular backlash to this decision, however, is not likely to be extraordinarily harsh, since the issue in this case will be obsolete after the next Presidential election. Professor Meese, who will be visiting at U.Va. Law next year, de- fended Bush v. Gore on equal protection and Article II grounds. He argued that the overturned Florida Supreme Court decision was clearly a violation of the Equal Protection clause, since it ordered selective recounts and allowed different standards to be used in different counties. To overcome such a plain violation, the Florida Supreme Court should have found a legitimate state interest (which the Florida Secretary of State failed to find). Since the Court found no such interest in applying different standards and no possibility of applying these standards before the December 12 deadline imposed by the Florida Supreme Court, Meese argued that the outcome in Bush v. Gore was justified. On the Article II issue, Meese argued that the Florida Supreme Court ordered a recount in 64 counties, yet Gore only contested the results in one county. Since Article II allows only recounts on contested votes, the remedy in Bush v. Gore was too broad. Meese’s stringent version of the Equal Protection clause, like the majority’s in the Bush v. Gore opinion, does not fully support a Bush presidency. In response to questions after his presentation, Meese admitted that the irregularities in counting military absentee ballots were subject to the same “uniformity or nothing” standard as recounted votes. Thus, these votes should not have been counted under the majority’s logic. This point might be considered moot, however, since the Gore team failed to raise the argument before the Court; however, a cynic might point out that the Bush team failed to raise its equal protection argument in the lower courts as well. Professor Harrison admittedly found himself conflicted between see PRESIDENT page 4 The Seven Society commends Kelly Barbour Carli Conklin Richard Bland Jennifer Mason Professor Anne Coughlin Professor John Harrison Professor William Larry Walker for their love of and devotion to the University of Virginia School of Law. 4 News Virginia Law Weekly Napster Stays Alive — For the Moment Friday, February 16, 2001 PRESIDENT Circuit Court Remands; Napster Still On-Line Crossword Solution by Jonathan Riehl ’02 The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its ruling last week in the Napster case. The ruling reviewed preliminary injunctive relief awarded by the lower court against Napster, the popular free on-line music trading site. Napster is being sued by a retinue of record companies and musicians for knowingly contributing to copyright infringement. The alleged infringement occurs when Internet users make use of the website as a forum for trading MP-3 music files. Napster does not store the files, but rather facilitates the direct “peerto-peer” trading of the files by Napster users. The Ninth Circuit, sitting as a three-judge panel, rejected all of Napster’s substantive arguments. It did find, however, that the lower court’s injunction ordering immediate cessation of all Napster-facilitated infringement of MP-3s was overly broad. The Ninth Circuit cited practical concerns raised by Napster concerning its ability to police material posted on the site, not all of which represents infringements. Napster has threatened to appeal for an en banc hearing with the appeals court. Napster is owned by Bertelsmann AG, which also owns BMG music, parent of RCA records and other labels. Bertelsmann, originally a party to the infringement suit, broke off its litigation and declared recently that it wanted to work with, not against, Napster. Bertelsmann also announced last month that Napster would begin charging a membership fee. No time frame was set, nor the amount of the future fee. Napster currently claims over 56 million users. To discuss some of the many issues implicated by the Napster case, the Law Weekly spoke to Professor Lillian BeVier, who teaches Copyright and Intellectual Property. LW: Do you think the Courts were prepared to address the technological issues in the Napster case? LBV: They are as prepared as the attorneys arguing the case can get them. They are not fortunetellers and don’t really pretend to be in the business of being technology gurus, but I am impressed at how hard they obviously work to bring themselves up to speed about and explain the technology they’re dealing with in particular cases. LW: Do you think the concept of copyright liability over the Internet, not just in the Napster case but in general, is going to require a rethinking of copy- right rules, or just a refining? Are there big changes ahead? LBV: Yes, there are big changes ahead. I think the principal “rethinking” that will take place will be over the concept of access controls, because that’s what the technological fixes for a lot of the illicit copying that goes on will be. The fights, my guess is, will be over how much control over access copyright owners can legitimately assert given traditional fair use concerns. LW: Are the courts able to accurately gauge the impact of Napster on the record companies? Is expert evidence about college students’ “downloading habits” consistent with established standards? LBV: The issue, really, is not the “effects” of the Internet, but rather the effects of Napster and the peerto-peer sharing that it facilitates on the plaintiffs’ market for CDs. The court’s approach is quite conventional. And remember, this case hasn’t been fully litigated — the question really is still whether the plaintiffs here have shown enough harm to be entitled to a preliminary injunction. LW: What about all of the other sites that offer Napsterlike services: Is this just a hydra’s head situation? LBV: It is a hydra’s head, but it’s not the judges that are trying to curtail copyright infringements – it’s the copyright owners. It seems apparent to me that the challenge for the record industry is in large part a technological one, but in even greater part it is a business model one: They are pursuing a business model — our “market” is hard copies of $15 CDs, etc. — the record companies need to be more imaginative and entrepreneurial; their Napster litigation seems to me to be as effective as a finger in the dike is at preventing a flood, despite the fact that they are on very solid legal ground. LW: Would the courts look at Napster differently if it were a non-profit entity? LBV: Probably. Profit vs. nonprofit has a big bearing on whether a use is “fair” or not. Still, the fact that Napster users are not transformative users but consumptive ones seems to me as salient as the fact that Napster is for-profit. LW: How long do you imagine this litigation is going to go on? Will this case wind up in the Supreme Court? LBV: Not long. I think they’re likely to settle and Napster as you’ve known and loved it will be toast. I doubt the Supremes will take the case — but who knows what they will decide! New Computer Lab Bookstore Slaughter Gets a Makeover by Amy Collins ’01 When the dust clears and the Law School is whole again, almost all of the student organizations will be in a new location. The first floor of Slaughter Hall will be completely redesigned (with the exception of the Bookstore), to accommodate almost all student organizations and a small computer lab accessible only to U.Va. Law students. The journal offices will be located on the second floor of Slaughter Hall, though the Virginia Law Review will not move from its current location. The Student Organization Space Allocation Committee (SOSAC), a subcommittee of the SBA, is in charge of allocating the new space (see map above). SOSAC held a meeting for organization presidents Monday afternoon, and is currently reviewing the organizations’ applications detailing their space requirements. Following that review, SOSAC will conduct interviews with organization presidents and then make the space assignments. Finally, SOSAC will submit their proposal to the SBA for approval. The new layout provides an increase in both total student organization office space and number of offices. Compared to the 3,105 square feet currently used by student organizations, the new design will offer 3,776 square feet, a 21.6% increase. The total number of offices will leap from 16 to 23, an increase of 48.7%. Perhaps the greatest effect on students will come just as finals approach this spring, as all organizations will have to pack up their belongings for the move. “We will give you boxes and I will ask you all to pack up your things by the end of exams, May 11,” Assistant Dean for Administrative Services Bill Bergen told the assembled organization presidents. “We will put all the desks and chairs and the like in storage, and will put them back the week before classes start.” Students will not have to do any of the actual moving — they will leave the boxes in their offices and movers will take care of the physical relocation. continued from page 3 his desire for a Republican President and his distrust of the Supreme Court. Article II, he argued, fundamentally concerns the relationship between state and federal law; the majority of the Court believed that the Florida Supreme Court (probably deliberately) misread the law of Florida. For Harrison, the question was not whether the Florida Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court was partisan, but which Court had the Constitutional discretion to be partisan. The Court usually interprets state law only to the extent necessary to answer a Federal question. Indeed, the Court’s argument in Bush v. Gore is premised on the idea that the Florida Supreme Court so grossly misinterpreted Florida election standards that their decision was legislative (in the sense that it created a new standard) rather than judicial (to the extent that it interpreted the legislature’s standard). According to Harrison, the problems with this argument are legion. First, it is rather audacious for the current Court to call anything “judicial legislation,” since all courts — and especially this Court — frequently create “new rules.” Second, this decision undermines the notion of a state Supreme Court’s authority to interpret state law. If every state law question becomes a federal law question, then no state agent can ever make a final decision and there is no such thing as state discretion. A true Federalist might find this decision repugnant. Third, the Court confuses the permissibility of interpreting a standard (which Harrison calls his “punch out the damn chad, you moron” argument) with the constitutional requirements for calling a vote “legal.” Virginia Law Weekly Columns Friday, February 16, 2001 5 Dumbing Down? U.S.A. Today Is Ther e to Help I wanna be dumb sometimes. Which is not to say I’m very smart to begin with, but after all somebody let me into this school, and it’s a good school according to my sources. No, I’m not saying anything of the sort. I’m just saying that sometimes, I want to put down my law books and just be dumb. Dan Brozost, a second-year law student, is a Law Weekly columnist. Like the rest of America. Now hold on just a minute, there you go again…I’m not saying the rest of America is dumb, although I kind of did. I’m just saying I want to put down my little old law books and be a dumb American for a while. Like our new president. You know, that kind of dumb. Not stupid dumb, just dumb. I used to be dumb a lot. Then one day I picked up the New York Times. At first it was confusing, but then I started to like it. I felt smart. I would walk by all those dumb people with their New York Posts and their Daily News, and I’d fold my New York Times in half and stick it under my arm so everybody would see that big old masthead screaming to the world, “I read the New York Times, I’m not dumb!” But now that I’m in law school, I just want to be dumb again. All this talk about burdens of proof and strict scrutiny this and parol evidence that…blah! Yes, blah I say! Make me dumb again. Okay, I’m getting up from my seat in the fishbowl to go get dumb for a little while. Here I go, don’t try and stop me. Wait, what’s that on the wall? Federalist Society lecture? The Bush v. Gore case discussed at length? Look away, Dan, look away. I’m walking, and walking some more. I’m turning…into the bookstore. Newspapers, newspapers…New York Times, no that’s not dumb. Washington Post, getting closer. Richmond TimesDispatch…a little too far. Ahhh, finally…the USA Today…dumb. Here you go, Miss, my fifty-two cents for my fifty-cent paper. I can feel the dumb already. You have a nice day too, Ma’am. I’m gonna have me a nice ole dumb day. Hey there Mr. Blue, you sure do look nice and blue today…But you’ll have to wait. I gotta go see Red first and get my fix. Red is good to me. He gives me the hard stuff, the goods…the things you can’t get inside. Red gives me box scores and rankings and a preview of the American League in mid-February. Red gives me total coverage. Red tells me about the Westminster Dog Show that I’ll never watch. But it’s there anyway, in all of its Reddy goodness. Yeah baby, show me that top 25 poll. Give me those game summaries. Don’t make me turn that page Red! I’m sorry, you never do. Everything I ever want is right there in front of me. Look, Red! “Wisconsin-Stevens Point women finally get past Oshkosh!” Tell me Red, tell me all about it! And don’t forget those stats, Red! Auto racing standings, PGA Europe results, and you even have the National Pro Soccer League results and standings! I didn’t even know there was a National Pro Soccer League! Nor that Harrisburg had a team! Now let me just check the lottery results from New Mexico and… Tri-state? I didn’t know we had a state named Tri-State. It must be near the state called Powerball. See you tomorrow Red! And don’t forget the good stuff (wink, wink). And we’re back to you Mr. Blue. I didn’t forget you. You’re a big part of my new dumb routine. Tell me Mr. Blue, Mr. Nation’s News- Planning to Get Married? Here’s Some Friendly Advice The seemingly never-ending pop of champagne corks in ANG inspired me to write this column. When I got married three years ago, I knew nothing about getting married. However, I have since seen my share of engagement and wedding fiascos. I am not an expert on the subject by any means, but thought I would pass along some friendly advice based upon my experiences. Darcey Rhoades, a first-year law student, is a Law Weekly columnist. # 1: Guys, ask your girlfriend’s father for permission before popping the question. I know it sounds old-fashioned. But please remember that most fathers are old-fashioned and over-protective when it comes to their “baby girls.” When my husband, Matt, and I talked about getting married, he wondered if he should ask my father for permission. I laughed at him for being so behind the times. After we got engaged, I thought it would be a great idea to have Matt come over to my house for dinner to tell my parents of our engagement. During dessert, Matt stood up and said, “I have an announcement to make. Last night, I asked Darcey to marry me and she said yes.” Were we greeted with euphoric cheers, hugs and kisses? No way. We were greeted with cold silence and unblinking stares. I left the house in tears and cried to — of all people — my future mother-in-law. My parents later told me that they had gone into shock. It wasn’t so much that they felt violated for not being asked to give their permission — it was just that they would have appreciated an advance warning. #2: Make sure that the members of your wedding party can at least be civil to each other. When a friend got married last year, she asked two girls to be in her wedding party who could not stand the sight of each other. This caused numerous problems, culminating in a hair-pulling, nail-scratching fistfight at the bachelorette party. The girls had to be physically separated at the wedding. The wedding day is full of enough stress without wondering whether your bridesmaids are going to make it down the aisle without beating each other into a bloody pulp. #3: Have fun at the bachelor/ bachelorette party, but don’t let the fun interfere with the wedding events. At one wedding I attended, the groom and his Navy buddies decided to get a head start on the bachelor party. Unfortunately, the groom had too much fun a little bit too early. He showed up an hour late to the rehearsal, falling all over the place and reeking of whiskey. The bridal party was literally taking bets as to whether the wedding would go on. #4: Don’t get married on the day of a major sporting event if you want to be the center of attention. When my cousin got married in Cleveland on the day of an Indians playoff game, all eyes were not on the happy couple. Three tables brought television sets that they had on throughout the recep- tion. Luckily, my cousin didn’t care. He is an Indians fanatic, and often stopped by the different tables to check out the score. The bride was a little less amused. #5: Not everything will be perfect, so deal. The most important thing to remember is that Murphy’s Law is always in full force — even at weddings. For example, my wedding was horribly hot. It was about 90 degrees and there was no air-conditioning in the church. Matt and I were drenched — we looked so disgusting that we ordered hardly any post-wedding pictures taken in the church. However, we supplemented our album with some great outdoor pictures. At our thankfully air-conditioned wedding reception, my very drunk maid of honor stepped on my dress during the chicken dance and ripped my train. So, I just changed into my “going-away suit” a little early. At another friend’s wedding, held in the same church as mine on another 90-degree day, a bridesmaid passed out during the ceremony. Luckily, one of the other bridesmaids was a doctor. At another wedding, the caterer completely forgot the cake. So, the servers shuttled around gorgeous plates of cookies instead. With all of these weddings where mishaps occurred, including my own, it is important to note that every couple is still happily married and considers their wedding day to be one of the best days of their lives. So, if things don’t go exactly as planned, remember two words — “open bar” — and it will all be okay. American History Month: Black Perspective by Nicole Valentine ’02 The American story is one of accomplishment, revolution and equality. It is also a story of struggle, oppression and hope. If we picked up a history book and turned to a page of the past, we may find the story of a group of people who arrived to America by ship. These are Pilgrims. These are disenfranchised citizens of Great Britain. These are explorers. These are African slaves. Although our ancestors used the same mode of transportation, the story of their lives took different routes, paths, and directions. We must not deny the contributions that have been made by those who invested in America. Americans of African descent have shed blood, sweat, and tears to create the America we all enjoy today. Some may argue that this is no different from what other great men and women have done to preserve American ideals and security. However, Africans in America performed many of their feats while in bondage. Knowing this truth has wealth beyond measure. The story of human survival is the story of America and we must celebrate the wealth of our history. I challenge the U.Va. community to read an American story in celebration of a month set aside by Dr. Carter G. Woodson to promote true American history. I suggest exploring the lives of Sojourner Truth, Ralph Bunche, Booker T. Washington, Mary McCleod Bethune, and Benjamin Banneker, for example. Did you know that our Nation’s Capitol was designed by one of these aforementioned greats? Are you aware that a true American inventor designed the stop sign? Can you believe that Americans from Africa fought in every war since the inception of America? If we truly knew and appreciated these realities, I predict we would have a stronger America and we could get further than where we are today. paper, is the French Quarter losing residents? Why yes it is, and thank you for telling me all about it. Tell me Mr. Blue, what’s going on in the Middle East these days? Well there we go, and all neatly wrapped up in two short paragraphs. Tell me Mr. Blue, how do parents rank the messiest rooms in the house? Who woulda thunk it that 12% of parents ranked the kitchen as the messiest room? And what a nice little picture with your nice little graph. Let’s see if you know what’s going on in Indiana today, Mr. Blue…since you seem to know everything else. You don’t say! Tony McKinley, who holds the local arrest record in Muncie, made a deal to stay out of jail. At only 41 years old, dumb Tony has been arrested 79 times for offenses involving intoxication. What a nice judge. He suspended his sentence on the condition he seek treatment for “possible alcoholism.” Now that’s just dumb, Mr. Blue…that’s just dumb. What’s that on your back Mr. Blue? Pretty colors! And so many of them! Uh, oh, light blue means cold! Well, at least it’s 59 degrees in Ecuador. Gee, you sure are smart, Mr. Blue. I haven’t forgotten about you my pretty little lady…yes that’s right, my Purple princess, I’m not through with you just yet. Oooh, and look what you’re wearing today my pretty girlfriend …Hannibal setting records at the box office, the next generation of kiddie toys, and, oh that’s sweet…Bobcat Goldthwait is getting married to a sexy sitcom actress from the WB. I always knew he’d find true love. But wait right there young lady, where’s my Nielsen ratings! I don’t see them anywhere! Oh, baby, I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to use that tone of voice…do you forgive me? It’s just that I’m under a lot of stress these days…. That’s a good girl…I know you’ll put them in tomorrow. Yes, Grandpa Green, I hear you calling. But you’re just a bit too smart for me today, and I’m just a little too poor for you. I’ll get to you this summer. For today, I’ll just leave you sitting here on this chair…in the shade of course… where I’m sure you’ll meet some lovely third-year to while away the day playing checkers. See you next Thanksgiving, Grandpa Green! Goodbye, my dumb friends! I bid you adieu for the land of the smart. Though I don’t know if I belong there anymore after spending time with you. To the AFC’ s Musical Programmer: Have you no decency? A person cannot exercise to the sounds of Whitney Houston, no matter how hard they try. The other day, you played “I Will Always Love You.” Twice. In less than an hour. This crosses the line from bad taste to Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Other offenses include repeated use of Phil Collins, Pat Boone(!), and the arch-nemesis of fitness: Mariah Carey. Ben Block, a thirdyear law student, is a Law Weekly columnist. Maybe you have not considered the detrimental effects Muzak can have on a workout. Haven’t you noticed the increasing muscular atrophy among patrons who frequent your facility in the 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. time slot? I watched one poor individual on the bench press right as program changeover time occurred. He went from being able to crank out ten repetitions at 225 pounds to gasping for breath as the bar crushed his neck while Neil Diamond crooned “Coming to America.” Had it not been for the quick reactions of his spotter (who, perhaps, has a bit of an unhealthy Neil Diamond fetish), tragedy would have ensued. Your practice flies in the face of physiological research. Nine out of ten experts in physical fitness agree that Phil Collins sucks. The Surgeon General warns “I Will Always Love You” is a leading cause of weakness in young males. When Mariah Carey works out, do you think she listens to herself singing? No! Stop the madness, please. Perhaps there is confusion as to the role of the AFC. It is not a dentist’s office. People go to AFC to spend their “one hour a day” engaging in Thomas Jefferson-approved activities. Music with a primary goal of making one’s stomach curl is not needed: the incline sit-up bench does just fine, thank you. Does the playlist have anything to do with facility overcrowding in the wake of New Years’ Resolutions? Are you thinning the herd? If so, then maybe it’s okay, but please be aware that in addition to “thinning,” the herd is also getting flabby, tired, and a little bit cranky. Most of the two-week wonders have gone back to their sofas, so I think its safe to play something with bass. (Read that last line carefully: it says with bass, not Ace of Base!) Or is this some social experiment? If this is really just some test that the kids over in experimental psychology talked you into, then fine. I have no doubt that they can prove that listening to this music really can make you a wuss. But normally, don’t people get paid for participating as lab rats? Well, I haven’t seen any checks, so cough up or change the channel, okay? Another theory is that you are in cahoots with the portable-CD/MP3 player industry. Repeatedly playing music designed to turn one’s brains, heart, and body to mush is thus some illicit tie-in operation aimed at getting us to plunk down a couple hundred bucks on Walkmans. Are you aware of the antitrust laws in this state? Well, neither am I, but I bet they are pretty stiff. Or are you just trying to force everyone into the new fitness craze of super-slow repetitions of very light weights? I read in Newsweek that 20 minutes a day, three days a week, is all one needs to lose weight and get in shape. It would just be nice if, rather than trick us into this technique by musical suggestion, you could maybe hand out a pamphlet or something explaining just how this program is supposed to work. It would probably be a lot more effective that way. Please understand where I am coming from. I am a not too irregular patron of your facility. I have never once complained about having to pay to park, or that you charge 25 cents to use a towel that can absorb approximately three drops of liquid before becoming useless. I will never publicly mention that the smoothies in the snack bar are overpriced and rather bland. Receiving complaints that the pool is open to non-swim team members less frequently than Bushwood’s was for the caddies? Didn’t hear it from me. But please do pass along to the “locker room distribution specialist” my confusion over why, if there are only four patrons using lockers, they must be crammed into one tiny end of the room. Is this to improve camaraderie in exercise? Perhaps we should discuss your playlist whilst we change? 6 Sports Virginia Law Weekly Friday, February 16, 2001 Sports Special: U.Va. Men’s Basketball Hoos Stomp Blue Devils in Giant W ednesday Night W in Virginia Coach and Players, Duke Players, Speak with the Law Weekly by Amy Collins ’01 University Hall rocked Wednesday night as the U.Va. Men’s Basketball team defeated ACC behemoth Duke, 91 to 89, before a soldout audience — some of whom had been camping outside for four days. After third-ranked Duke won the tip-off but missed their first shot, U-Hall came alive and never let up. Travis Watson’s dunk three minutes into the game set the tone — steady trades of hotly contested baskets keeping the score close, punctuated by an occasional crowdpleasing Watson or Adam Hall dunk, or a Keith Friel or Roger Mason three-pointer. Twelfth-ranked Virginia led at the half, 46 to 42, but lost that lead five minutes into the second half under a torrent of Duke threepointers. They began to look alive again, grabbing the offensive rebounds they had been largely missing in the first half, and reached their biggest lead of six points with 13:48 left to play. Within a minute, however, Duke substitute Casey Sanders missed two free throws in a row — and as Virginia second-string forward Stephane Dondon looked intensely across the lane before the second shot, he was probably already planning the comeback. With a Dondon three-pointer at the 10:30 mark, Virginia regained the lead. That this was only Dondon’s second game back after a sprained big toe makes his clutch plays even more impressive. With only 14.3 seconds left to play, the game was tied at 89 after two good free throws by Duke’s starting forward, Shane Battier. Adam Hall answered with an easy lay-up after a dish from Roger Mason, Jr., giving U.Va. the lead with 0.9 seconds to play. Students beginning to rush the court had to be pushed back by the players, giving Duke one last chance. Dunleavy’s cross-court throw was intercepted by Hall as the b u z z e r sounded, and Virginia had accomplished the unexpected. When the dust cleared after a tense 40 minutes containing eight lead changes, three ties, and no lead larger than eight points for either team, the assembled Virginia fans finally got what they had been waiting to see — a floor full of celebrating students and exhilarated players. Perhaps the key to Duke’s difficulties was the early foul trouble of starting forward Mike Dunleavy, who had already accumulated three fouls ten minutes. Dunleavy played only 13 minutes of the game, contributing just five points to the Duke cause. Duke center Carlos Boozer was held to just six points, as the Cavaliers’ close man-to-man defense kept Duke from getting the ball v. inside. When they did get the ball inside, Duke came up short against a fence of Hall, Chris Williams and Watson. The audience held nothing back, holding signs reading, “Duke Girls are Ugly / U.Va. Girls are Hot,” “You’ve Got No ‘J,’ Ason Williams,” and, in a tribute to Valentine’s Day, “Roses Are Red, Violets are Blue, I Hate Duke,” How Far They’ve Come... S. Dondon J. Dowling K. Friel A. Hall D. Hand J. Hare G. Lyons by Tillman Breckenridge ’01 olden days, that was all us kids had to Tomorrow, the U.Va. men’s bas- look forward to — a win over Clemson ketball team travels to Tallahassee to — and a nice pair of shoes so that we take on the Florida State Seminoles. didn’t have to walk five miles barefoot Aren’t you excited? Oh. Well, you in the high Charlottesville snow drifts to get to class. Now, things are differshould be. As I am writing this, I have abso- ent. The players are (or at least seem lutely no idea what the outcome for to be) good guys who keep their noses the Duke game will be (or as you’re clean, and they’re winning. It is a great feeling these days to see reading it, the outcome of the Duke game was), but the bottom line is that people walking around Grounds upit really doesn’t matter…much. Of s e t that the team has lost two straight road games at N.C. course, if the Cavaliers won, then you State and at Georgia Tech. have been seeing me floating While these teams are cerabout the halls with a tainly not behemoths, I can smile on my face for the remember a time just a past two days. But if Duke short while ago when those won, I’m still happy. losses were a given. The reason is January Pete Gillen has 17, 1999. On that fateful day, n brought to this team an I went to the Clemson game ille G e up-tempo style, a pressing dewith a few friends of mine from Pet fense, and a flair for the spectacular college. The team was still reeling from the loss of several key play- that makes the games exciting. The ers to criminal behavior two years team is also starting to build the conbefore and had lost its first four con- fidence it needs to win games against ference games. That year, analysts the big boys. When all is said and done had predicted that the Cavs would go this year, the Cavs will have made the an unprecedented 0-16 in conference NCAA tournament, and with any luck, games. That day, Donald Hand will have advanced. Unfortunately, most of the team’s dropped 27 points on the Tigers and leaders — Donald Hand, Chris WillU.Va. proved the analysts wrong. That was the dawning of a new iams and Adam Hall — have seen the attitude for basketball here at U.Va. lean times. Sometimes, one can see It was a sign that the bad times would them almost wondering to themselves soon be over and that coach Pete whether they really are a different Gillen really could be the savior. Gillen team than those a few years ago that inherited a team that had lost its went 3-13 and 4-12 respectively in the leading scorer because he beat his conference. That needs to change. The girlfriend and had to leave the Uni- Cavaliers need to recognize that they versity (now in the NBA after a stint are a new team that can play with the at Fresno State), a top prospect be- best and sometimes win. The University provides us with a cause he slashed a football player on a basketball court and was serving free (at least marginally free) pass to time in prison (now playing ball at Mt. the basketball team’s home games. Saint Mary’s), and two good players Take advantage of it. Show the playthat got the boot from Honor for steal- ers that things are different. Enjoy ing clothes (who knows where they the chance to watch a really good are). Gillen took what was left, and basketball program. There are only two home games left: North Carolina beat an ACC team. Everyone at University Hall was on the 25th, and Clemson on the 28th. so excited, they stormed the court If they beat Clemson again, though, after beating Clemson!!! Back in the don’t expect anyone to storm the floor. and “Valentine’s Day Massacre.” The 8,242 fans packed into U-Hall baited Duke star forward Shane Battier, chanting “’Hoos Your Daddy, Battier.” Virginia coaches and players alike credited their dedicated fans, including many law students, for the win: “We couldn’t have won without our students and fans from the community,” U.Va. coach Pete Gillen said shortly after the game. Double’Hoos can’t remember anything like the excitement that surrounded this game, Virginia’s first win over Duke in their past 13 meetings. “I haven’t been this excited since we beat Florida State when I was an undergrad here,” said thirdyear Matt Boscher at the game. “Law students are great — with all the work they have…the fact that they spent…two days waiting out for this game — I’m flabbergasted. It’s unbelievable,” Gillen told the Law Weekly. Gillen said that he loved that this win was shared by the entire U.Va. community — graduates and undergraduates, faculty and staff alike. “It was a Virginia moment,” said Gillen. “I hope the students feel pride in their university.” After the game, there was a rare atmosphere of defeat in the Duke locker room. “It was a big game for both teams; they wanted it a little more and came out with the win,” Dunleavy told the Law Weekly. “It was hard,” added starting guard Jason Williams, “They play really well. They outplayed us.” Williams also credited the Virginia fans with a part in the win: “The fans are like this all the time when we’re here — it’s rough. I know I couldn’t make a shot.” The fans packed into U-Hall were largely garbed in orange, due to Gillen’s e-mailed request to the student body and the distribution of hundreds of bright orange “Virginia Basketball” t-shirts to students entering the game. Gillen admitted that he was a little concerned about the orange, as the last time the team asked fans to wear orange they lost. “Wake beat us like a rented mule in the orange,” Gillen said, adding that he went with the orange anyway because the community was already rallying for it. Welcome to Hooville by Amy Collins ’01 They were there for five days, surviving only on meager rations and the warmth they could muster inside their tents. These inhabitants of “Hooville” had no phones, no television, and no microwaves. But hey, they got the best seats at the Virginia/Duke basketball game Wednesday night. Beginning early last Saturday afternoon, graduate and undergraduate students alike camped out by the south entrance to University Hall, waiting in line to be the first in when the gates opened for the 7 p.m. game Wednesday night (see article above), a testament to the sudden immense popularity of the U.Va. men’s basketball team. Spread out in sleeping bags, students slept, studied or played cards. “It was great — people were sleeping in garbage bags in the rain, and they didn’t give a rat’s ass,” said third-year law student Pete Ashcroft. “It was just full of U.Va. love.” As soon as the first tent popped up, others jumped in line: “We always sit on the floor, so we started checking [for a line] Ho Friday night around ovi lle six or seven,” said third-year undergraduate Blair Putnam. “I live at U-Hall this week.” The tent city was soon dubbed “Hoo-ville.” Fourth-year undergraduate T.J. Zitkevitz explained that the name was chosen in an attempt not to imitate Duke’s custom of naming basketball-motivated tent cities after the coach: “We didn’t want to copy Duke with ‘K-Ville,’ so we went with Hooville’ rather than ‘G-Ville’.” By Monday evening, still 48 hours before game time, there were 50 to 60 people sleeping out to preserve their spot in line, according to Zitkevitz, one of the first in line. The numbers doubled by Thursday night. “We always want the same seats for every game,” Zitkevitz said in explanation of his group’s arrival Saturday afternoon. “They’re the ones next to the visitor’s bench.” This is the first time, Zitkevitz said, that his group has ever camped out for more than one night. So why the quadrupled effort this time? “This is actually going to be one of the first times two almost Top Ten teams will play at U-Hall, like Maryland last week,” noted Zitevitz. The rules of Hooville are simple — groups in line could be as large as 12 people, and at least one member of each group must be present at U-Hall at all times. “You need a replacement if you leave…it’s the honor system,” explained first-year undergraduate Beth Watson. A large poster on the wall detailed the members of the group in line each of the four gates at the student entrance, so that the campers did not have to stay in a strict line — 100 groups were on the list by game time. The die-hard fans had confidence that they were waiting to see a victory over the higher-ranked Duke team: “This time we have a chance to beat Duke,” Zitkevitz said. “We play really good at home, and we took them to overtime last year over Christmas break.” The campers were quick to note that the basketball organization took care of them in exchange for their support, providing them with dry sleeping quarters in Onesty Hall, power cords for electricity in their tents, and even pizza delivered by Coach Pete Gillen’s staff on Tuesday afternoon. “The school’s been really helpful, trying to organize this last minute,” said Zitkevitz, “We didn’t expect electricity, and we didn’t expect to be let into the Cage — and even better, pizza!” M. Mapp R. Mason, Jr. J.C. Mathis J. Rogers T. Watson C. Williams M. Young photos courtesy of the ACC, with the exception of “Hooville,” by Brian Gist Virginia Law Weekly Reviews Friday, February 16, 2001 7 The People v . Crouching T iger, Hidden Dragon Like its rooftop-vaulting heroines, Ang Lee’s Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon has steadily leapt its way up the box office ranks and into pop cultural consciousness since its limited December opening. Movie Review by Howard Chang and Ben Block Now that Crouching Tiger is showing on over a thousand screens nationwide, including Charlottesville’s own modest art house, Vinegar Hill, we granted certiorari to determine the merit behind the critical admiration universally bestowed upon the film. Facts: Filmed entirely in Mandarin Chinese and subtitled for English-speaking audiences, Crouching Tiger chronicles the hubbub that ensues in Beijing when a slender, masked thief surreptitiously pilfers the precious sword known as “Green Destiny,” a gift given to a local nobleman by the world-weary, legendary swordsman Li Mu Bai (Chow Yun Fat). Li Mu Bai, with the help of his friend Yu Shu Lien (Michelle Yeoh), recovers Green Destiny while simultaneously avenging his old master’s death and attempting to discipline the fiery, but untempered martial talents of an aristocratic firecracker, Jen Long (Zhang Ziyi). CHANG, C.J. For audiences depending on what must be a deliberately terse subtitled translation, the rather intricate plot will probably yield to a more abstract understanding of the underlying themes in Crouching Tiger, which are compelling and often poignant in their own right. The perseverance of women living in a culture of captivity manifests itself with interesting nuance among three starkly different female characters. The unfulfilled love between friends long separated by a code of honor provides the film’s emotional foundation and enhances the pathos of its conclusion. The ultimate maturation of a hubristic youth plays like a modernized Greek tragedy, chorused in Mandarin and quietly redemptive. With Crouching Tiger, Ang Lee has made more than a masterful martial arts showstopper. He has crafted an emotional, period action-epic that deserves recognition as one of the most memorable foreign films in recent history. But the fight scenes do deserve their own explication. Choreographed by Yuen Wo Ping, the fanciful battles in Crouching Tiger easily outshine the martial arts expert’s prior ground-breaking work in The Matrix. In that film, the audience accepted that Keanu Reeves and Lawrence Fishburne could leap incredibly in the throes of kung fu combat because they were operating in a computer world whose secrets they had uncovered and were capable of manipulating. In Crouching Tiger, photo courtesy of Sony Pictures Classics the audience must suspend its disbelief from a different perspective when heroes fly through the air, bound from rooftop to rooftop, balance on tree limbs, and tiptoe across the surface of lakes with the timbre of traditional Hong Kong action films. The audience should view the impossible as it acknowledges the magic of Merlin and Excalibur, another set of nonrealities situated in a historically accessible, but distant culture. If that can occur, the magic of the images will need no translation at all. BLOCK, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part. Certainly, this is a beautifully-made film. The cinematography is astounding and the musical score provides the perfect accompaniment to ev- Reviewing Feb Club Fiestas by Jackie Sadker ’02 ‘Tis the season to be, well, whatever the theme of the night happens to be — this is Feb Club. Law students from all around the top ten envy us as we spend an entire month dressing up in costumes and socializing with other slackers. Oh, and drinking too, or so I hear. Since February is half over, a midpoint review of this year’s festivities is in order. While no Smash-a-Thons have emerged, most people agree that there have been respectable turnouts all around. For those of you (first-years and visiting faculty) unfamiliar with the Smash-a-Thon, it was dubbed the Feb Club Party of the Century by someone. Maybe that was me. But the party hosts actually hoisted items ranging from pumpkins to laptops off a very tall crane. What’s not to love? For those of you unfamiliar with Feb Club, stop what you are doing and get yourself to one of these theme parties. This is the reason you are not at Chicago. Second-year Brian Rocca accurately describes the criteria for this Feb Club review, “The best Feb Club parties are the ones that don’t run out of alcohol, and where everyone, not just the friends of the host, feels welcome.” Rocca, his roommate, and neighbors hosted Tuesday night’s packed Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory party which contained plenty of both alcohol and people, proving that some people practice what they preach. Another highlight so far, based on an extremely scientific poll of random law students, was Temptation Alderman, an entire party based on my new favorite show. Sadly, semi-celeb Tom Ritchie was nowhere to be found — perhaps reliving those memories would have been too traumatic. The solid performance by the go-to hosts at Rugby Road has also inspired praise. Eighties gear was in season as law students blended right into the “Me decade.” Go figure… Other early favorites include Law Review’s tavern takeover, boy band numbers, and erect superheroes descending on the Corner. The most common complaint regarding this year’s Feb Club has been, believe it or not, a shortage of beer. One attempt at a Saturday night party turned into a tragi- cally dry pumpkin at midnight, prompting some unforgiving upper-classmen to refer to the party as “amateur night.” The least favorable reviews were for the dry party: “Worst idea for a Feb Club party ever is a dry party where the guests were told after they showed up ‘this party is only going to last 19 more minutes.’ I thought Betty Ford was supposed to be nice.” Third-year Ben Cohen, the Feb Club king, has never missed a party in all of his three years here. In his very expert opinion, the best party so far this season was the Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory around-the-world extravaganza because, “everybody seemed to be happy and having fun.” He also gave high marks to the dark horse Fire and Ice, the Law Review Tavern party and the BLSA suite at the Omni. His Feb Club philosophy: “It’s a little mini-adventure every day. Will it be fun? Will it suck ass?” Third-year Andrew Dubill sums up the Feb Club experience, “I can think of no better way to spend a Monday night than chasing some rotgut whiskey with some warm flat beer.” photo courtesy of Matt Eisenbrandt ery scene. And yet I was still troubled by the plot; perhaps more accurately, I left with a sense of disappointment that either a) I didn’t understand the movie and that’s why I didn’t love it; or b) I did understand it, but I still didn’t love it. Given the hype surrounding the film, somehow I expected more. The magical realism did not upset me. To the contrary, the film resembled a Gabriel Garcia Marquez novel with moments of reality interspersed with flashes of fantasy. But Marquez novels also develop their characters to heighten the reader’s interest. And that is where Crouching Tiger fell short. Perhaps, as my learned colleague suggests, this emotion was lost in the translation. In any event, the viewer’s emotional capital is left untapped. Li Mu Bai and Shu Lien take stoicism to a new level, and this made it hard for me to really care whether they ever got the sword back. It sure didn’t seem to matter much to them. Most troubling to me was Jen’s character. Why a spoiled princess received such unwavering support from every other character in the film (be they good or evil) remained a mystery to me. Li and Shu stonefacedly adopted her as their protégé, but never explained why they needed a pupil in the first place. Too much of the background remained unrevealed: The plot line mentions the Wudan and the Guang Hi, presumably rival forces in the struggle for power, but never explains what really is at stake. Unless the lesson was that good looks should inspire unmitigated devotion — and certainly Ang Lee had something more in mind — the film failed to deliver its message. He Said, Heep Said: A Trip to the Old Countr y Nestled just south of Charlottesville’s shopping mecca, Fashion Square Mall, Old Country Buffet is one of the area’s most ballyhooed all-you-can-eat experiences. C’ville Dining in a Nutshell by Jason Heep &Carsten Reichel For those expecting a true taste of the old country, however, you should be aware that nary a Sicilian was in sight … capisce? With its culinary focus squarely on generic American fare, Old Country’s décor was equally nondescript but sparkling clean. Sporting six islands of food, it is one of the area’s larger buffets. Heep: Having built up an appetite, I was giddier than a 1L checking ISIS upon arrival. I went straight to the food bar. Carsten, however, was distracted looking for Barrister dates. He was eyeing the lady patrons; I was eyeing the spread of food. Both of us were disappointed by the selection. Carsten: The first thing I can say about this place is that there definitely was some truth in advertising — the Old Country Buffet was certainly old. I’d say there were more wrinkles and heads of gray hair in the restaurant than in last month’s edition of Silver Foxes magazine. I kept waiting for the Lion’s Club meeting to come to order, but it never happened. Heep: After my first go-round, I was about as excited by the possibilities of this restaurant as I am by a Scott Fink e-mail. I pushed on, and in anticipation of the release of Hannibal, made sure I got some liver from the bar. I also scooped on some macaroni and cheese, which was saltier than even the Vanguard of Democracy. Carsten: The large signs over the individual bars guided me to my first stop — “Meats.” I was a little disappointed by the selection here, ultimately settling for the last scraps of pot roast and some baked chicken. Both were a little like Natty Light from a keg — good enough if that’s all they have, but probably not worth paying for. To supplement the paltry meat selection, I sought refuge in the “Entrees” bar. Here, I was surprised to learn that cornbread and cinnamon rolls qualified as entrees. As I returned to the table, I am sure I heard some child told, “If you don’t eat your cinnamon roll, you can’t have any pudding. How can you have any pudding if you don’t eat your cinnamon roll?” Heep: With my second plate loaded down with cinnamon rolls, French fries, and ketchup (which was, surprisingly enough, not listed as a vegetable), I ate fast with the goal of finding something decent. This tactic failed. The cinnamon rolls tasted no better as an entrée. Carsten: I knew I was in trouble when I wound up taking my second trip to the salad bar. Here, I found a sampling of mayonnaisebased salads which would put your average church potluck to shame. I went with a chicken pasta salad that was creamier than Heep’s thighs and added on a spinach salad for good measure. The available vegetation was a lot like Heep’s sense of humor — fresh, but remarkably limited. Heep: I looked across the table at Carsten and noticed he wasn’t attacking his food with the usual gusto. Was it the crappy food or that he was afraid he wouldn’t fit in his outfit for the Ball (he was planning on wearing just the pants, bowtie, and cummerbund from his Chippendale days)? Carsten: By this point, I was ready for a beverage. Unlike most buffets, Old Country included a drink bar in its $7.99 price. I like my drinks like Heep likes his women, so I went for something that was dark, thick, and went down easy — a glass of chocolate milk. This was probably the highlight of the meal. Heep: By this point, my expectations were as low as Carsten’s girlfriend’s. I went for some dessert, only to find that the cheesecake was as tasteless as the couples who were making out at 2:30 a.m. in the elevator at Barristers. Carsten: Dessert was an appropriate ending to the experience — desperate to find something which would leave me feeling better about myself, I loaded up. Banana pudding, chocolate cake, apple crisp, peach cobbler, and a “cheesecake” which bore a remarkable similarity to Cool Whip on a graham cracker. The pudding was thin, the cake dry, and the cheesecake, I believe, carcinogenic. My lone hit of the trip came with the peach cobbler, which was groingrabbingly good. Heep: Overall, I have as much chance of returning to this place as Carsten has on Temptation Island. Carsten: This buffet offered fewer choices than an SBA election, the food was as predictable as the results of the Dean search, and much like a Tuesday night Feb Club party, you’d probably be better off not going. Screw Flanders. 8 Law School Life Virginia Law Weekly Friday, February 16, 2001 ANGUARD We’ve Got the Biggest (Barristers) Balls of Them All V OF DEMOCRACY The yearly debacle that is the Barristers Ball (a.k.a. the Nerd Prom) has historically provided more juice for this column than any single event on the calendar. And while this year’s Ball lacked the drunken histrionics of years past — e.g., no Bulgarian-induced bouts of fisticuffs nor any particularly ugly public break-ups — the event didn’t lack for fodder. At the outset, let’s save everyone some trouble and issue a blanket tsk-tsk to those of you who behaved badly during the course of the night. The poison pen of VG can only report so much...and frankly, there’s some stuff we don’t even want to know about. The first item of interest should be filed under the heading, “We are women, hear us kvetch.” A “girls-only” pre-Barristers’ party organized by 3L L.H. at the home of 2Ls P.H., S.C., and K.F. became the source of some controversy when efforts to admit males met with a rawther testy response, particularly by 2L E.M. and 3L L.G. An estrogen-induced disaster was eventually averted by a compromise which allowed dateless males to enter the party — but much like feeding time at the zoo and conjugal visits at the county jail, the boys were only allowed in for an hour. Later in the evening, the ladies amused themselves by playing “Hook-Up Yahtzee!,” attempting to abscond with others’ dates. The runaway winner: 3L M.S. Hell hath no fury… Hook-up highlights of the evening include 3L J.A.’s latenight rendezvous with friendly neighborhood 1L Cheryl; 3L A.G. making a case for himself as the Law School’s “Mr. International” after showing up on the arm of LLM S.W.; and 2L R.G. arriving with 3L A.B. We assume the latter couple had an enjoyable evening, as R.G. was seen being dropped off the following morning by a brightred car with “Buchko” plates. However, the evening was not without casualties, as behemoth 2L S.R. opened a door on an unidentified female’s face, causing much bleeding and crying. Further, 3L G.S. nearly set his tux ablaze while reaching for a basket of bread during a pre-Ball dinner. Note to all our gay friends: It’s sufficient to announce that you’re out of the closet; it’s not necessary to literally become “flaming.” That’s just dangerous. Tempted By the Fruit of An- other: Despite the best efforts of 3Ls B.P., H.B., B.J., and N.A., last week’s “Temptation Alderman” proved to be worthy of its considerable hype. The inexplicable star of the evening was N.A. himself, as hordes of women avoided the downstairs keg bottleneck and flocked to do shots in his bedroom. This wily 3L employed some serious strategery by announcing a rule that all shots had to be done off of his admittedly buffed body — and though many put their mouths on N.A., it was 3L L.P. who ultimately won the war of attrition. On another front, 3L L.G. spent the night behind closed doors talking with 1L Joe (sorry for all the first names, folks, but this is where a hard-copy facebook would come in handy). The real casualty of the evening, though, was fashion. 2L G.R. and 3L M.H. abandoned their usual Abercrombie conventions and went native in an attempt to dress like their favorite “Temptation Island” characters. In addition, “Bizarro D.N.,” a 1L by the name of Geoff, dressed up in a revealing floral-print number that had even the most inebriated party-goers scratching their heads. For the record, Geoff, just because you bought it in Fiji, doesn’t mean it’s not a skirt. VANGUARD OF DEMOCRACY is an independent column of the North Grounds Softball League and does not necessarily represent the views of the editors of the Virginia Law Weekly. PHOTO GALLERY photo courtesy of Matt Eisenbrandt “I’m...too sexy for my shirt...” photo courtesy of Jesse Pannoni photo courtesy of Kevin Sullivan “So sexy, it hurts.” “We’re...too sexy for shame.” THE Weekly Crossword Top Ten LL.M. Clarifications Edited by Wayne Robert Williams by Peter Oberholzer, LL.M. LOOK SHARP By Frances Burton, Summerville, Georgia ACROSS 1 Eschew 5 Ascend 10 Brazilian dance in duple time 15 Gone by 19 Weight of one silver rupee 20 Emulsifying agent 21 Zodiac sign 22 __ of Dogs 23 Present starter? 24 Glare with fury 26 Fictional sleuth Charlie 27 Ground grain 28 Concurred 29 SSS classification 30 Hrbek or McCord 31 Affected person 33 John Quincy or Samuel 35 School kids 37 Helps with the dishes 39 Arena cheers 41 Lost traction 42 French pets 45 Shipshape 47 Figurative uses of words 51 Norway’s capital 52 Shepherd’s stick 56 Leprechauns’ land 58 Sidestep 59 Shoulder wrap 61 Potted household favorite 64 Sicilian peak 65 Browned 67 Neighborhoods 68 Frozen dessert 70 Composer Satie 72 Wapiti 73 Mexican bread 74 Lounging attire 78 Hideaways 80 Writer Ellison 85 Taj Mahal city 86 Located exactly 89 “Moonlight Gambler” singer 90 “I Can’t Make You Love Me” singer Bonnie 92 Actress Ward 93 Jewish feast 95 Westerns author Grey 96 Dieter and Lou 98 Carpenter’s groove 100 Studied, but not so much? 102 Customary time 104 Socially inept loser 106 More mature 107 Rights to enter 111 Salary increase 113 Satellites’ paths 117 O v e r whelming defeat 118 Against: pref. 120 Gaps 122 Med. sch. course 123 Sci. or math, e.g. 124 E m b r o i dery on canvas 126 “__, Mia” 127 P o p u l a r cookie 128 Recently 129 S i n g e r Fisher 130 Half hitch or bowline 131 C r a s h site grp. 132 M i s s i s s i p p i quartet? 133 M a r s h grasses 134 Sound stages DOWN 1 Trample 2 Path starter? 3 Bones in forearms 4 Established conclusively 5 Compensations 6 Block up 7 Greek marketplaces 8 Enjoyed 9 Make beloved 10 Give in to gravity 11 Jason’s ship 12 Bearings 13 Crushable hats 14 Battery mate? 15 Examined item by item 16 Deathly pale 17 Particular bias 18 Campers’ residences 25 Clio Award winner 32 Internet address: abbr. 34 Diplomas casually 36 Nearly hopeless 38 Guessed figs. 40 Put to sea photo by Brian Gist “...And we shake our little tushes on the catwalk.” Solution on p. 4 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. No, International is not a synonym of Interstate. Yes, if you win the “World” Series, you might be the best team in the world, but just because no one else cares. No, when you think you eat Swiss cheese, it is not Swiss cheese, but yes, good food really exists. Yes, you can have election results in less than a month. No, 1-800 is not the only way to deal with customers, and no, “my phone call is not very important to you.” Yes, the “Bar Charts” might be World’s #1 but they are useless outside the U.S. Mr. Bush, the name of India’s prime minister is Vajpayee. No, in real FOOTball you do not touch the ball with your hands. Yes, you can live without a gun. No, it does not hurt to laugh about yourself. Submit your top ten list to Jackie Sadker, Features Editor, in SL 279 or via email at [email protected]. Please have entries in by 5 p.m. on Tuesday for the following publication. 42 Work station 43 Employee protection agcy. 44 Heroine of “The Good Earth” 46 Meandered 48 __ de foie gras 49 “So Big” and “Show Boat” author Ferber 50 Connection line 53 Stirred from sleep 54 In favor of 55 Gravy-train passenger 57 Noun-forming suffix 60 Lascivious look 62 __ Lama 63 Pianist John 66 Hit the dirt 69 Fossil fuel 71 Sacred bird of ancient Egypt 74 Fishhook feature 75 Lab gel 76 Small combo 77 Crude effort 79 66 or A1A, e.g. 81 Semiwild hogs of the southeast U.S. 82 Fictioneer 83 “__ of Green Gables” 84 Have not 87 Blueprint 88 Moore of “Disclosure” 91 Boxing decisions, in brief 94 Comebacks 97 Philosopher Langer 99 Pope’s fanon 101 Saul’s uncle 103 Taylor and Adoree 105 Laundry stinker 106 Live 107 Fiery crime 108 Woo 109 Dice, e.g. 110 Medley meals 112 Josiah’s porcelain 114 Lacking sense 115 Fortuneteller’s cards 116 Sports pages figs. 119 Unemployed 121 Oklahoma city 125 Fleur-de-__