From a Justice Department job announcement for “up to 10 experienced attorneys for the position of Trial Attorney in the Voting Section in Washington, D.C.”:
The Civil Rights Division encourages qualified applicants with targeted disabilities to apply. Targeted disabilities are deafness, blindness, missing extremities, partial or complete paralysis, convulsive disorder, mental retardation, mental illness, severe distortion of limbs and/or spine. Applicants who meet the qualification requirements and are able to perform the essential functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation are encouraged to identify targeted disabilities in response to the questions in the Avue application system seeking that information.
I’m pretty sure I know what happened here: Boilerplate that was designed for a wide range of federal jobs — including the ones (probably a relatively small percentage of all federal jobs) for which one can be qualified even though one is mentally retarded — is just being copied here; and the limitation to “qualified applicants” who “are able to perform the essential functions of the position” ensures that no mentally retarded lawyers will indeed be hired. Still, the result looks pretty striking in a call for applications from experienced attorneys.
Thanks to Christopher Rohrbacher for the pointer.
B.D. says:
Is Alberto Gonzales still looking for a job?
Oh, that’s harsh.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 1:42 pmPatent Lawyer says:
On the other hand, maybe this explains why the DoJ dropped a civil rights case after winning a default judgment?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 1:43 pmMike McDougal says:
Will the feds pay a finder’s fee?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 1:52 pmrjbiii says:
I’m sure you’re right that this is just boilerplate language, but isn’t a major point of positive discrimination policy to recognize that if you can become qualified despite your disabilities you’ve got something pretty special about you. In this case I don’t think the limiter is that you have to be able “to perform the essential functions of the position.” If you’ve become an attorney and gained the three years of experience already required by the position, most likely you will be able to perform the functions of the job.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 1:53 pmChristopher Cooke says:
Maybe this explains the OLC torture memos.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:00 pmmikeyes says:
I suspect that the rules used to offer these jobs specify the list you see in that announcement for all jobs in the department if not the entire federal government.
Boy, this really begs the snark though, doesn’t it?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:01 pmRoyLitmus says:
Wouldn’t any of the lawyers in the Democratic Caucus who wanted to run ads against Democrats that won’t support the health care bill qualify? At least according to Rahm Emanuel I think they would.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:04 pmChrisTS says:
I can at least picture a retarded or insane lawyer in court. But one who is completely paralyzed? Will she be rolled in in an iron lung?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:10 pmPhatty says:
I wonder what kind of “reasonable accomodations” a mentally retarded lawyer would need to perform the job.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:11 pmNorthern Dave says:
The use of Sony’s new “LawyerBot 2010″ TM as an aid of course :-)
(Thanks Eugene, I shall dine out on this one........)
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:17 pmPubliusFL says:
I foresee this job announcement being emailed to a lot of lawyer acquaintances with no more explanation than “I thought you might be interested in this.”
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:21 pmLarryA says:
In D.C., none whatsoever.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:28 pmAnderson says:
Great catch by Rorhbacher.
Compare Sarah Palin’s condemnation of Rahm Emanuel’s calling Senate liberals “retarded,” shortly after she’d complained about times getting to where folks can’t say “politically incorrect” things.
(Points for working Palin reference into thread on mentally retarded government officials: 15.)
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:29 pmPersonFromPorlock says:
Appointment to the bench?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:40 pmJRL says:
” . . . ensures that no mentally retarded lawyers will indeed be hired.”
/. . . must . . . resist . . .
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:41 pmAnderson says:
I wonder what kind of “reasonable accomodations” a mentally retarded lawyer would need to perform the job.
Here in the private sector, we call those accommodations “associates.”
[Rimshot]
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:42 pmSun Tzu's Nephew says:
I thought the mentally retarded lawyers were all employed in Congress?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:47 pmGov. Sarah Palin says:
Professer Vokoloff:
I know you did not mean the use of “that word” in the way that that Immanuel used that word, and I have been told, you know, also, that you are a Great American, and so, therefore, I am not going to demand your resignation or anything like that. But I also do want to, you know, give you a heads up that some people may take your use of that word out of the context that I know you intended and try to use it against you, because you are a Great American, and maybe try to draw some line between what I said about that Immanuel guy and what you did, and so maybe you might want to, also, sort of think of another word next time you are thinking of using that word.
Also, if the liberals do try to make something out of this, and you are ever in need of any public relations assistance in that regard, also, my Bristol has formed a consulting firm that just might be what you are looking for.
P.S. I spent some time perusaling your blog and think maybe some of your readers would be interested in my timely insights. I can’t budge from my strict $100,000 minimum for expressing my real American views and values, of course, but if you want to try to make the numbers work, let me know. I see you already have ads on your blog, and so therefore, maybe you should, you know, also want to think about this.
OK? Thanks, Professer Volokove, and may God richly bless you, even if you keep using that word.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:48 pmA. Criminal says:
“ensures that no mentally retarded lawyers will indeed be hired.”
Then having to take remedial reading doesn’t count?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:55 pmAnderson says:
Q. What blogs does Sarah Palin read?
A. All of them!
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:57 pmegd says:
I hate to be a buzzkill on the snarkfest, but “mental retardation” is a fairly broad category. Developmental disorders, aphasia, and autism may all be classified as “mental retardation.”
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:57 pmDjDiverDan says:
Hey, in 27 years of practice, I’ve seen dozens of lawyers who I think qualify as mentally retarded — like the tax lawyer trying to close a real estate deal who, when he didn’t know what to put in the blank line in the Warranty Deed immediately before the words “herein called “Grantee”, just deleted the blank line from the form. The result was a filed Warranty Deed in which the Grantee was NOT identified; this was not some first year solo, but a Partner in a major lawfirm, in a multi-million dollar transaction. Or the Banking Partner in another big firm, representing a borrower from Canadian Bank of Commerce, who OK’d a Loan Agreement that failed to specify that it was U.S. Dollars his client intended to borrow (at a time when the Canadian Dollar was worth about $0.75 U.S.). I believe thare are LOTS of Mentally Retarded Lawyers out there, many of them drawing huge draws from big Law Firms. It’s only fair the DOJ gets its share (though mentally retarded lawyers seem to be grossly over-represented at the IRS).
Quote
February 3, 2010, 2:57 pmS says:
Is ‘mental retardation’ defined somewhere in gov hiring policies? If so, then, perhaps, there are certain such conditions which can work, here. Eg, certain conditions that don’t invariably effect higher order thinking.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:00 pmDavid M. Nieporent says:
Congress!
Indeed, it’s practically a BFOQ for the job.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:00 pmohwilleke says:
Matthew Michael “Matt” Murdock would have been proud. ;)
David Paterson, meanwhile, now has a backup plan.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:03 pmPatHMV says:
Why are they only targeting certain disorders? Why are they discriminating against people suffering from other disorders, which apparently aren’t privileged enough to be “targeted”? I demand equal rights for people with untargeted disorders!
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:05 pmRPT says:
Yow, another Imhofe joke.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:06 pmDave N. says:
In a post that screams for snark, this one is the clear thread winner.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:10 pmKenvee says:
I’ve actually practiced with a criminal trial attorney who was almost completely paralyzed and when at home was in an iron lung. He was a polio survivor. He could move his head and one hand slightly, so he could steer his motorized wheelchair.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:35 pmArchitect says:
–Underwear from K-mart
–Drive slow in the driveway
–box of choc-o-lats
–french fried ‘taters
–weird haircuts
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:42 pmricky says:
I once worked in a mailroom with a guy who was mildly retarded. He performed the functions of his job adequately and was pleasant to work with. I’m glad he found a job (it was a government job) that suited his abilities. I’m all for the disabled living with dignity.
That said, at what point did we go so insane with the cultural Marxist rhetoric as to include “targeted disabilities” as a hiring criterion? Did someone actually come to the conclusion that their department couldn’t perform its duties without a certain number of workers suffering from severe distortion of the spine? Or is this affirmative action to make up for 400 years of ableist oppression?
I propose we create a separate “Department of Make-Work Jobs for Misfits” so that at least we can stop these endless social engineering projects from interfering with the normal functioning of government.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:47 pmPhatty says:
We have a winner!
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:48 pmArrowSmith says:
Make up your mind. Either he’s evil or retarded. Can’t be both.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 3:54 pmrandom guy says:
Reminds me of Croson’s crack about the Richmond ordinance re affirmative action in contracting: Richmond sought to do penance for its racist past by preferring Aleutians as contractors. The city obviously cloned similar federal language (probably directly from the provision at issue Metro Broadcasting), so they covered the “laundry list” of minorities. But if the specific context was tied to an actual remediation theory, rather than diversity for its own sake, then it was just silly.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 4:25 pmTim says:
John Yoo might be unemployed soon.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 4:35 pmTexas Lawyer says:
I tried a case against a quadraplegic lawyer. He was an excellent lawyer and a formidable opponent.
He was injured in a diving accident and went to law school afterwards (as well as earning an MBA). He’s a board-certified trial lawyer.
He of course has assistance at trial. Someone moves his wheelchair around and holds the papers for him. But he is a pretty impressive example of how people can overcome incredible adversities.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 4:37 pmAnderson says:
That said, at what point did we go so insane with the cultural Marxist rhetoric as to include “targeted disabilities” as a hiring criterion?
If you are really skeptical that disabled people might face discrimination in hiring, then I can’t imagine how I could persuade you otherwise.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 4:59 pmBob_R says:
I don’t know if commenters are being deliberately obtuse in order to score points against Palin. But, I think that the situation is pretty clear for anyone who looks at it without a political ax to grind. “Mentally retarded” is a perfectly reasonable descriptive term. However, as scum like Rahm Emanuel amply demonstrate it is used all the time as a deliberate and bitter insult. Because of this many people cease to use it even in contexts that are not pejorative. While I don’t find it offensive in many cases I rarely use it around my handicapped son since I know that it has been used to insult him to his face.
BTW, in the case of Rahm “scum” is purely descriptive.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 5:03 pmPintler says:
At least they didn’t specify reliable.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 5:12 pmneurodoc says:
The first and last of those (“developmental disorders” and “autism,” that is “Pervasive Developmental Disorder”) might be labeled “mentally retardation,” though that is a term that is generally avoided because some find it objectionable, as Rahm Emanuel discovered. “Aphasia” would not be counted as “mental retardation” because it is usually an acquired disorder rather than a congenital one or one dating from early childhood, and more importantly because it is one particular form of cognitive impairment, whereas “mental retardation” implies global cognitive impairment. One can have a high IQ in the face of aphasia, depending on the type of aphasia, which does not comport with “mental retardation.”
The only sorts of jobs a “mentally retarded” person would be hired for by the government would be those entailing the simplest of tasks, e.g., cleaning, photocopying, etc.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 5:30 pmmethodact says:
neurodoc:
What about idiot savants?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 5:37 pmTammy Cravit says:
I don’t know about that...I’ve known a number of people with autism-spectrum disorders who nonetheless were very intellectually capable and who (with accommodations to their sensory-processing deficits) I suspect could well have become lawyers. One company I worked for some years ago had a senior network engineer who talked openly about his autism, and who was nonetheless entirely capable at his job. He didn’t typically use the label “mentally retarded” to describe himself, but I know other people sometimes did.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 5:44 pmricky says:
Anderson–
The whole point of the hiring process is to discriminate, isn’t it? If you don’t hire everyone who shows up, you’re discriminating.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 5:48 pmChris Travers says:
IMO, classical measures of mental retardation don’t apply at all to idiot savants. They are not on the line. They are sideways to it.
Note my IQ subtest scores are all over the place. They range from (on the low end) the 25% percentile to (on the high end) up at the top. Peaks and valleys in this way are not what people should call “mental retardation” but rather are evidence of specific neurological disorders.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 5:54 pmChris Travers says:
that’s because some people were using the term “mentally retarded” incorrectly at least as regards its formal definition.
“Mental retardation” is a description of overall IQ scores, and typically should only be used when IQ scores are generally (and uniformly) low. If some are high and some are low, you have a neurological disorder. ADD, Autism, Williams’ Syndrome, etc. all show this pattern.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 5:58 pmDennis N says:
I thought Congress was reserved for lawyers who went bad.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 6:32 pmPeteP says:
“including the ones (probably a relatively small percentage of all federal jobs) for which one can be qualified even though one is mentally retarded ”
Typically, these are elected positions.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 6:48 pmBarbara Skolaut says:
Are you sure? Do you have a better explanation for the Attorney General and his “policies”?
(Yeah, I know, maybe he’s just an idiot. Oh, wait....)
Quote
February 3, 2010, 7:21 pmShelbyC says:
kinda reminds me of the old “his brain was in a jar on my desk” joke.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 7:55 pmRPT says:
What’s your opinion of Rush Limbaugh?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 7:59 pmProsecutorial Indiscretion says:
I don’t get how this brings out knocks against the past administration — while there were certainly problems, I don’t recall anything this hilariously boneheaded going on under Mukasey or Ashcroft or Gonzales. I hope this doesn’t signal a Toyota-like plunge in quality control.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 8:09 pmAbdul says:
“Targeted disabilities” are disabilities targeted by the EEOC because they face unusal amounts of discrimination and/or nearly always require reasonable accomodations. It’s not that the agency is giving a preference to certain disabilities.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 8:11 pmArthurKirkland says:
Goodling? Enrobed statues? Schlozman? Repudiated reasoning? Tommy Chong? “Quaint?” Regent? Torture? Hamdi? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 8:36 pmarbitraryaardvark says:
I read somewhere recently (boingboing? instapundit?) about a company that hires people with autism for programming jobs. It’s not makework; the autistic have a comparative advantage in those tasks. The election code, particularly if you factor in tax consequences, is mind-numbingly dense, and even those of us who are experts get bogged down. Autistic hyper-focus could be an asset. That this kind of overregulation ends up chilling speech was a factor in Citizens United.
I have some of the characteristics of the autism spectrum, am the absent-minded professor type, was called “rainman” by coworkers at one job. Being a DOJ voting section attorney is one of the few jobs I might be suited for. As far as I know I’m not eligible to apply because I didn’t register for the draft.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 8:43 pmCareless says:
I’ve got to ask: on what does an IT professional with excellent writing skills score significantly below average?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 10:09 pmmalclave says:
Never assume. This is the Holder DoJ we’re talking about.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 10:30 pmJeffersonian says:
The jokes just write themselves, don’t they?
Quote
February 3, 2010, 10:35 pmCurious passerby says:
What’s your opinion of Rush Limbaugh?
I’ve only heard Limbaugh about 3 times on the radio, but if I would judge him only by the people who hate him, he is brilliant!
Quote
February 3, 2010, 10:56 pmDave Hardy says:
without going for the obvious gag line (in gov’t work, maybe 50% of the work could be done by a person with a sub 100 IQ) I did know a govt lawyer who was completely blind and could do his job nicely. He memorized every legal detail and every detail of the establishment of every federal installation in Alaska. I have no idea how a human memory could accomplish that. It would be a massive task to program a computer spreadsheet (and there were none in those days) to do it. But he could. I was once told to ask him about some federal establishment of a few acres, and he said, oh, yes, established as a radio station by Public Law ____ in _____, expanded a little by Executive Order ___ in ____, and so on.
Quote
February 3, 2010, 10:58 pmuberVU - social comments says:
Social comments and analytics for this post...
This post was mentioned on Twitter by DevilMCare: Justice Dept sets its sights very high: http://volokh.com/2010/02/03/seeking-qualified-mentally-retarded-lawyers/...
Sun Tzu's Nephew says:
Remember: Some 50% of the population has a sub-100 IQ.
A fact that keeps me awake at night, worrying
Quote
February 3, 2010, 11:08 pmHucbald says:
I posted that before you (Even with the Australian time zone... well, you’re not retarded... no wait, you’re a lawyer).
HA!
Quote
February 3, 2010, 11:09 pmJustice Department Seeks to Hire Mentally Retarded Lawyers | The American Pundit says:
[...] think I’m kidding. But I’m not. The Justice Department is actually seeking to hire mentally retarded lawyers. The Civil Rights [...]
liz says:
Uh, I think you mean affect not effect....
Quote
February 4, 2010, 12:08 amBy reader acclaim: great moments in “targeted disabilities” says:
[...] Eugene Volokh and many [...]
CurlyDave says:
Actually, I would be much more worried about lawyers suffering from “mental illness”, than “mental retardation”.
I can easily imagine a mentally ill cannibalistic serial murderer who was also a perfectly competent lawyer...
Quote
February 4, 2010, 12:15 amJ Richardson says:
Well, if they could pass the bar exam.....
Quote
February 4, 2010, 12:21 amwGraves says:
They already have Holder, what more do they want?
Quote
February 4, 2010, 2:13 amR Gould-Saltman says:
Just a thought re: Palin’s sudden turn towards enforcement of her idea of political correctness: I can think of almost no common American English nouns** used to express, in exaggerated terms, the speaker’s contempt for the intellectual ability of his subject, that haven’t been, at one time, a prevailing legal or medical synonym for being, well, “developmentally impaired”. Immediately obvious examples include “moron”, “idiot” and “imbecile”, all of which you’ll find ensconced in the dustier parts of your state’s appellate reports. “Feeble-minded” would also be problematic.
Frankly, being limited to describing one’s dim-bulbed opponent as “just dumb” or “pretty stupid” will get pretty stale.
**leaving aside the compound variations on the George Carlin stadards, i.e. “s**t-head” “f**k-wit” etc.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 3:48 amAnatid says:
Yes, sadly, at any given moment half of the population will be below average ...
Quote
February 4, 2010, 4:10 amDept. of Justice looking for “retarded” lawyers (no joke) « Spin, strangeness, and charm says:
[...] of Justice looking for “retarded” lawyers (no joke) Noooo!!! Really: From a Justice Department job announcement for “up to 10 experienced attorneys for the position [...]
Reason Morning Links: Subsidies for Energy, Trouble for Toyota, Thumbs Down for Question Time - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine says:
[...] • The Justice Department is looking for a few good mentally retarded lawyers. [...]
Bob_R says:
@ RPT: I don’t understand the Rush Limbaugh reference — probably because I don’t listen to any of infotainment shows. So I really don’t have an opinion of him.
I see that I might have made it seem like I thought that Rahm was scum because of the insult under discussion. That’s not the case. Insulting the mentally retarded is a form of casual bigotry that is very common among the current “educated class.” Sort of on the par with the “some of my best friends are jews/blacks” antisemitism and racism of the 50’s and 60’s. It’s so common and thoughtless that I don’t get too upset about it. Of course, I let people know that they have insulted my son when they do it in front of me. They seldom do it a second time.
My opinion of Rahm is based on my impression of his place amongst the various hatchet men, fixers, and bag men that seem to inhabit every administration. “Somewhat less sleazy than Bob Haldeman” is not something I would brag about. Insulting the mentally retarded seem completely in character for him.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 7:42 amcoriolan says:
Old joke: How do you greet a mentally retarded lawyer? “Good morning, Judge!”
Quote
February 4, 2010, 7:45 amed says:
“able to perform the essential functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation”
Sounds like a description of Obama’s Cabinet, where the “r” word has officially been banned.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 7:47 amasfvab says:
Would it be okay for Rahm to call any people or ideas “stupid”?
Because I know a lot of people with lower IQs who are not significantly cognitively or developmentally impaired and they find that word to be a vicious slur. They deserve Sarah Palin’s advocacy too. In fact, she is really a perfect poster woman for the movement, proving it’s not just the big brains (ha, it’s not so funny when the tables are turned) who can make millions for talking four hours a week on Fox.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 8:06 amMr L says:
coriolan: It’s “Good Morning, Your Honor.” The retards in question tend to get really pissy about that.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 8:12 amDon Keefhardt says:
So...“missing limbs” and “deformed spine” are OK, but not “missing spine” ? Maybe they’re already to the limit in “spineless lawyer bureaucrats”. Seems that way to me.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 8:36 amMars vs Hollywood says:
I propose we create a separate “Department of Make-Work Jobs for Misfits”
We already have a Congress.
Just to bring it full circle. :)
Quote
February 4, 2010, 8:44 amTokyoTom says:
Eugene, I‘m pretty sure much of the female gender thinks males are pretty much all “mentally retarded”, but in any event it‘s easy to see that we all labor under the handicap of cognitive biases.
I imagine you have no beef with Congress passing laws that call for or encourage applicants who are disabled, and you clearly understand that this kind of boilerplate is a result.
So what‘s your substantive point? Legal absurdities are a dime a dozen, but why this one here and now, when the object of your attention is the mentally retarded and disabled?
Quote
February 4, 2010, 9:05 amThe Rich Wasp says:
I have a friend with a serious math learning disability who has a BS in Political Science who wanted to go to law school. I believe he’s now up to being able to perform math at a sixth grade level. I wonder if he had figured out how to go on to get that law degree, if he would qualify for this federal job?
Quote
February 4, 2010, 9:12 amG Man says:
Hey, Johnny Cochran hasn’t been dead long enough for that to be funny...
Quote
February 4, 2010, 9:42 amswill says:
With apologies to Samuel Johnson, a mentally retarded person who gets their J.D. is a special mentally retarded person, not a special attorney.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 9:56 amJames D. Miller says:
People with learning disabilities can have well above average overall IQs and yet still be properly categorized as retarded on a subset of cognitive abilities.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 10:09 amswill says:
I’m sure there are dozens of ways to define both IQ and mental retardation but the DSM-IV defines mental retardation (which is what the ad is “recruiting” for) as having an IQ below 70.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 10:36 amPaula Rhoads says:
I am mentally disabled by a traumatic brain injury and was unable to hire legal representation in Colorado’s worker’s comp system because my employer, U.S. Home Corporation, let its work comp insurance lapse. Colorado refuses to enforce the law or even adjudicate a judge’s discovery order the defense ignored. Three defense witnesses lied to misrepresent my job performance, which the concealed documents prove.
I feel like I have become almost a lawyer, despite the fact my cognitive deficits make it impossible. The system is impossible too.
It violates Hellebust v. Sam Brownback, 42 F.3rd 1331 (10th Circuit Kan) Dec. 19, 1994.
I am disabled mentally but retain a high IQ.
I would like to apply, but I could lose my disability benefits if I do, and then also my home and child.
Please tell me how I can apply so I can end the rampant discrimination against people disabled mentally.
Paula Rhoads Hook
303–371-6204
P.S. My Brainiacs public access tv show is available at http://www.denveropenmedia.org/project/6254/shows
Quote
February 4, 2010, 11:17 amMartyA says:
Not to worry, the feds have a way around this. Should an otherwise qualified retarded lawyer apply, rather than hire him, the employing office will pull the notice down and then, repost it, adding a Spanish language requirement.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 12:18 pm“Targeted Disabilities” « Nunc Pro Lunch says:
[...] best explanation we’ve seen comes from Eugene Volokh,at Volokh Conspiracy, who says: I’m pretty sure I know what happened here: Boilerplate that was designed for a wide [...]
Prosecutorial Indiscretion says:
You and I apparently have different definitions of “hilarious.” The boob thing might qualify, except that it was far more reasonable than people give Ashcroft credit for, given the media’s efforts to frame him with a tit behind his head at every opportunity — and it was blown out of proportion by the same asshats who accused Ashcroft of using the Bill of Rights as toilet paper while he was busy trying not to die long enough to be a constitutional superhero from his hospital bed.
All the other stuff you cite reflects either serious misjudgment (sometimes to the point of criminality) or policies with which you disagree. But none of it reflects a boneheaded incompetence in the day-to-day functions of the Department. Although I suppose this could potentially be a policy preference with which I disagree; maybe the DOJ is trying to hire mentally retarded lawyers. At least then if they do something really spectacular to violate someone’s rights, they won’t have to worry about the death penalty.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 2:22 pmBaboy says:
I can’t help but think they already have a preponderance of mentally challenged people in the Obama administration as is, starting with the Man himself.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 4:14 pmChitown Benny says:
The POTUS may be a socialist, but he’s no dummy. So knock off the cheap potshots and focus, damit. Is it true that Eris Holder the Attorney General of the United States wants to find mentally or delvelopmentally challlemged people who hav passed the Bar Exam?
If so, good luck to you AG Holder and God Save the United States.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 5:44 pmmoron says:
Janet Reno and Eric Holder qualify, oh, that is not harsh.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 6:31 pmCCD6116 says:
As a non-lawyer (Engineer) I always thought all lawyers were mentally challenged.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 6:43 pmNeo says:
AG Holder is seeking peers
Quote
February 4, 2010, 6:50 pmDon says:
What possesses you moronic clowns to degrade the conservative message like this? Is it a compulsion?
Quote
February 4, 2010, 7:08 pmwooga says:
Calling someone a “retard” is a rude, mean thing to do. But Rahm was obviously not intending to insult people with actual mental handicaps. He was trying to insult KosKids. It is nowhere on par with various racial insults, and the grievance mongering is just as unseemly from the right as the left. Rahm was not making fun of the handicapped, and neither was Limbaugh.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 7:15 pmLogicalUS says:
We have one mentally retarded “attorney” currently in the White House do we really need another in the Justice Department. Isn’t the disaster Eric Holder doing enough damage for you leftist?
Quote
February 4, 2010, 7:56 pmshort busrider says:
political correctness has made this country, Sofa King Wee Todd Ed.
Quote
February 4, 2010, 8:31 pmChris Travers says:
I don’t know if that typo was intentional but it was pretty darned funny....
Are you accusing Holder of being effeminate? Or of being an agent of chaos and discord?
Quote
February 4, 2010, 8:38 pmSouthern Appeal » Justice Department Seeking Retarded Lawyers? says:
[...] The Volokh Conspiracy, which offers a brief commentary, and good explanation for this) PermaLink | Rebel Yells (0) | [...]
Anon says:
I’m a current law student (1L at a public Tier 2 in a small state) with one of these targeted disabilities — a mental illness, bipolar disorder. In the short term, because it’s a recent diagnosis and my condition hasn’t been stabilized, the bipolar has made it near-impossible for me to get good grades and load up on extracurricular activities. That won’t last forever, but my resume and transcript will never catch up to my classmates’. My condition (if treated) won’t interfere, even slightly, with my meeting the DOJ’s qualification requirements or performing well at any legal job — but it’s definitely going to make it harder to find employment in the short run.
The use of this all-encompassing boilerplate’s hilarious, but kudos to the DOJ for keeping an eye out for us weirdos.
Quote
February 5, 2010, 12:03 amJust Who Is In Charge (or) It Isn’t Easy Being God » The Pink Flamingo says:
[...] in terms, but if you want to see an example of how inept and pathetic this administration is, this is it. “…The Civil Rights Division encourages qualified applicants with targeted disabilities [...]
Dirk says:
I think anyone who has known people with what would be classified as mild retardation knows that they are capable of performing many tasks that a regular worker would (let’s face it, most UAW jobs would be a cinch). These people often work harder than most to prove they are as good. That being said, most of them also have a high enough level of personal dignity that they probably would want nothing to do with working for the DOJ.
Quote
February 5, 2010, 10:29 amMore Snow (AGAIN) = more pics and links « AmyTracker… says:
[...] Government in action, seeking mentally retarded lawyers, which some people may or may not think is [...]
Robert Fortuno says:
DOJ already has a surfeit of mentally retarded lawyers.
Quote
February 5, 2010, 12:30 pmFatboy Slim says:
I guess three generations of imbeciles are not enough, after all.
Quote
February 5, 2010, 1:35 pmRD says:
Does that mean the fee title was conveyed into nothingness? Seems pretty existential. If no one walks into a bank and gets a loan, does that then constitute a lien on the real property conveyed by the Warranty Deed?
Quote
February 8, 2010, 6:03 pmJorgeShrugged says:
So, their long standing policy has now been made official.
Quote
February 9, 2010, 9:16 pm"…but I repeat myself." « Cephalic Furrow says:
[...] to The Volokh Conspiracy. Posted by cephalicfurrow Filed in Uncategorized Tags: lawl-o-blag Leave a Comment [...]