The Volokh Conspiracy

Congratulations
to my former student Jonathan Bond, George Washington University Law School Class of 2008, who recently accepted a clerkship with Justice Scalia for the October Term 2009. Pardon my kvelling, but Jonathan will be the fifth George Washington University Law School graduate to clerk for the Supreme Court in the last six years. (The current Acting Solicitor General, Greg Garre, is also a GW Law graduate and a former Supreme Court clerk.) Finally, if Wikipedia is correct, Jonathan will be joined in the Scalia chambers by another former student of mine, Daniel Sullivan, who I taught when I was visiting at Chicago. Congrats to both of them!
Ignatius (www):
Congratulations from a fellow Section 12er
7.1.2008 5:12pm
Miss Grundge:
"whom I taught"

Bad grammar is like nails scrapping across an old chalk board.
7.1.2008 5:47pm
Curt Fischer:

nails scrapping


I'm loving those scrappy nails!
7.1.2008 6:19pm
Bill F. (mail):
Miss Grundge shoots, and it's an airball.
7.1.2008 7:41pm
Karl Stucky (mail):
Jack Scalia Bauer welcomes him.
7.1.2008 7:53pm
Chris Bell (mail) (www):
Does that make Orin a "feeder"?

Lucky for me, I'm pretty sure I owe Orin a beer.
7.1.2008 7:58pm
GW Law Review Plebe:
Congrats to John Bond, #1 in the class at GW, winner of the Con Law moot court competition, Senior Articles Editor of the law review, and the smartest person I've ever had the privilege of working closely with.
7.1.2008 9:01pm
faceword:
What grades did these students get in your classes? :)
7.1.2008 10:01pm
GCC Alum:
Congrats from an acquaintance at his undergrad. He's a fantastic guy--both well-respected and well-liked.
7.2.2008 8:26am
GW Alum:
MAD CONGRATS JONATHAN!!!!!!! You totally deserve it... I had the privilege of just being in class with you . . . and will soon be able to say "I knew you when!"
7.2.2008 9:29am
2007 GW Grad:
No surprise here. Jonathan is easily one of the smartest people I've met, and I'm sure that having him in 3 of 4 classes in my final semester (when I was a 3L and he was a 2L) didn't help my GPA. Congrats!
7.2.2008 10:15am
TRE:
How do *I* take an OK class?!?!
7.2.2008 11:09am
GW Alum:
This is no surprise to anyone who has had any contact with Jonathan.

I was privileged to serve as an Articles Editor under the guy, and I can tell you that there is way more to him than his stunning brilliance. I particularly remember him offering to take the fall on a deadline that it looked like I was going to be late on, through no fault of Jonathan's obviously. The guy is a winner of hearts as well as minds.

I hope this is the beginning of a career of great influence and personal satisfaction for you, Jonathan.

Deepest congratulations!
7.2.2008 1:53pm
jeremy haile:
Jonathan was the first person called on the first day of Civ Pro. The case was Capron v. Noorden (if I remember correctly). And he nailed it cold.

Congratulations, my man.
7.2.2008 6:45pm
OrinKerr:
I have to say: the one thing cooler than Jonathan getting the clerkship is the warm congratulations sent in from (mostly anonymous) classmates. Seriously, I love it. I like to think GW is a supportive place, and comments like this are just really cool.
7.3.2008 12:43am
GW2008:
I worked with Jonathan on the Law Review and wanted to extend my congratulations. While his intellect is obvious to everyone, more should be said of his personality and character. With all of his accomplishments, you will not meet a more grounded and sincere individual. Congrats Jonathan and good luck!
7.3.2008 8:52am

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?

[Important Note to Helpful Readers: If we have confusing typos and especially ugly formatting errors, such as an unclosed underline or bold tag, we'd love to hear from you about them -- but please e-mail the author about this, rather than leaving a comment. We often won't read the comments for a while after the post, and if there's a glaring formatting error, we'd see it quickly when we revisit the post, even without the comment; and in any event the comment likely isn't going to be that helpful to your fellow comment readers. So please e-mail us directly about glitches like this. Thanks!]

Comment Policy: We'd like the posts to be civil, of course (no profanity, personal insults, and the like), but we're also hoping that people try to be as calm, reasoned, and substantive as possible. So please, also avoid rants, invective, substantial and repeated exaggeration, and radical departures from the topic of the thread. Sticking with substance -- and staying on-topic -- will make the comments more helpful to other readers, and more pleasant.

As editors, we reserve the right to delete posts, and even to kick out posters, though we hope that both of these will be exceptional events. (We also reserve the right to be busy with other things, and therefore (1) not remove all the posts that might merit removal, and (2) ignore demands such as "You should remove A's posts, because they're just as bad as B's!")

Here's a tip: Reread your post, and think of what people would think if you said this over dinner. If you think people would view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who vastly overdoes it on the hyperbole, rewrite your post before hitting enter.

And if you think this is the other people's fault -- you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, but fools wrongly view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who overdoes it on the hyperbole -- then you should still rewrite your post before hitting enter. After all, if you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, then surely it's especially important that you frame your arguments in a way that is persuasive and as unalienating as possible, even to fools.

Our goal is to provide an interesting and pleasant environment that can help inform readers. To do that, we'll occasionally have to exercise our editorial discretion. Think of this as an in-person discussion group, where having different voices is critical to a great conversation -- but where sometimes the leader has to deal with cranks who sour the conversation more than they enliven it.

Naturally, there's always a risk that this discretion will be used erroneously, no matter how well-intentioned the editor. But discussion groups (especially on the Internet, but also off it) generally need an editor who'll occasionally make such judgments.

And, remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.