MLM Counties News. Notices. Need-to-know Information.

Three separate yet interwoven developments illustrate a dangerous trend: focus on the cost of legal service at the expense of the value of justice. How does each of them strike you?

Finally saw “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter” the other day. Once I stopped worrying about the divergence of even the nonsupernatural timeline from actual history, I had plenty of guilty fun. I also came away wondering at the upsurge of interest in our 16th president these past few years.

Timing. That’s the crucial element missing from the rancorous debate, prompted by the U.S. Supreme Court’s health care ruling, over whether states will decide not to expand Medicaid.

Impeccable liberal sources, including the editorial page of The New York Times, insist that the court is radically activist and conservative, regardless of its decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act. Conservative observers continue to intone that the court is liberal and out of touch with America — as it has been for nearly 60 years, since Earl Warren was named chief justice in 1953.

It seems like only yesterday I was filling out applications for law schools. Being a lawyer didn’t strike me as being that important. In fact, I was considering getting a Ph.D. However, the law school applications took so long to fill out, and having been admitted, it seemed like I might as well just go to law school, so I scrapped the Ph.D. idea.

As we await the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, the rhetoric of the statute’s supporters is growing increasingly heated — almost panicky.

The U.S. prides itself as the beacon of democracy, but it’s very likely no U.S. president has ever been elected by a majority of American adults.

For court watchers, the drama is becoming unbearable. With just two weeks left on the U.S. Supreme Court’s calendar to announce opinions, the five most important cases of the term all remain undecided.

Lawyers love credentials that symbolize professional recognition and accomplishment. Part of the reason is that credentials are evidence of effort and success, and the lawyer personality has a strong inclination toward both.

What’s the opposite of free speech? If you answered, “totalitarian censorship,” you are right — and you are old.

Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers is anti-woman. That’s the position of Ellen Pao, a junior partner at the venture capital firm who filed a lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court contending “discriminatory treatment of Plaintiff and other female employees, specifically in advancement and compensation because of their gender.”