5/18/2012: Looks like a shotgun wedding, by the Honorable Judge Michael Hogan:
Yes, of course I feel dirty for having posted this, you’re welcome. My guess is UO pays some competent lawyer $200,000 and Ms Emeldi another $200,000 to clean it all up. The full “amicus brief” is here.
Interesting…but for those of us that aren’t legal eagles…Could someone explain what this means? What is an amicus brief and what relationship is implied here between UO and the Eagle Forum Education and Legal Defense Fund?
she’s the woman who almost single handedly killed the Equal Rights Amendment, back in the 70’s.
Are you certain she’s a woman?
Amicus Curiae brief is literally “friend of the court.” There doesn’t have to be ANY relationship between one of the parties and the group filing the Amicus. Anyone with a stake in the outcome can request to provide an amicus brief. Sometimes there is collaboration and sometimes not.
-submitted by J.D., former practicing lawyer.
UO did not want the Eagle Forum to be allowed to friend them on this case, because the EF argument is opposed to affirmative action. See
http://www.registerguard.com/web/newslocalnews/27946174-41/title-university-court-eagle-forum.html.csp
UO wants to say it favors AA and title IX, but just does not believe they should apply to this case.
Hogan ruled against UO and let EF files this, hence the shotgun wedding reference.