No paddling this weekend. You’d be surprised how warm today’s wetsuits are. They can take you to minus ten centigrade comfortably, but in fresh water you get a lot of ice-up below minus five and if its windy getting in and out of the water can be pretty unpleasant. To rub my landlocked status in, I got surf reports (with pictures) from my friends Alex in Nova Scotia, Jean-Luc in Santa Barbara and Jan in Raglan, New Zealand. Can you tell that I get cranky when I don’t get in the water?!
Anyway, I came back to the law on the basis that pursuits of the legal kind can be as good a means of finding enlightenment as the aquatic. On that note, here’s what I read of interest this week.
- Randy Cohen (The Ethicist), Anonymity Breach. An ethical (and legal dilemma) on investigating the identity of a student who writes discriminatory teaching evaluation under a promise of confidentiality. (New York Times)
- Ellen Nakashima, In Child Porn Case, A Digital Dilemma. Covers an appeal that addresses whether a decryption order in furtherance of a child pornography investigation would violate the right against self-incrimination. (Washington Post)
- Pete Yost, White House Missing CIA, Iraq E-Mails. The Washington Post has had the leading coverage on the allegations that the White House has failed to comply with the Presidential Records Act, now scheduled for a February 15th hearing by the Committee on Government Oversight and Reform. (Washington Post)
- Ellen Perlman, Delete at Your Own Risk. Food for thought for freedom of information coordinators and government records managers. I agree with the basic premise, but disagree to the extent the article suggests that retention beyond statutorily-mandated retention periods is necessarily a good risk-management practice. (Governing.com)