It’s Over

Well friends, I’m sure you’ve figured this out by now:  Sua Sponte is no longer an active blog.

I could write a litany of reasons why we stopped writing this year, but I’m fairly confident you can figure out what happened to us.  (It’s the economy, stupid).

All of us here at Sua Sponte at 3Ls – and without any underclassmen writers to join us, the blog was going to die after we graduated anyway.  That isn’t a good excuse to stop blogging (because ultimately, everything dies, right?) but it definitely contributed to our decision to close down at this point of the year.

I can’t lie – this is a sad post for me to write.  I know we made some mistakes along the way, but I think we also did some things right.  Each and every one of us wants to thank each and every one of you who joined the conversations that we tried to start here.  We were excited to share our perspectives of the world with you, and even more excited when you shared your perspectives of the world with us.  Whether you were a daily visitor, or you just stopped by once or twice, we sincerely appreciated your support and your patronage.   This site was sua sponte, but without you all, we would have nothing.

To my co-bloggers:  The past year-and-a-half was a great deal of fun for me.  Writing alongside with you was both a privilege and a joy.  Thank you for writing with such passion and dedication.  Thank you for helping me manage the site when things got a bit busy.  And most of all, thank you for becoming good friends.

And finally, a plea:  If any underclassmen want to pick up the reins continue the conversation, I strongly encourage you to do so.  I think Sua Sponte has a lot more that it can offer to the student body here at GW Law and to the legal blogosphere in general.  I only regret that we currently can’t offer our best.  But maybe one of you somewhere out there can.  If you’re interested, please email me – I’ll keep the suasponte email account active for a while longer.

With that, we bid you all farewell.  In the words of Johnny Carson, “we’d say thank you, but we had all the fun.


The next Senate Meeting will open with a General Assembly meeting next Tuesday, Oct 13, at 8:15pm in L401.  The General Assembly is comprised of the SBA Exec Board, Directors and Asst Directors, and all Committee members. All are welcome to attend and observe.

Senate Meeting

The SBA Senate will be having it’s second meeting (and first with our new 1L Senators!) next Wednesday, September 30th at 8:30pm in L301.  All are welcome to come and observe. Additionally meetings from the first meeting are posted on the SBA website, gwsba.com.

Expanding the House

I was reading this article the other day about whether the House of Representatives should be expanded based on the disparity if how many people each congressperson actually represents.  I won’t summarize the whole article here, but the gist of it was that the congresspeople from Rhode Island represent approximately 530,000 people each, while the congressman from Montana represents over 950,000.  That means that the 1.05 million people in Rhode Island have two votes in the house, while the .95 million people in Montana have one.

My first gut-level response to all of this was that the current system doesn’t seem fair.  The 400,000 person disparity is just too large and it is possibly unconstitutional as well.  I won’t go into detail on that issue here, but feel free to comment about it (and for some background on the issue, here’s a link to the Supreme Court’s decision in Baker v. Carr ).  But then I read on in the article for an estimate of how large the house would have to be in order to make things more “fair”–the answer was between 932-1761!  Woh.  The number 435 seems pretty arbitrary to me, but the thought of two times as many representatives on Capitol Hill just makes my head spin.

Even after reading the whole article and thinking about it for a few days, I still don’t really know what to think, and I’m curious about other people’s thoughts–especially those of you who have worked on the Hill and seen the way the House works.  It seems to me that doubling the number of representatives can only make it harder to get things done in the House.  On the other hand, it would make voting districts smaller, which means the representatives would (in theory) have to raise less money and would be more accountable to their constituents.  It also might make them less likely to follow the party line and tailor their votes to their home district’s needs/wants instead.

Forgetting about the logistical problems of fitting 1000 representatives into the Capitol, do you think expanding the House would lead to better or worse government?

Over at The Atlantic, Philip Howard offers a run-down of existing ideas to rein in medical malpractice suits.  If you listened to or read the President’s speech last week, he suggested that one way to help lower medical costs would be to implement some tort-reform measures.  Because tort reform is an issue that is near and dear to the hearts of trial attorneys (or at the least, should be), I just wanted to bring it to your attention.

Among some of the ideas he mentions are:

  • Special medical courts
  • Limits on damages
  • Malpractice screening panels
  • Insulate doctors from liability for following certain national standards
  • Apology statutes – this sounds very interesting!
  • Early settlement incentives

Check out the article and let us know your thoughts.

Student Blogs

The GW Hatchet just published an article profiling four student run blogs on the GW campus.  I’m happy to say that Sua Sponte was one of the blogs profiled.

Did you get a call yet?  Tell us about it.