Is "Slacktivism" a form of civic engagement?

The following article I found on the website of the Pittsburg Post-Gazette raises great questions about something I like to call "fake activism." It is activism in the sense that one who participates is actively making a statement but it is fake in the sense that the statement has no effect on any policy or government action. A few years ago, there were several on-line petitions that went around but never were sent to anyone, they just accumulated names and made the signers feel connected to each other. Please read the article. I will likely present my thoughts in a subsequent post. Slacktivism emerges as questionable online way to support causes

Thursday, December 30, 2010

By Carolyn Davis, Philadelphia Inquirer

Victoria Joseph noticed recently that many of her Facebook friends were changing their profile picture to a favorite childhood cartoon character. The effort, some online explanations said, was to show support for child-abuse prevention.

The University of Pennsylvania student estimates that 40 percent of her 800 Facebook friends obliged and became part of the cartoon cascade that officially ended Dec. 6. But not Ms. Joseph, a 21-year-old senior.

"I thought it was just unnecessary," she said. "At the end of the day, what does changing your profile picture even mean?"

Minimally, it means you worship Wilma Flintstone or dote on Underdog. Its impact on the cause celebre, however, is blurrier than the Road Runner whizzing past Wile E. Coyote.

This type of crusading has become so common online that a word has been coined for it -- slacktivism. It's not a term of endearment. Definition: Activism, often done on a computer, that requires a slacker's amount of effort and is of questionable effectiveness.

Why raise money doing a breast cancer walk when you can easily update your Facebook status with the color of your bra? (That Facebook meme happened in January.) Maybe you wanted to encourage Iran's prodemocracy demonstrators last year. To show your support, all you had to do was tint your Twitter avatar green or add to it a virtual green ribbon.

It's not that low-impact activism is new. For years we've sat in traffic and read a bumper crop of bumper stickers proclaiming drivers' concern for the rain forest, support for a political candidate, or pride in little Eddie or Emma making the school honor roll. Walk down the street and you'll see people making statements with T-shirts and rubber wristbands.

But social-media websites up the ante by expanding the audience exponentially for a fraction of the effort. Without getting off the sofa, you instantly can tell your friends about your pet topic. If you want to get involved in a cause but don't know how, you can follow the lead of those who have mentioned their pursuits on Facebook, Twitter or MySpace. No research needed.

"You can make the case that slacktivism is important because it makes people feel affiliated to a movement and be part of it, and talk about it," said Ethan Zuckerman, a fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Future Civic Media.

Associating ourselves with people and places helps us define our place in the world, says Patricio Abinales, a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington.

"It's social bonding," Mr. Abinales said. "You have the feeling you're not alone."

The flip side is that taming a complicated problem such as child abuse requires moving beyond bonding -- and that is where these Internet campaigns may fall short.

"The question is: How do you get from affiliation to deeper involvement?" Mr. Zuckerman said.

Some experts say slacktivism has the potential to do more harm than good -- that exerting a single, simple effort could make people complacent when otherwise they might have become more active.

Mass online actions also can dilute the heft of a campaign because they suggest a weak commitment on the part of the people involved.

"The easier it is to show support for the cause, the more easily [the action] is dismissed," said Harvard University's Tom Sander, who studies civic engagement as executive director of the Saguaro Seminar at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.

When Dr. Sander worked in Washington for Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, it was common lore among legislative staffers that e-petitions "signed" online were not taken as seriously as ones that bore actual signatures. The same was true for letters in which writers cut and pasted their messages from a master copy on the Internet, he says.

Sometimes, inaction can be lucrative. One of slacktivism's proudest moments may have been this month when a group of celebrities, including Lady Gaga, Alicia Keys and Justin Timberlake, earned money to help children with HIV/AIDS in Africa and India by doing nothing. Starting Dec. 1, World AIDS Day, they pronounced themselves digitally dead.

"That means no more Twitter or Facebook updates from any of them," said the effort's website. "No more knowing where they are, what they had for dinner. ... Every single dollar helps Keep a Child Alive [Ms. Keys' nonprofit] fight this terrible disease. And when $1 million is reached, everyone will be back online and tweeting in no time."

On Dec. 6, the campaign said it had reached its goal.

Though stunts like that won't work for everyone, experts say it's up to people and organizations to figure out how to harness social media's potential -- and drop the slack from slacktivism.

To dismiss the trend, said Mr. Zuckerman, doesn't acknowledge that it's "a really interesting way of starting to get people involved."

First published on December 30, 2010 at 12:00 am

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10364/1114281-454.stm#ixzz19cZ0qLMD

Should Legal Literacy Efforts Consider Non-Western Approahes to the Law

source of consideration: The Malaysian Star. See: http://thestar.com.my/columnists/story.asp?col=reflectingonthelaw&file=/2010/12/29/columnists/reflectingonthelaw/7691447&sec=Reflecting%20On%20The%20Law Shad Saleem Faruqi's December 29, 2010 piece in the Malaysian Star deserves some attention. His piece is titled "Reflecting on the Law" and it argues that most law books in Malaysia tend to discuss law from a Western perspective rather than an Asian one. He argues that the "structure and content of our courses, the choice of core subjects, the categories of thought, the fundamentals, the methods of analysis and research... [and more]....all remain Western [as if they were] universal." As I shall discuss, while Faruqi's point has merit on its own, it also should be considered from the perspective of teaching about the law to those uneducated about the law.

He points out that legal philosphy courses tend to ignore Islamic, Chinese, or Hindu thinkers, He identifies the following examples of important but ignored texts: The Mahabharata, the Arthashastra, the Book of Mencius, Analects of Confucious, the the treatises of Ibn Khaldun Ghazali, Ibn Rushd, Mulla Sadra, Jose Rizal, Benoy Kumar Sarkar, Yanagita Kunio and Naquib al-Attas. I would add the Talmud as a great legal codification that deserves consideration in the accumilation of world legal philosophies. Our author identifes several ways of looking at the law that is missed by this Western-centric approach. For instance, in the Western approach, according to the author, the law is seen as an excercise of political soverignty rather than an excercise of culture, religion, or morality. Another unique aspect of the West is the rigid distinction between crime and tort. Our author further points out that the distinction between rights and duties in public and private are are also Western oriented. According to our author, the Eastern approach is more holistic. Our author's primary point seems to be how eastern texts are good sources from which to learn legal concepts cherished in the west, For instance, he writes "Prophet Muhammad’s sermon at Arafat is one of the world’s greatest human rights declarations. More than 1,400 years ago he spoke about liberty and property, racial equality, women’s rights and the ruler’s subjection to the law." He also points out that in Islamic criminal proces there is a legal presumption of innocence. He makes other similar points. The East is not the only non-Europeans sources of law which are commonly ignored. Many of the legal concepts which the West tend to believe were invented in the 18th and 19th centuries do not date back only to Islam but date back to the pre-Christian era Hebrew/Jewish culture--and may ever date back further than this. However, while Faruqi's points seem to be targed to the formal legal education world such as law schools, I think we who are concerned about educating the public about the law should take his comments to heart. As a lawyer who spends a fair amount of his time teaching non-lawyers about the law. When I started, I didn't fully appreciate what legal concepts were obvioius to all and which ones were obvious to me only because I had legal training in a western style law school. For instance, as a western-educated lawyer, the distinction between crime and tort seems natural to me, but when I educate non-lawyers, I become painfully aware that the distinction only seems natural to me because of my legal education. Although it is obvious to all that the executive brances of their governments are responsible for trying to seek remedies and punishments for certain types of crimes likes assaults and murder, it is not always obvious why the executive branch of the government is not interested in getting involved in disputes such as employment discrimination and defamation. Wrongs like theft and embezzlement can fit in either category, depending on the circumstance -- an opportunity for the most educated of laymen to get confused. Another examples is the distinction between a moral wrong and a legal wrong. In America, most employment is "at will," meaning that an employee has the right to resign his or her employment, an the employer has the right to terminate its employee regardless of motivation--unless it is an unlawful motivation. As an attoney who advises employees of their rights, I am often saying "your employer has clearly acted immorally and unethically; you were clearly wronged in many ways, but the employer did not violate the law in this situation." Those of us who educate the public would do well to appreciate the distinctive features of the legal system in which we operate. We need to understand that the legal presumptions we hold dear are often distinctive and are not obvious to our clients and students. Study of non-western legal systems would provide western lawyers with some perspective. When our appreciation of our own legal system is uniquely western-centric, it is much harder to teach those who do not share our same legal presumptions because we fail to articulate those presumptions. When we have perspective, teaching is easier because it is easier to issue-spot those presumptions.

A Festival For Democracy Could Make Democracy Cool

There are two crucial features required for any institution or government to become or remain democratic. The first element is constitutional, namely the governing structure must adequately provide for opportunities for citizens and members to have a say in the institution's decision-making, and must provide reasonable opportunities for citizens or members to exercise their rights within the institution. The second element is social, also known as cultural. In other words, for an institution to become or remain democratic, there must a legal structure that provides opportunities for citizens to engage in democratic activities, and there must be social or cultural factors that encourage such democratic engagement. When either element is missing the relevant institution cannot be democratic. Thus, one of the challenges faced among those seeking to advance democracy in the world is to make democracy an essential aspect of normative culture. It is not enough to advocate for laws that provide for the right to democratic activism and engagement if the population is no so driven. If one reads into the history of democratic communities, one repeatedly comes across the notion of the public square. Although it is discussed figuratively today, along with the notion of the "marketplace of ideas", there was a time when the market was a place for people of varying social classes and viewpoints to interact and exchange ideas. When one goes to the mall today, one simply does not have the opportunity to replicate the experience. When one goes to city-wide festivals like Artscape in Baltimore or the Taste of Chicago in Chicago, one rarely finds activist and volunteer organizations alongside the sale of hot dogs and showcasing of paintings and pottery. In fact, if one examines the activity calendars of most of the "city papers" in the country, one does not normally or necessarily see activist or volunteer opportunities advertised alongside the latest plays, concerts and arts festivals. [The Philadelphia city paper (at least its online edition) seems to be a notable exception from what I can tell.] This is a shame, and should be corrected. In my bold opinion, there is something curious and ironic that in a country where "robust debate in the public square" is an essential aspect of its self-image, most public squares are devoid of robust public debate. A logical mechanism for correcting this problem would be to bring the pubic debate to the already existing public forum. When I envisioned this piece, I envisioned that I would advocate for a festival that featured booths of numerous activist and communal organizations. The image in my head was for attendees to walk through booths of organizations throughout the political and social spectrum. It would also be fairly interesting for representatives of divergent political organizations to be thrust in a room together to speak to the same potential members. Now, however, as I think about festivals such as Artscape, Taste of Chicago, and other city-wide festivals featuring great art, great music, and numerous people, it strikes me that the more logical approach would be for organizers of these festivals to encourage and allow community associations, non-profit associations, and non-profit service organizations to be permitted space in festivities to advance their causes and showcase their services. I further believe that this is of such communal importance that these organizations should be permitted to participate in these festivals without the need to derive appearance fees analogous to those entities looking to turn a profit. Think about how this would enhance the community festivals that surround the fourth of July--a holiday clearly intended to advance our nation's democratic cause. Imagine how the national discussion would be enhanced so well by the incorporation of our national dialogues into our social experiences. To me, this is the logical way to make our democratic visions come alive. The notion of making civic engagement more connected to our cultural festivities is not unique to this author. In September 2010, a major national arts project aiming to make civic engagement and the Austrailian constitution "cool". One connected effort is a "ride for democracy" where 70 motorcycle riders will ride accross the nation urging the advancement of civic education. The articles I have not read about this have not specified how this advancement will work, but clearly the objective is to connect the social experience of motorcycle riding with the social experience of being part of a national community. Another such example that might be more directly on point is development of mobile legal clinics in Nepal. Hoping to address the lack of knowledge of legal rights and access to mechanisms to address those rights by those in Nepal's rural communities, the A2J project has established 18 free mobile legal clinics, affecting people in Sarlahi, Mahottari, and Rautahat, along with the distribution of legal literacy booklets in local languages. Information distributed includes information concerning rights concerning marriage, caste discrimination, domestic violence and other similar areas of the law. According to one article I read, thees clinics have greatly assisted access to the legal community and legal remedies by otherwise marginalized and disadvantaged communities. Alternatively stated, these clinics have had the cultural affect of making certain members of the community realize their rights and opportunity to act on them.

Advisory to the Pro Se Litigant #9: If Served with a lawsuit, you must respond

If You Have Been Served With A Complaint, You Must Respond In Some Manner If you have been served with a lawsuit, you first need to determine how you want to respond. You have two primary options: a) file an Answer that responds to each statement in the Complaint; b) file a Motion which attacks the legal sufficiency of the lawsuit. (A Motion is a request to the Court). An answer is a factual reply to the lawsuit, generally one that responds to the complaint, paragraph by paragraph. There are nine types of Motions one might file in response to a Complaint are: a) Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted b) Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction over the person c) Motion to Dismiss for improper venue d) Motion to Dismiss for insufficiency of Process e) Motion to Dismiss for insufficiency of service of process f) Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter g) Motion to Dismiss for failure to join a party under Rule 2-211 h) Motion to Dismiss due to discharge in bankruptcy i) Motion to Dismiss for governmental immunity Each of these motions seeks to dismiss (throw out) the case, effectively allowing the defendant(s) to “win” without having to defend the case itself. A Motion to Dismiss For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief May Be Granted is the Appropriate Response to A Complaint Which Alleges Behavior Which No Relief May Be Granted to the Plaintiff If someone sues you for an alleged “wrong” that is not actually unlawful, you may file a Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. There are four primary reasons what one may want to file such a motion: 1. No Law Violated: If the complaint fails to allege that a law was violated, it is appropriate to file a motion to dismiss. For instance, the facts alleged may amount to a moral or ethical wrong that is not made unlawful by state or federal law. In that instance, dismissal would be appropriate—as courts are only permitted to rule on issues concerning American law. 2. Facts Don’ Violate Law: If the complaint fails to allege facts that, if proven true, would violate the law, it is appropriate to file a motion to dismiss. For instance, it may be that the complaint alleges that a law was violated, but the facts alleged, even if proven true, could not possibly lead to a judge or jury deciding that the law was in fact violated. In that instance, dismissal would be appropriate – as courts are not expected to hear cases where there is no possible hope of recovery. 3. Wrong Defendant: If the complaint alleges that a law was violated and alleges appropriate facts that would violate the law, but sues the wrong defendant, it would be appropriate to file a motion to dismiss. For instance, it may be that the facts may allege a legal violation, but the facts alleged, even if proven true, could not possibly lead to a judge or jury deciding that the defendant is legally responsible for the violation. In that instance, dismissal would be appropriate (at least for that defendant) – as courts are not expected to hear cases where there is no possible hope of recovery. 4. Wrong Plaintiff: If the complaint alleges that a law was violated and alleges appropriate facts that would violate the law, but the plaintiff is not someone with a right to recover under the law, it is appropriate to file a motion to dismiss. For instance, it may be that the facts allege a legal violation, but the facts alleged, even if proven true, could not possibly lead to a judge or jury deciding that the plaintiff is entitled to a recovery – because someone other than the plaintiff is the alleged victim. In that instance, dismissal would be appropriate (at least for the claims brought by the particular plaintiff) – as courts are not expected to hear cases where there is no possible hope of recovery. Additional Motions to Dismiss Are Available to Defendants When the Court in Which Suit Has Been Brought Cannot Legally Provide the Remedy Sought, Courts are prohibited from hearing cases they are not established to hear. Thus, if you are served with a lawsuit before a court which you believe is not empowered to hear the case, you may file one of the following motions: • Motion to Dismiss because of Lack of Jurisdiction over the Person or • Motion to Dismiss because of Lack of Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter Just as Courts (in general) are not authorized to issue decisions on disputes that don’t involve American laws, Maryland courts are not authorized to issue decisions on cases don’t involve Maryland residents, Maryland businesses, or incidents occurring in Maryland. Thus, even if the complaint alleges a law was violated and alleges appropriate facts that would violate the law, but there is no legally sufficient reason why a Maryland court should hear the case, it is appropriate to file a motion to dismiss. For instance, if the alleged wrongdoing occurred outside Maryland and the defendant has had no interactions inside Maryland, nor a resident of Maryland, dismissal would be appropriate. In addition, one should not file in circuit court a case where the district courts have exclusive jurisdiction -- and should not file in district court a case where the circuit court has exclusive jurisdiction. See 4d above. (It should be noted that many judges will sooner transfer a case to a proper jurisdiction than dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. However, as with most complicatd areas of law, case law may be consulted, but no precise result can be guaranteed and you should consider consulting an attorney for further guidance.) Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue Similarly, even when cases are properly brought in Maryland, they should be brought in the proper county. For instance, a resident of Montgomery County having a dispute with another resident of Montgomery County, concerning a matter occurring solely in Montgomery County, thereby under the laws of Montgomery County, should not bring their dispute to court in another venue, and runs the risks of dismissal for improper venue for that reason. (It should be noted that many judges will sooner transfer a case to a proper venue than dismiss for lack of venue. However, as with most complicated areas of law, case law may be consulted, but no precise result can be guaranteed and you should consider consulting an attorney for further guidance.) Maryland provides for the following optional motions as well: Motion to Dismiss for insufficiency of ProcessWhere there is an important error on the documents served on Defendant(s), such as if it mis-states the deadline to respond to the suit or fails to provide an address with which the defendant can respond, a court may grant defendant’s motion to dismiss for insufficiency of process. Motion to Dismiss for insufficiency of service of processWhere there is an important error concerning how the documents were served, such as if they were handed to a minor child or left with a neighbor, defendant may have grounds for a motion to dismiss. To better understand the Motion to Dismiss for insufficiency of process, please review section 7 above to better understand what is expected of a party serving a defendant. Motion to Dismiss for failure to join a party under Rule 2-211Where there is another person or persons who should have been sued, or joined as a co-plaintiff, Defendant may file a motion to dismiss, arguing that plaintiff failed to sue or join all the right parties—and thus the suit as designed should not proceed. For instance, someone who has a patent on the processing of a product may sue another company for using the same processing without the patent-holders’ consent. However, in such a suit, the patent-holder is required by federal law to include any co-owner as a co-plaintiff -- and failing to do so may be the basis of a motion to dismiss for failure to join a party under Rule 2-211. Motion to Dismiss due to discharge in bankruptcyWhen an individual or company is granted a discharge of past debts through a bankruptcy (which can only be done through the United States Bankruptcy Courts), a plaintiff cannot thereafter recover for those debts. Therefore, a defendant, once being sued for a debt or liability that was discharged through a bankruptcy may ask the court to dismiss the suit. If you have a claim against a defendant who is proceeding in a bankruptcy, you should contact a lawyer or the United States Bankruptcy Court to pursue your rights to recover in that forum. Motion to Dismiss for governmental immunityThe Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, and similar terminology in various state constitutions provide that the government is immune from lawsuits in all areas in which immunity have not been waived. For instance, in the employment law context, the federal government cannot be held financially liable under the Family Medical Leave Act, although it can be liable under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The Good News (for Legal Diversity):Christianity's Liberty University Law School Accredited

This past August, Liberty University School of Law received accreditation. What makes Liberty University unique among law schools is its uniquely conservative Christian perspective on the legal system. According to its own website, they: "believe that truth is knowable, see law as a creation of God designed to protect life over death, liberty over tyranny, and bring order out of chaos. Founded in and originating from God, law is infused with transcendent principles that surpass time, geography, and politics. Positive law must be in consistent with natural and revealed law." Despite the fact that my perspective on the law is drastically different than that of those promulgating this institution, I am very pleased by this development. In many ways, as I shall explain, I hope this is the sign of things to come. There are approximately 200 law schools in the United States. Most of them claim no ideology other than "success." Thus, although there are indeed differences in offerings among the various law schools, there is also a certain uniformity that makes legal education in one institution fairly interchangeable from another. From what I can tell, most law schools compete with themselves for the students with the best match of high college grades, LSAT scores, and most likely to obtain financial success in the marketplace. Although different schools have different matricies when comparing applicants, for the most part, they are all looking for the same ideal, the "A" student with perfect test scores who is likely to secure a lucrative job and contribute lots of money to the institution. This effectively means that the student's motivation to attend law school is not necessarily a contributing factor to their acceptance or rejection. I remember one law school dean explaining to me, when I was exploring law school, that"no amount of work experience and commitment to the social good can outweigh the combination of good grades and a good LSAT because all we care about is bringing in students who can succeed in our program."

Part of this stems from the fact that schools often compete for funding and respect based on set criteria established by independent groups like US News and World Report. Therefore, schools generally focus their attention on competing in terms recognized by ranking groups like US News and World report.

These rankings are also crucial for student job prospects. Thus, there is a great incentive on the part of the management of each law school to fit to compete in the arenas that draw attention by US News and World Report. This can have the side effect of making law schools as uniform as possible. This uniformity has some favorable effects, such as lawyers having a common set of academic material with which they are all familiar. From the job prospect side, it also means that an employer can trust that a graduate of any law school has a certain knowledge and experience. The downside, however, is that the legal community runs the risk of a paucity of diverse ideological perspectives on the law. This is especially true when law school focus their attention on employability and marketability, rather than directing students to think about how they can contribute to the development of the law or society.

My law school for instance, has a noble history of providing legal education to working class night students, many of whom work during the day and many of whom did not go to fancy colleges. Many of these students have family obligations, and thus do not have the luxury of making law school a full time endeavor. These night students bring an experience to the legal community that is not available to law school students without serious work experience. However, because of the uniformity above discussed, traditional students who come from right from undergrad with stellar grades and test scores are sometimes more attractive students to schools than those with diverse experiences on their record. The cumulative effect of this is that law schools compete for the same students, train students in very similar ways, and encourage them to compete for the same big law firm jobs.

Thus, I see good news in the establishment of Liberty University Law School. In it, I see a possibility of various law schools providing more diversity in the legal profession. For instance, just as Liberty University provides a conservative Christian approach, another school could provide an approach that is uniquely leftist, or another which is more academic oriented. An example of what I have in mind is in recent history, namely Antioch School of Law, which is the predecessor to the law school of the University of the District of Columbia. Antioch was unique because its singular focus was to train lawyers dedicated to public interest and low income advocacy and representation. According to its description on one website, it "pioneered a comprehensive clinic education model." That this is not currently being offered to potential lawyers is a real shame, as there is a very lack of law schools in this country that make concerted efforts to train their students to represent the disadvantaged, and those who cannot afford expensive counsel. Although most law schools profess a commitment to encouraging public interest work to some extent, there is no other school uniquely committed to such an endeavor. In most schools, in fact, the presumption that one is driven to the law for financial gain is so strong, that schools publicly push their students to do a certain amount of pro bono work--because obviously they wouldn't consider more reasonable hourly rates or other creative mechanisms to make their business affordable. Antioch took the radical approach of having their students reside temporarily in low income neighborhoods in order to appreciate the challenges they were being asked to address. As the goal was to encourage service to communities otherwise without legal services, it is quite easy to admire the extent to which Antioch went to advance its agenda. I don't mean to suggest that Antioch and Liberty are sole members of a family of law schools with their own approaches. Certainly Northeastern University deserves lots of credit for its cooperative legal education program. At Northeastern, students are required to intern during the course of their educational career, thus making their experience in the workplace an essential part of their education. Also, all students spend a certain amount of time doing public interest work. The school is very selective. For the class of 2011, there were over 3 thousand applicants competing for the 200 available spots. I envision a world in which there can be more diversity in legal education. In all frankness, I envision a world in which legal education was far less expensive, and perhaps easier to come by. For instance, I went to a college called St. John's College where we read and discussed the great books of Western civilization. We were graded on our engagement with the philosophers, not purely our memorization of theorems. Why not a law school that is drive to engage the philosophers and questioners of law, rather than merely the comprehension of the prevailing method for addressing known legal problems? In the course of this analysis, one must ask whether my suggestion might also lead to the inadvertent specialization of law schools. Perhaps one law school would direct their students to become experts at law for the medical profession and others would direct their students to become experts at law relating to malpractice or auto injury. On one hand, it seems reasonable that a profession might desire newly minted lawyers with specialization in their field. On the other hand, a nation of specialists would be a serious problem. Thus, although it seems reasonable that professions have a right to train a cadre of lawyers to focus on their needs, the fact that lawyers generally have the ability to be generalists and to go from one field to another is a wonderful trait that we must guard against losing. Thus, in applying the ideas in this essay, their must be balance.

Advisory to the Pro Se Litigant #8: Giving the Defendant Propoer Notice of the Suit

If you are filing a lawsuit, you are responsible to assure that the Defendant(s) learn about the lawsuit. Just as it would be unfair to try you with a crime without affording you the opportunity to respond, it is unfair for you to sue another party without giving them an opportunity to respond. Consequently, court rules provide that you deliver a copy of the court complaint, along with a “summons” to the Defendant. This delivery is known as “service.” If you are suing an individual, it is important that you deliver the complaint and summons to the Defendant personally. The rules also provide that you can deliver the summons and complaint by (1) mailing it to them by certified mail, specifying “restricted delivery” or (2) by leaving the complaint and summons at the Defendant’s residence with a competent adult. See Maryland Court Rule 2-121. Each court and jurisdiction has additional options if these aren’t successful. Once court in New Zealand, with similar rules of service to those in Maryland, accepted service by “facebook” when all other efforts to serve were exhausted. Be advised that you are typically required to serve the defendant usually within sixty days. If you are unable to do so within that time frame, you should contact the court concerning your options. The purpose of the laws of service are to assure that each defendant is given a an opportunity to respond and/or oppose the claims asserted. It would be unfair and improper to proceed without that assurance.

Advisory to the Pro Se Litigant #7: Choosing the Correct Defendant: Identify With Whom You Truly Dispute

It is important that when filing a lawsuit, you sue the proper person or entity, and you name him, her, or it correctly. For instance, let’s say you have a dispute with the managers of a store, and you believe that the dispute is one for which you have a reason to file a lawsuit. You must decide whether your dispute is with the manager personally, or really with the store the manager represents. If you sue the manager personally, you are trying to hold the manager personally financially liable for the harm caused you. If you sue the store itself, you are effectively claiming that the manager’s wrongdoing was of the type for which the store itself should be liable. Choosing the correct defendant is important. If you name a defendant which could not possibly be legally liable for the wrongdoing you claim, a court may dismiss (toss out) your lawsuit. Ultimately, a court could hold you financially liable to the Defendant for pursuing a lawsuit that you should have known was not appropriate. One related problem is the importance of suing the proper entity. This often arises when one is suing a government entity or large corporation. For instance, when interacting with various federal agencies, you may not be immediately aware that the entity you are interacting with is only an element of or subsidiary of a larger federal agency. For instance, the Department of the Navy is an aspect of the Department of Defense—and the Department of Defense is the proper defendant. (Note that when suing federal agencies, you are expected to name the Secretary of the Department in “his or her official capacity.”). Similarly, corporations often have trade names and division names with which you are more familiar than the name of the proper corporate entity with which you have a dispute. When suing a private entity, one resource is available, through which you can investigate the formal name of the entity with which you are in dispute. In Maryland, the State Department of Assessment and Taxation has an online resource (see http://sdatcert3.resiusa.org/ucc-charter/CharterSearch_f.asp) through which you can locate important charter information about corporate entities. It also provides information about the ownership of real property throughout the state. See http://sdatcert3.resiusa.org/rp_rewrite/.

Advisory to the Pro Se Litigant #6: Include a Request for Reparation in Your Lawsuit

When you file a lawsuit, you should articulate your demand. A demand is your request for money as reparation for the loss or injury for which the defendant is liable. If you require the defendant to take action to make you whole, such as physically moving property intruding on your property, you should include that in your demand. Your demand should be sufficiently clear so that a defendant may know what steps it may take to immediately resolve the dispute you are raising. Determining the appropriate amount to demand can be tricky, and is different in every case. The law governing the wrongdoing you are suing about (and the case law interpreting that law) will often dictate what sorts of damages are available to a successful plaintiff. You may want to consult with a lawyer in considering the appropriate amount to demand. Here are some of the typical types of damages that courts may award. (this list is not exhaustive.) Direct damages: Damages for actual losses due to the wrongful act, such as the cost of property damaged by the harm caused. Compensatory damages: Damages deemed to compensate the injured party for losses sustained as a direct result of the injury suffered (other than those considered direct damages). Punitive damages: Damages awarded to punish the wrongdoer. Double or treble damages: In some cases, such as in cases of unpaid wages, courts may award damages in an amount of two or three times the amount for which the wrongdoer is found liable. Expectancy damages: damages recoverable for breech of contract, designed to put the injured party in the position he or she would have been in had the contract been completed. Emotional damages: damages recoverable to compensate for emotional injuries for a harm done.

A Radical Idea: The Civic Engagement and Community Service Leave Act

In 1993, Congress enacted the Family Medical Leave Act (Public Law 103-5). The objective of this article is to look at the Family Medical Leave Act and raise questions as to whether we should use it as a guide to structure a statute to advance civic engagement. I have been thinking about this idea for a while and have delayed publishing this article because of quesitons I have about the practicality of such a proposal.

The underlying problem I seek to address is that I believe many non-executives/super-professionals are subconsciously barred from playing a leadership role in addressing community-wide issues when opportunities for addressing them arise during their normal work hours. Many executives and super-professionals are given professional credit for their community service and certain other volunteer work, whereas hourly workers and other less high ranking professionals are more likely placed in the position of not being available to community-oriented organization, or other causes about which they care.

My goal here is to raise quesitons about how best to encourage civic engagement, including activism on community issues. My concerns stem from the facts that few people have the leisure to take time from work to address community matters. One way this is often addressed is by having people trade shifts. However, in the family medical leave context, and even in the religious context, there is favorabvle expectation that employers take initiative to acccomodate, although they are not required to take any unreasonable steps in accomodating. In the context of religion, an employer is not required to overcome a union-brokored legitimate seniority system in order to accomodate an employee's religious requirements that he be free from work on his sabbath, but to the exten that religious accomodation may be done consistant with other scheduling rules, effort to accomodate must be made. The Family Medical Leave Act requires that employers wtih more than 50 employees provide employees, who have worked full time for a period of approximately 1 calendar year, with the right to take unpaid leave of up to 12 weeks, provided that the employee is able to show a legitimate medical need for said leave.

There is a certain logic to using the Family Medical Leave Act as a model to address the need for employees with communal needs that must be addressed. The findings section of the Family Medical Leave Act identifies certain societal problems the statute seeks to address. Specifically, according to the statute, the societal objective is "the development of children and the family unit that fathers and mothers be able to participate in early child-rearing and the care of family members who have serious health conditions."

The Findings, thus further, identifies the problem it seeks to address as "the lack of employment policies to accommodate working parents [effectively] force individuals to choose between job security and parenting; there is inadequate job security for employees who have serious health conditions that prevent them from working for temporary periods.

Similarly, it is crucial to the democratic nature of this nation for citizens to be able to participate as citizens in the political world and community world. As Robert Putnum illustrates in "Bowling Alone," there have been steady decreases in community and political involvement. Although it is not clear to me if he says this explicitly, it is certainly implicit in his work that true democracy does not flourish when citizens are not engaged (a) as social members of their local community; (b) as citizens of their local community; and (c) as citizen of the state and national community. In keeping with the logic of this blog, it strikes me that I should include the notion that (d) as citizens with legal rights under the law, democracy cannot flourish if citizens are unable to exercise their legal rights, both with respect to harms done to him or her from both government and other individuals or corporations.

In the "Overworked American," Juliet Schor shows how the societal and economic pressures to constantly work and focus on work creates an effect of a population of dis-involved people, thus affecting people's abilities to act as community members. Illustrative is what was recently being reported out of North Carolina. 84% of North Carolina's young adults report they don't participate in any organized groups, and 67% of North Carolinians overall are not involved in such activities either. However, similar statistics may be found throughout the United States.

Therefore, just as the Family Medical Leave Act was enacted premised on the fact that too many Americans were unable to take the necessary time to be available to their sick family members, so too too many Americans are not available to their community.

Could one fashion a Civic Engagement and Community Service Leave Act modeled off of the Family Medical Leave Act? To address the above-described challenges of workers caring for their family members, employees who work for employers with 50 or more employees in that employee's work site, or within a 75 mile radius of that work site, are entitled to a total of 12 workweeks of leave during a 1 year period. No employer is required to pay for this leave. However, if the employer already provides paid sick personal or vacation leave that would cover all or part of the leave to which the employee is entitled, use of that leave may be counted against the 12 weeks to which an employee is entitled.

Could or should a similar leave protocol be established for members of community and political associations to have leave to handle their needs? Fashioning a fair statute could be very difficult. Employees often use FMLA to address their personal illnesses, which is totally inapplicable to a community, or to help family members address discrete life or death illnesses. Documentation of their immediate need is usually documented by written statements of medical professionals. Communities don't have similarly discrete life or death issues for which a particular sort of professional might be universally recognized to diagnose. In other words, one can rarely report "if I don't assist my community today rather than tomorrow, it will die. Furthermore, people use FMLA for health crises, not for routine care. Our communities needs routine care, not merely involvement in crises.

Thus, I am somewhat at a standstill, but publish this article anyway in hopes that public contemplation of the issues might lead to a legislative fix of some kind.

It is worth noting how the religious accomodations laws are interpreted. To the extent that accomodation or switching shifts is possible for any other reason, it must be acceptable to accomodate religious needs. Thus, one could institute a statute that is broad based, requiring employers to make legitimate efforts to accomodate a certain amount of civic obligations per year, but broadly permits an employer to avoid going through "extra efforts" to accomodate its employees.

As a lawyer, I am well aware that a statute whose language is too vague cannot be enforced. In other words, the statutory provisions must be reasonable clear enough so that a reasonable person can appreciate what actions are made illegal under the statute. If the statute is so vague that a reasonable employer could have had no way of knowing what actions violate the statute, the emplloyer can't be held liable.

Thus, policy thinkers interested in such a staute must think through by what standard an employer might be required to consider accomodating an employee's proclaimed community emergency. Would a community meeting qualify? What about a meeting with the mayor? What about a boy scout trip?

Again, I have no interest in creating a new legal maze that simply requires countless lawyers to negotiate over every twist and turn. Instead, I write to raise the question whether the framework of the Family Medical Leave Act should be used as a model to create a statute to advance civic engagement, which often suffers from the same lack of community care, a problem somewhat analogous to the problems that lead to the Family Medical Leave Act.

Advisory to the Pro Se Litigant #5: File in the Correct Court

Maryland’s Court System includes District Courts, Circuit Courts, and Orphan’s Courts. It is important to File Your Case in the correct court. Most disputes in Maryland are presented to one of the following Maryland state courts: (1) District Courts: Each county has District Courts (not to be confused with the United States District Courts) which hear cases concerning disputes in which the amount claimed is less than $25,000, landlord-tenant claims, and a few other similar type of claims. Cases brought here are heard before judges and not juries. (2) Circuit Courts: Circuit Courts hear disputes in which the amount claimed is more than $2,500, adoption, case, protective proceedings for disabled persons, and a few other matters. Cases brought here may be heard before juries. (3) Orphans’ Courts: Orphans’ Courts have jurisdiction over wills, estates, and other probate matters, along with aspects of guardianship. There are several types of disputes, primarily those with claims between $2,500 and $25,000, which may fall under the jurisdiction of both the Circuit Court and the District Court. In those cases, the plaintiff decides which court to bring his or her case. The factors involved in making that decision is beyond the scope of this page.

Advisory to the Pro Se Litigant #4: If I Have a Lawsuit, How Do I Bring it?

A. Draft a Complaint That Articulates How You’ve Been Harmed, and What Law Has Been Violated If you want the court to hear your dispute, you must file a “complaint.” A complaint sets forth (in numbered paragraphs) the allegations and your demand for relief (payment or other remedy to put you where you would have been but for the dispute). Accordingly, it should have three primary parts to it: (1) On the first page of the Complaint, place a caption that states the court, the names of the parties, the docket number (once one is assigned), the title of the document, such as “Complaint”, and if you know it, the name of the judge (2) Identify the facts that set forth why the court in which you are filing your suit is the proper court to hear such a claim. See below under “Choosing the Proper Court.” (3) Draft a section of “Facts”—stating in numbered paragraphs those facts which illustrate that one or more laws were violated and that resulting harm has occurred. (4) Identify each legal violation for which you are seeking relief. (5) Identify what relief you are seeking. B. The Complaint Must Have Sufficient Details For A Court To Understand What Facts You are Alleging – and What Law You are Alleging was Violated The purpose of the complaint is to inform the court and the opposing party of your claims. You want to make sure it clearly articulates: (1) the infraction committed, (2) the law providing a remedy, and (3) the remedy you seek. Your complaint need not be so thorough as to convince the court of the merits of your case. It need only say enough to show the court that you are complaining about something for which the law provides a remedy. As long as the judge understands what you are complaining about, and the court where you have filed is a correct court in which to file you complaint, it will probably not be thrown out—and you will be permitted to proceed. However, please read the information under “Motion to Dismiss” for further information about how detailed your complaint should be. The purpose of the complaint is to notify the court and the other party of your claims. For the Defendant and court to understand what those claims are, you should identify them adequately. This means identifying the laws under which you are filing suit, and consequently, using as a basis to argue that you are entitled to damages. As you are only putting the defendant and court “on notice” of your claims, you do not need to cite case law to prove the merits of your case at this point. Be advised that many courts have “form complaints” for certain common issues, such as domestic violence, contract claims, auto accidents, and certain types of personal injury, thus avoiding the need for you to research the applicable statutes. “Form complaints” are pre-writen complaints with blank spaces for you to insert the particular facts of your case. Thus, if you are curious if the court has a form complaint for the issue that concerns you, please contact the relevant court clerk’s office.

Advisory to the Pro Se Litigant #3: How Do I Locate the Law that Applies in My Case?

Federal Statutory Law Is In The United States Code 

Organized By Subject Matter Once a federal law is instituted (usually enacted by Congress and signed by the President), it is recorded in the United States Code. There are presently 50 sections (referred to as Titles) of the Code, each dealing with a different broad subject matter. For instance, Title 42 is titled “Public Health and Welfare,” including laws as diverse as disaster relief and civil rights in education and employment. To give another example, title 26 is titled “Internal Revenue Code” and contains laws related to taxation.

Cornell University and The Government Printing Office each have each put the Code on their websites.

 These websites, along with several others, have search functions you can use to locate federal laws that address the topic that interests you.

Maryland has its own Code  

Maryland similarly has its Code divided by subject matter. Lexis and Westlaw, the two most popular legal research websites for lawyers

Past Court Decisions

Referred to as case law or precedent, past court decisions may bind a judge on a given matter. In the American legal tradition (and in other systems that follow the "common law," judges are expected to issue decisions consistent with prior decisions on similar legal issues, namely “precedent.” They are specifically expected to issue decisions consistent with those of higher-ranking courts.

When a party believes that a court has issued a decision that is inconsistent with precedent, he, she, or it may appeal to a higher-ranking court to overturn the decision of the lower court. Because past decisions of appellate courts have an authoritative nature, they are given the expression “case law.”

Because of its authoritative and persuasive effect, attorneys and other skilled advocates rely heavily on case law in arguing for favorable rulings.

 You can find the United States Supreme Court’s past decisions on its website, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decisions on its website,  The Court of Appeals of Maryland’s decisions on its website,  and the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland on its website.

 Other public oriented legal websites, such as www.findlaw.com include many of these decisions on their web pages, and have functions which make searching easier. You can also locate various court decisions through legal search engines such as lexis.com or westlaw.com. Many law libraries provide access to one or both of these search engines. Law libraries have other resources with which to search past decisions.

What Thomas Paine's Common Sense Has To Teach Us Today

text: http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/commonsense/text.html Thomas Paine's Common Sense should be read by all Americans for three reasons. For one, as the passing of time has allowed our separation from England to feel inevitable and obviously just, Paine's text provides the reader an opportunity to better appreciate how revolutionary and controversial such advocacy was. Second, Paine's resort to a careful analysis of history and public opinion should educate us as to the importance of scholarship to our country's founding. Third, the similarities in Paine's use of social contract theory to Jefferson's in our Declaration of Independence is a sign of how serious our founder's were in basing their new country's structure on logical principles available in social contract theory. Paine's arguments against the continuation of the British monarchy's rule on our shores is now considered so obvious that readers must read Paine's arguments very closely to appreciate the existence of a pro-monarchy side. In fact, it is only through studying Paine's text closely that one can one fully appreciate the extent to which "Common Sense" was revolutionary, and--although quite possibly -- not necessarily representing the majority opinion of the Colonialists, at least prior to its publication.The text reminds us that our separation from England at that time was not inevitable, even if (at least from our vantage point) eventually inevitable. Thus, Paine critiques and overcomes several arguments in favor of monarchy, such as status quo, natural rights of monarchs, religious rights of monarchs, obligations by virtue of being of English descent, and other "ancient prejudices." Paine's resort to historical analysis leads me to believe that logic and historical analysis played a huge role in the founder's view of why to separate from England and how to form a new nation. Thus, I conclude that in public deliberations, if and when we resort to taking positions that are not based in a good faith analysis of history and human nature, we run the risk of acting contrary to our founder's view of how this republic should be governed. Additionally, if we fail to resort to investigate relevant historical facts to determine our most adviseable course of action, we run the risk of only literally applying the Declaration, yet failing to engage in the serious contemplative arts envisioned by Paine and Jefferson. This point is made even clearer to me when I examine Algernon Sideney's "Discourses Concerning Government." In Discourses, Sidney incorporates both logic and historical analysis to challenge those who advocate for absolute monarchy. Much of his text is devoted to showing why those who argue for the divine rights of kings are misreading Scripture, human nature, and what we can learn from the facts of history. Although he lived a century before the founding of this nation, Presidents Jefferson and Adams considered themselves greatly influenced by the Discourses, and thus the distance in time between the publishing of Discourses and the founding of this county should not be a barrier for our appreciating the role of Sidney's ideas in shaping this county. More importantly, we must appreciate what Sidney does to make his case, and how this is similar to Paine and other writers who influenced the founders. First, as the monarchists rest on Scripture to argue for their eternal rights to power, Sidney shows how this is a misreading of Scripture. In explaining a more proper reading of Scriptural stories and statements that appear to endorse monarchy, Sidney often employs similar techniques that Talmudists utilize by looking carefully at context and language of Scripture to decipher meaning and possible mis-reading. He then addresses what he believes to be common mis-impressions about history. In both the Biblical and historical analysis, he explains what he believes to be the sources of common mis-impressions, and articulates what he sees as a more logical explanation. My point here is not merely to be impressed by thoughtful men. Although there are reasons why Paine and Sidney's texts deserve "great books" status, they also teach us a great deal of how we as citizens should employ contemplation, reasoning and thoughful analysis when considering the issues of the day. It is clear to me that American politics in the 21st century can sometimes resort to a type of language correcness that gives no way for complicated analysis. For instance, various potential political leaders have been publicly attacked for exploring communist though or other disrespected ideologies. Most recently a Senate candidate has been laughed at for having an isolated or a few experiences examining the Wiccan tradition, and thus convinced that her only hope to address the perception was to pronounce "I am not a witch" as if being a member of the Wiccan faith tradition were a barrier for US Senate. Our current President felt compelled to pronounce "I am a Christian, not a Muslim," and was made to answer for unpopular views of his pastor. I think it is fair to say that Sidney or Paine might intensely explore the political views of Ms. O'Donnell and President Obama, but I doubt either would evaluate their political views by drawing vast conclusions from their non-political and casual associations. Another point must not be lost in exploring Thomas Paine's work. As suggested above, Paine and Sidney's extensive analysis indicates that their views were not necessarily in the majority at the time of their writings. Sidney was executed by the State for his views. Thus, it must be telling that the 1776 Revolution was not merely a physical revolution, but a psychological one. It altered the way people saw citizenship. Specifically, it meant that the founders of this country were not scared to advocate rebellious notions. Thus it would only be true to the character of Paine and Jefferson for a thinker to engage in honest examinations and to risk humiliation for articulating one's thoughts. On this last point, I find it a sad state of affairs when individuals are ridiculed for their honest beliefs. Before ridiculing others for their minority views, we need to remember that many ideas we consider mainstream and "obvious" were once ridiculed and considered grossly offensive. Instead, in keeping with Paine and Sidney, those views should be analyzed for their logical consistency with our understanding of human nature and history.

Civic Engagement Today: A Commentary on the Demise of ACORN, the Growth of the Tea Parties, and the College Civic Engagement

Let's start with the good news. According to the recently published 2010 Civic Health Assessment by the National Conference on Citizenship , nearly 60% of Americans have reached out in 2008 and 2009 to help their neighbors and approximately 16% do so every day. Also 75% of us discuss political affairs with family and friends at least once a month. This news is good because it reflects greater attention by citizens into public affairs, even in a long recession. After all, we hope that greater attention means greater involvement, which means a polis holding their government and its leaders more accountable and responsible. However, the favorable news has a dark cloud. While the Assessment reflects increases in volunteering and other forms of citizen involvement, there are important disparities in who is engaged. The following are some disparities about which I am most concerned: a. High school graduates are twice as likely to engage in organizations and to vote than those who have not graduated high school and college graduates are even more likely to be engaged. These statistics are consistent with other statistics that this blogger has read, namely that those with more education are more likely to involve themselves in civic life than those with less education. This problem is not uniquely a function of educational levels, but is often a function of opportunity. Those with greater education levels are more likely to have jobs that value outside philanthropic and social commitments. Executives, for instance, are encouraged to serve on boards of non-profits and community associations. Their work may be seen as good will on behalf of the businesses they represent. Non-executives are rarely valued for any activities done outside of work, and hourly employees are only paid for time spent doing the specific activity for which they have been hired. Hourly employees are, by definition, not paid for any time off the clock, even if the activity greatly advances the objectives of the employer. The effect of these disparities is a society which values the opinions of executives more than non-executives -- and apparently rates of engagement indicate that this may in fact have a real effect on engagement patterns. b. Rural residents are 10% more likely than urban residents to be engaged in neighborly activity. This finding seems counter-intuitive and frankly surprising. One would think that urban folks would be more inclined to see their lives and well-being as interdependent with the well-being of others because of their physical proximity to other urban folks. For instance, a rural individual may not be physically or financially affected by the fact that his neighbor's house has burned down whereas an urban individual whose neighbor's house is burning is more likely to be physically connected with that neighbor either by a common wall, or some sort of shared infrastructure. c. Those who assume community leadership roles are five to seven times more likely to be involved in other civic engagement projects than those who are not members of any group. This is reflected in the fact that only 3% of Americans have attended a rally, protest, or march between 2008 and 2009. In other words, many tend to fit in the category of being hyper involved or minimally involved, thus creating a situation where community associations intended to represent entire communities only represent the loudest and most involved of those communities. I observed this trend when I was more heavily involved in grass roots community organizing. I observed that it was easy to engage those who were interested in leadership roles, but hard to engage those who were well-suited to be foot soldiers in the organizations for which I was recruiting. In other words, they seemed to agree with the purpose of the organization, wanted similar results, but were unable to get involved either because they were too busy with work and family commitments, or didn't see themselves as able to contribute to the organization. In this same time period as that of the study, America has seen the demise of ACORN and the growth of "tea party" organizations. ACORN was a 400,000 member organization that advocated for low-to-moderate income communities. This advocacy sometimes involves issues involving specific communities such as addressing particular bad landlords, and other times it involved larger systemic problems like health care and predatory lending. Although some ACORN chapters appear to remain through open re-branding, thousands of members will are now left without a powerful community association unless they are able to take the initiative to rebuild. Meanwhile, over this same period of time has been a grown of tea party protests where members advocate against what they see as wasteful government spending and excessive taxation. A quick online search as to number of American involved in the tea parties give an impression that a similar number of Americans are involved in the tea parties as were involved in ACORN. Some liberals are likely frustrated over the simultaneous growth of the Tea Party movement and death of ACORN because this confluence of events will likely favor conservative political objectives. However, civic engagement advocates should be concerned about this same matter regardless of personal ideological perspective. ACORN members and the Tea Part movement members are similar in that they come to rallies to endorse politicians and a political agenda that match the perceived self-interest of the members. However, unlike the tea party movement, which appears exclusively focused on electoral politics, and national issues, the local ACORN organizations were known for trying to hold local businesses responsible for their business practices in the neighborhoods in which they lived. Also, ACORN also created non-profits to facilitate home purchasing, obtaining fair loans, and other financial matters that can sometimes be out of reach of poor persons. Furthermore, the stated goals of ACORN included training low income individuals to get involved in community decision-making, and often in politics. Thus, ACORN served a role that went beyond narrow legislative priorities. Although the tea party movement might develop into such an ACORN-style movement, at this moment, its objectives appear targeted at the enactment of legislation rather than the expansion of the political and social process. The decline of ACORN-style organizations and the growth of tea-party style organizing may be reflected in our 2010 Assessment. As mentioned above, the Assessment seems to suggest that a small number of those involved are seeking leadership roles, which makes it hard for local matters to get tackled. Also, the Assessment found that individuals over age 65 are much more engaged than younger folks and those between the ages of 16 and 30 tend to be directed online. In my opinion, this also directs the dialogue nationally rather than locally. Those over 65 years of age are more likely than younger folks to be focused on social security, health care, and other welfare type benefits that they may need. These matters are handled on the national level, not the neighborhood level. As one's online community is not limited by geography, it is not surprising that those between 16 and 30 might not be directed at community-based activism,but might be more interested in national-based activism. Although I hope I am wrong, I am afraid that this contrast reflects some of scary trends discussed in Robert Putnam's masterpiece, Bowling Alone. In Bowling Alone, Putnam characterized a steady decline of in-person social intercourse, undermining the individual's sense of and loyalty to community, not to mention a decrease in the ability of citizens to collaborate with neighbors on social and communal problems. Alternatively put, people can't collaborate with their neighbors on community problems if they are not communicating with their neighbors to know that such problems exist. Thus, although the 2010 Civic Health Assessment gives us general hope that in person social intercourse may be increasing, we are also concerned that the in person social discourse is being directed in ways that do not necessarily advance the needs of the communities in which the social discourse is occurring.

Advisory to the Pro Se Litigant #2: How Do I Determine if Civil Litigation is An Appropriate Means With Which to Resolve a Problem

· Courts Resolve Disputes Only Where There Are Disputes Involving Federal State or Local Law Courts, as part of the judicial branch of our federal and state governments, are charged with deciding disputes under Local, State and Federal law. They determine whether the individual or group being sued, [known as the defendant(s)] has violated the law the individual or group bringing the suit [known as the plaintiff(s)] claims. Often individuals and groups have moral, ethical and religious disputes that do not involve Local, State and Federal law. Courts will refuse to hear disputes that are not governed by applicable Local, State, or Federal Law. · Judges are required to interpret and apply Local, State, and Federal Law, not their own beliefs, ethics, or morals. Judges are not allowed to impose their own morality, ethics, values, or sense of righteousness on litigants. Further, litigants are not asked to try to convince courts of their ethics, values, or sense of righteousness. Instead, courts interpret the law. What does it mean to interpret the law? The word interpret means to: explain or tell the meaning of something. In the context of courts, this is usually limited to (1) determining what laws apply to a given situation or dispute; (2) determining how those laws apply to and govern the particular situation or dispute.