The New York Times just published this article about the growing acceptance of flip-flops as acceptable footwear in the LA entertainment industry, which got me thinking:  Will Hollywood’s enthusiasm for flip-flops eventually mean that West Coast lawyers will be wearing flip-flops to depositions at some point in the next few years?  Out of curiosity, I Googled "flip flops" and "law firm" to find out whether flip-flops have already become acceptable law firm wear.  Judging from my search results, it appears that even East Coast law firm employees are indulging their flip-flop love.  On the DCist blog, a post about flip-flops brought this comment:  "At my job, most 20-something women wear flip-flops in the office (a large law firm downtown) during business hours." The Washington Post carries this rant about women interns in suits and flip-flops.  And the Jewish Advocate blog reports with dismay that "there is a scandal pulsing at the threshold of Boston’s financial district  . . . It seems that everyone (and their mother and brother and law partner) wears flip flops to work – and not just on their way to work in the a.m., but throughout the day.  People are flip flopping their way into office buildings . . . ."  Despite evidence that flip-flops are gaining ground in office settings, Law.com has a sternly worded article about all of the faux pas to avoid during a stint as a summer associate, including an admonition to save flip-flops and sandals "for the weekend."   My own personal opinion as a former law firm recruiting committee member?  Nice, conservative sandals are not likely to be a problem in most California law firms, but flip-flops may raise some eyebrows even today.  But who knows?  Maybe in a few years, the last traces of flip-flop antipathy will vanish, and lawyers will wear them in the office without thinking twice.

The bar exam is just four weeks away, which means we have a lot of graduates putting in long study hours in the library.  For those seeking to minimize distractions from environmental noise in the library, we have a few suggestions.  First, the library is usually at its most serene during the evening hours after 5 p.m.  Also, where you sit in the library makes a big difference.  The study areas on the first and second floors opening onto the main reading room typically have the highest level of noise.  If you’re sensitive to noise and movement, you’ll want to steer clear of these areas because both of the library’s service desks will generate some sound while the library is open.  Not surprisingly, the quietest study areas are the stacks located in the back of the library on the first and second floors.    If you want to ensure that you won’t be distracted while you’re studying, you might want to invest in a MP3 player.  These days, iTunes offers lots of study-conducive tracks, including jazz, classical music, and nature sounds.  My own recommendation -- anything by John Coltrane.  My handful of John Coltrane CDs and tapes got me through law school finals and the bar exam.  (Yes, I took the CA bar before the sleek and compact iPod was invented and had to haul my clunky Walkman and cassette tapes to the library.)  Also, for those of you who prefer chirping birds or surf sounds to instrumental music, Christopher Breen has a useful article on finding really long nature sound tracks on iTunes.  Finally, don’t forget that Heafey always has a bin of free ear plugs available at the Circulation Desk.

The San Francisco Chronicle published an interesting story today about some embarrassing redacting errors made by federal prosecutors.  According to the article, federal prosecutors filed a court brief relating to the government’s attempt to require two Chronicle reporters to reveal their secret source for confidential grand jury testimony.  A redacted PDF copy of the government’s brief was available to members of the press with a portion of the text hidden by "black bars."  A New York Sun reporter was able to reveal the redacted text by highlighting the redacted sections, copying them, then pasting them into a Word document, which revealed the blacked-out text.  What did the brief’s author do wrong?  Instead of removing the text completely from the document, the author just changed "the foreground color to . . . a black rectangle."  The text was still there, and it didn’t take an expert to reveal it.  Ironically, at least one federal agency has published a guide to redacting digital documents entitled "Redacting with Confidence."  The guide dispenses valuable tips on how to sanitize electronic documents.  You can also find additional recommendations on redacting digital documents in this Law.com article.

POSTSCRIPT, June 26, 2006:  A few days after this post, LLRX published a helpful piece on "Controlling the Accidental Release of Digital Information" by attorney Conrad Jacoby.

The Securities and Exchange Commission recently unveiled a new search page that allows researchers to search the full text of all EDGAR filings from the past two years, including attachments.  After experimenting with this search page, I recommend skipping the basic search and moving directly to the advanced search page, which gives you the option to limit your search by date, by company, by central index key, and by form type (10-K, 10-Q, etc.).  For those of you who are new to legal research and aren’t sure what EDGAR filings are, EDGAR stands for the SEC’s "Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval" system.  The SEC decided to require electronic filings over a decade ago so that investors would have easy access to the most current financial information about public companies.  You can find additional EDGAR search options as well as descriptions of SEC form types on the SEC website.  Thanks to beSpacific for the tip.

Most law students know about the helpful online exam preparation exercises and resources offered by CALI, the Center for Computer-Assisted Legal Instruction.  But did you know that CALI is now offering podcasts as well?  You can find podcasts on constitutional law, contracts, property, torts, and exam preparation strategies on CALI Radio.  For legal educators who are curious about trying podcasts, you can listen to interviews with law professors who participated in CALI’s Legal Education Podcasting Project on CALIopolis, CALI’s blog on legal education and technology. 

I see that the "Google Cheat Sheet" has been making the rounds in the blogosphere and at legal conferences again, so I thought I’d feature it for a second time on Heafey Headnotes.  For those of you who aren’t aware of it, the Google Cheat Sheet provides you with lots of ways to refine your Google searches, and it also gives you information about little-known functions, such as using Google as a calculator.  Why should law students take the time to learn advanced search techniques?  Because these features will save you lots and lots of time by giving you much more relevant, on-point search results.   Law school gives you the opportunity to conduct legal research in a fairly leisurely fashion, but the luxury of having lots of time for research projects will disappear in practice, so it’s a good idea to familiarize yourself with these features now.  These advanced features aren’t exclusive to Google.  Advanced search tips and features are also available on Yahoo!, FirstGov, Ask.com, IceRocket, and A9.com, just to name a few.  Search Engine Showdown’s search engines features chart is also a valuable resource for determining which search engine is best for your search.

Rep. Henry Waxman has just released a report that highlights the number of times that Congress has voted in the last five years to preempt state law.  The report, prepared by the House Committee on Goverment Reform’s minority staff, states: 

" . . . [T]here exists a wide gulf between the pro-states rhetoric of Republican leaders and the actual legislative record. Rather than ceding power to the states, the Republican-controlled Congress and President Bush have repeatedly preempted state authority and centralized policy-making in Washington. 

Over the past five years, the House and the Senate have voted 57 times to preempt state laws and regulations. These votes have resulted in 27 laws, signed by the President, that preempt state authority. Some of this legislation contains multiple distinct preemptive provisions. Over the last five years, the House and the Senate have passed 73 separate preemptive provisions, and 39 of these have become law. 

An examination of this legislation reveals that Congress and the President have routinely backed federal legislation that usurps traditional state powers. The reach of the preemptive legislation is broad and its intrusiveness is deep. Literally hundreds of state laws have been or would be overridden. 

The House and Senate have passed legislation that would preempt states from regulating sources of air pollution, setting health insurance standards, and protecting consumers from contaminated food. Areas of traditional state prerogatives, such as local land use decisions and the issuance of drivers’ licenses, have been federalized, and states have been blocked from protecting their citizens from emerging threats, such as unsolicited “spam” email. Last year, Congress passed — and the President flew through the night to sign — legislation to override the judgment of a state court in an individual family’s private end-of-life decision.

 Thanks to beSpacific for the information on this report.

I recently subscribed to Ellen Ostrow’s excellent newsletter, Beyond the Billable Hour, and I would recommend it for law students who are planning to join a law firm after they graduate.  The newsletter dispenses useful tips on career strategies and work-life balance aimed primarily at women attorneys, but there’s plenty of valuable information here for men as well.  Ostrow’s website also has a handy "Resources and Links" page that includes a lengthy bibliography on every aspect of managing your legal career.

For those of you looking for some law-related literature for your beach reading or as a distraction from studying for the bar, Daniel Solove has thoughtfully compiled a list of literature about the law.  If you’re interested in law and humanities, check out Professor Solove’s group blog, the Law and Humanities blog as well as The Law and Humanities Institute.

Commencement season is just about over across the United States, and the New York Times had a nice round-up of commencement speeches from across the country a few days ago that’s worth reading.  I thought it would be nice to feature a selection of some of my commencement speech favorites:

• David Gergen asked Duke Law’s Class of 2006 to be "lawyer-statesmen" and work to reform "the insanity of the billable hours regime."
  
• Judge John Kane’s 2004 address at the University of Colorado School of Law warned graduates that "you will seldom see people at their best" and told them that, to succeed as a lawyer, "you need to feel a fire in your belly."
  
• Kansas Attorney General Carla Stovall reminded graduates at Washburn University School of Law’s 2002 commencement that "doing basic legal research is really not below your station in life" and encouraged them to "accept the job you want -- not the job your parent or spouse wants for you."
  
• And finally, historian David McCullough didn’t address law students, but his advice to Bates College’s graduating seniors is perfect for all of us:  "How ever little television you watch, watch less.  Read.  Read for pleasure.  Read for happiness."