Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!bu.edu!telecom-request
From: cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: I Didn't Really Mean Judge Greene Should be Shot
Message-ID: <72171@bu.edu.bu.edu>
Date: 12 Jan 91 23:51:24 GMT
Sender: news@bu.edu.bu.edu
Organization: Human Interface Technology Lab, Univ. of Wash., Seattle
Lines: 16
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 31, Message 4 of 10


Judge Greene gets to interpret the law, and he interpreted the law
with regard to the antitrust violations committed by AT&T.  He was
responding to the Attorney General of the U.S., who proposed the
settlement in the first place -- and who gave HIM the right to make
the law?

Judge Greene-bashing is not only old hat, it's fruitless.  I should
add that in my discussions with Judge Greene's staff (I was a staffer
for the CA Legislature for eight years in the area of telecom policy), I
found them more knowledgeable than any legislator or congressional
staff (with the possible exception of the OTA) with whom I came into
contact.


Bob Jacobson