Government by distraction

COMMENT

Whatever you think of the next president of the United States, there can be no denying that markets since his election victory have been buoyant, not just on Wall Street but here in Canada, too.

Of course, we have Donald Trump to thank for this, according to Donald Trump, of course. As he tweeted on Boxing Day: “The world was gloomy before I won — there was no hope. Now the market is up nearly 10%...”

Let’s not quibble over whether markets were actually “gloomy” before Election Day. ( The Dow had, in fact, returned 17 per cent from its mid-February low to Nov. 8.)

And le t ’s l eave aside Trump’s aggressive rounding- up to “nearly 10%” in that tweet. ( The Dow on Dec. 26 was up less than nine per cent from Nov. 8, but I guess that’s closer to 10 per cent than zero, right?)

Plus, there’s no point noting that this self-congratulation came from a man who, during his time at the helm of a publicly traded company ( Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts, from 1995 to 2005), returned — 89 per cent to his shareholders.

Tam states in court documents that he founded The Slants in 2006 not just to play music, but also to fight discrimination against Asian- Americans. He chose the band’s name as a form of “reappropriation” — that is, when minorities take terms that were once directed at them as insults, and use them as badges of honour.

“We want to take on these stereotypes that people have about us, like the slanted eyes, and own them,” Tam says in his brief. “Everyone in the band really loves the fact that we can try and empower Asian Americans and say, ‘ You know what? We are slanted. Who cares? We’re proud of that.’ ”

The U. S. government is fighting to protect the disparagement clause. Lawyers for the U. S. PTO argue the clause does not violate the First Amendment because it doesn’t actually curtail speech. Rather, it deals only with whether things can be trademarked. Simon Tam “may use any term he wishes,” the patent and trademark office lawyers state in their written argument.

More t han 30 groups have flooded the Supreme Court with briefs that take various positions. For example, the San Francisco Dykes on Bikes Women’s Motorcycle Contingent Inc. tells the court that the disparagement clause has resulted in the rejection of its application for a trademark.

The U. S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Wednesday.

WE WANT TO TAKE ON THESE STEREOTYPES ... LIKE THE SLANTED EYES, AND OWN THEM.