odd and ends (June 22, 2011)

• Reuters: Whatever you think of the merits of the US Supreme Court's decision in the class action agasint Wal-Mart, you might be interested in reading about how the lawsuit has been funded from the plaintiffs' side (largely self-funded by the lead firm).  Not too many years ago, each plaintiffs-side suit was a risky enterprise that had to fund itself.  Now, with sharing of costs, litigation funding, and substantial investments by plaintiffs' firms, it's the entire portfolio of existing cases that needs to be adequately funded.  UPDATE: Ted Frank blogs about the article.  I didn't read the original article quite the way he did, but see what you think of Frank's take.

• Politico (ht: How Appealing): there's been a debate among the blogs about whether Justice Thomas's relationship to the funding of a museum violated ethics rules.  Steve Gillers discussed it here.  I have to keep reminding myself that just because there is a long term political attack on Justice Thomas using the vocabulary of judicial ethics and focused on the health care case, it doesn't necessarily follow that none of the many bricks lobbed his way have merit.

• Daily Caller: Strictly still a rumor, but there are hints that the gun running scandal out of the ATF will reach higher.  I don't doubt that some are trying to pin advance knowledge on Attorney General Eric Holder -- but as with prior scandals I'm mentioning this just because I suspect we'll be hearing a lot more about it in the coming weeks.