It ws bound to happen sooner than later - lawyers who blog about legal issues that touch on sentitive cases are going to be scrutinized. John Steele raises the question "Is blogging grounds to oppose pro hac vice application?"
Ben Sheffner thinks legal blogs are better than law reviews. Here is the example he gives:
Because you can write sentences like this:
Indeed, since the en banc decision was handed down, it seems that every conference and informal gathering in the field eventually morphs into trying to figure out what the majority was smoking opinion means, how judges should comply with it, how law enforcement should respond to it, and whether and how long it will be until it is overturned.
Here's the possibly drug-induced controversial opinion by the Ninth Circuit in United States v. Comprehensive Drug Testing.
But beware! There are those who will attack lawyers who blog. Here blogging is posed as grounds to oppose pro hac vice application.