The tactic at the heart of Trump's current trial in NY:
- Click here for the article.
Catch and kill is a surreptitious technique employed by newspapers and media outlets to prevent an individual from publicly revealing information damaging to a third party.
Using a legally enforceable non-disclosure agreement, the publisher purports to buy exclusive rights to "catch" the damaging story from the individual, but then "kills" the story for the benefit of the third party by preventing it from ever being published. The individual with the information frequently does not realize that the tabloid intends to suppress the individual's story instead of publishing it. The practice is technically distinct from using hush money, in which the individual is bribed by the third party to intentionally conceal the damaging information, but identical for all practical intents and purposes.
The National Enquirer and its parent company American Media, Inc. have attracted attention for using the practice.
Monday, April 15, 2024
Regarding Federal Public Policy
- U.S. details Pentagon’s role in defending Israel from Iranian attack.
- How climbing Mount Everest went from a heroic feat to a business proposition.
- Rural Americans are way more likely to die young. Why?
Sunday, April 14, 2024
From the Houston Chronicle: Harris County leaders vote to back new housing developments with $39.8M in COVID-19 recovery funds
A look at counties and fiscal federalism.
- Click here for the article.
Six affordable housing developments are the latest to get a boost from Harris County's federal COVID-19 recovery funds, part of an ongoing initiative to channel American Rescue Plan dollars toward the county's housing goals.
Commissioners Court on Tuesday approved a $39.8 million investment that will help create or preserve 677 units of affordable housing at six properties, including Lost Oaks, Manson Place Apartments, Meridian on Cullen, New Hope Housing Avenue C, The Upland and Tidwell Apartments.
The court previously signed of on $75 million for another 12 properties.
Harris County also has committed millions of dollars to purchasing single-family homes for the Harris County Community Land Trust, providing free legal aid to residents facing eviction and helping to build the HAY Center, a project that includes 50 one-bedroom apartments and studios for those exiting the foster care system.
Unlike the county's more traditional priorities – such as law enforcement, roads and flood control – investing in housing stability is a relatively recent approach, said Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis, who was elected in 2016.
"The old regime was all about roads and bridges," Ellis said. "When I took office, I tasked my staff with crafting policies and programs that build roads to opportunity and bridges to a better life for our residents."
Thursday, April 11, 2024
Terms - 4/11/24
- Peremptory: putting an end to or precluding a right of action, debate, or delay; not providing an opportunity to show cause why one should not comply; a peremptory mandamus; admitting of no contradiction.
- Gross negligence: . . . a lack of care that demonstrates reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, which is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety. Gross negligence is a heightened degree of negligence representing an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of care. Falling between intent to do wrongful harm and ordinary negligence, gross negligence is defined as willful, wanton, and reckless conduct affecting the life or property or another.
- Attainder: in English law, the extinction of civil and political rights resulting from a sentence of death or outlawry after a conviction of treason or a felony. The most important consequences of attainder were forfeiture and corruption of blood. For treason, an offender’s lands were forfeited to the king. For felonies, lands were forfeited to the king for a year and a day and then, because felonies were considered a breach of the feudal bond, escheated (forfeited) to the lord from whom the offender held his tenure.
- Outlawry: act of putting a person beyond the protection of the law for his refusal to become amenable to the court having legal jurisdiction. In the past, this deprivation of legal benefits was invoked when a defendant or other person was in civil or criminal contempt of court; and, in cases of alleged treason or the commission of a felony (referred to as major outlawry), it amounted to a conviction as well as an extinction of civil rights. In England, on proof of the mere fact of major outlawry, the offender was sentenced to death and was often killed on sight or during the effort to arrest him. Conviction for major outlawry also effected the immediate forfeiture of all property and possessions to the crown and prevented the receipt of any property. In civil proceedings outlawry was formally abolished in England in 1879. Under English law outlawry can now be invoked only for one accused of criminal charges.
- Gross negligence: . . . a lack of care that demonstrates reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, which is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety. Gross negligence is a heightened degree of negligence representing an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of care. Falling between intent to do wrongful harm and ordinary negligence, gross negligence is defined as willful, wanton, and reckless conduct affecting the life or property or another.
- Attainder: in English law, the extinction of civil and political rights resulting from a sentence of death or outlawry after a conviction of treason or a felony. The most important consequences of attainder were forfeiture and corruption of blood. For treason, an offender’s lands were forfeited to the king. For felonies, lands were forfeited to the king for a year and a day and then, because felonies were considered a breach of the feudal bond, escheated (forfeited) to the lord from whom the offender held his tenure.
- Outlawry: act of putting a person beyond the protection of the law for his refusal to become amenable to the court having legal jurisdiction. In the past, this deprivation of legal benefits was invoked when a defendant or other person was in civil or criminal contempt of court; and, in cases of alleged treason or the commission of a felony (referred to as major outlawry), it amounted to a conviction as well as an extinction of civil rights. In England, on proof of the mere fact of major outlawry, the offender was sentenced to death and was often killed on sight or during the effort to arrest him. Conviction for major outlawry also effected the immediate forfeiture of all property and possessions to the crown and prevented the receipt of any property. In civil proceedings outlawry was formally abolished in England in 1879. Under English law outlawry can now be invoked only for one accused of criminal charges.
Wednesday, April 10, 2024
Ukraine frontline: The killer drones changing warfare
The nature of warfare continues to evolve.
For our look at defense and military policy.
For our look at defense and military policy.
Tuesday, April 9, 2024
From the Washington Post: Parents of Oxford school shooter face sentencing for involuntary manslaughter
For our look at trials, in this case the sentencing phase. The overall story includes the decision by the district attorney to apply a law - involuntary manslaughter - in a unique situation: the culpability of the parent's of the person who committed the crime.
- Click here for the article.
James and Jennifer Crumbley, the parents of the Oxford High School shooter, face sentencing in Michigan on Tuesday after emotional back-to-back trials earlier this year ended with their convictions on four counts each of involuntary manslaughter.
Days after the killings at the school in Oxford, Mich., McDonald made the unprecedented decision to criminally charge parents for a mass school shooting committed by their child.
. . . Throughout the two trials, the prosecution’s overarching argument against the parents was that they bought a gun for a teenager who was clearly troubled, they failed to secure it, and they failed to take steps before the shooting including the morning of that could have prevented the eventual tragedy.
James Crumbley bought a 9mm SigSauer days before the shooting as an early Christmas gift, while Jennifer Crumbley bought ammunition and took her son to a shooting range to practice with it.
On the morning of shooting, the parents were called in to discuss violent drawings their son had made on a math assignment, including a drawing of a black gun and a bullet-ridden body. The Crumbleys left their son at school and returned to work after he asked to stay. They were alerted hours later of a shooting at Oxford High School.
Involuntary Manslaughter in Texas:
- Penal Code.
- Horak Law: Houston Involuntary Manslaughter Lawyer.
- Chris Lewis and Associates: Understanding Texas Manslaughter Laws.
Jury Selection in the NY Case against Trump
From YouTube: If a potential juror answers yes to this question about Trump, they'll be removed from jury pool.
Relevant terms:
- criminal trial
- appeals court
- hush money
- 34 charges
- courtroom
- falsified business records
- jury
- jury questionnaire
- jury pool
- bias
- jurors
- self reporting
- fair and impartial
- dismissal of jurors
- unable to serve
- for cause removals
- qualified jurors
- peremptory strikes
- hung jury
- beyond a reasonable doubt
Relevant terms:
- criminal trial
- appeals court
- hush money
- 34 charges
- courtroom
- falsified business records
- jury
- jury questionnaire
- jury pool
- bias
- jurors
- self reporting
- fair and impartial
- dismissal of jurors
- unable to serve
- for cause removals
- qualified jurors
- peremptory strikes
- hung jury
- beyond a reasonable doubt
Charlie Sykes: GOP, Toxic Narcissists and a Fundamentally Broken Congres...
Lots going on here. Think about this in terms of party polarization.
Who is Charlie Sykes?
. . . an American political commentator who was editor-in-chief of the website The Bulwark. From 1993 to 2016, Sykes hosted a conservative talk show on WTMJ in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He was also the editor of Right Wisconsin which was co-owned with WTMJ's then-parent company E. W. Scripps. Sykes is a frequent commentator on MSNBC.
In an era when the national success of Rush Limbaugh was inspiring similar call-in talk radio shows around the U.S., Sykes started hosting talk radio in 1989 as a substitute host for Mark Belling at WISN in Milwaukee. Sykes got his own show on WISN by 1992. Lacking a contract with WISN, Sykes jumped to WTMJ within a year and hosted a morning show there until December 19, 2016.
In 2002, Sykes and fellow WTMJ host Jeff Wagner gained prominence in leading a campaign to recall Milwaukee County Executive Tom Ament, who was embroiled in scandal for changing the county pension policy to give himself and close aides large payouts; Ament controversially retired at the end of February 2002, rather than resign, to retain his pension.
In a 2005 speech, Jay Heck, executive director of the Wisconsin branch of the liberal political advocacy group Common Cause referred to Sykes' influence on local politicians. "The Sykes Republicans from southeastern Wisconsin are worried that he will castigate them by calling them RINOs, 'Republicans in name only.' So (he makes it) very difficult for Republicans to be independent of the party line on any issue."
. . . In October 2016, Sykes announced that he had decided late in 2015 to quit his radio show for unspecified personal reasons. In December 2016, Sykes wrote an op-ed for The New York Times suggesting that the conservative movement had lost its way during the 2016 campaign, saying "...as we learned this year, we had succeeded in persuading our audiences to ignore and discount any information from the mainstream media. Over time, we'd succeeded in delegitimizing the media altogether — all the normal guideposts were down, the referees discredited."
Who is Charlie Sykes?
. . . an American political commentator who was editor-in-chief of the website The Bulwark. From 1993 to 2016, Sykes hosted a conservative talk show on WTMJ in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He was also the editor of Right Wisconsin which was co-owned with WTMJ's then-parent company E. W. Scripps. Sykes is a frequent commentator on MSNBC.
In an era when the national success of Rush Limbaugh was inspiring similar call-in talk radio shows around the U.S., Sykes started hosting talk radio in 1989 as a substitute host for Mark Belling at WISN in Milwaukee. Sykes got his own show on WISN by 1992. Lacking a contract with WISN, Sykes jumped to WTMJ within a year and hosted a morning show there until December 19, 2016.
In 2002, Sykes and fellow WTMJ host Jeff Wagner gained prominence in leading a campaign to recall Milwaukee County Executive Tom Ament, who was embroiled in scandal for changing the county pension policy to give himself and close aides large payouts; Ament controversially retired at the end of February 2002, rather than resign, to retain his pension.
In a 2005 speech, Jay Heck, executive director of the Wisconsin branch of the liberal political advocacy group Common Cause referred to Sykes' influence on local politicians. "The Sykes Republicans from southeastern Wisconsin are worried that he will castigate them by calling them RINOs, 'Republicans in name only.' So (he makes it) very difficult for Republicans to be independent of the party line on any issue."
. . . In October 2016, Sykes announced that he had decided late in 2015 to quit his radio show for unspecified personal reasons. In December 2016, Sykes wrote an op-ed for The New York Times suggesting that the conservative movement had lost its way during the 2016 campaign, saying "...as we learned this year, we had succeeded in persuading our audiences to ignore and discount any information from the mainstream media. Over time, we'd succeeded in delegitimizing the media altogether — all the normal guideposts were down, the referees discredited."
From the Houston Chronicle: Houston lawmakers call for state hearing to address alleged violations of state law in HISD
More checks and balances.
In this case, the Texas legislature is gearing up to check - or at least challenge - the decision by the Texas Education Agency to take over the Houston Independent School District.
- Click here for the article.
Several Houston-area Democratic legislators are calling for a formal hearing to address “potential violations of state law” in Houston ISD in the aftermath of the Texas Education Agency stripping elected leaders from the school district.
The lawmakers asked in a letter sent Friday that the House Committee on Public Education host a hearing to address reports of “unqualified, non-degree holding teachers” working in classrooms and a lack of accommodations for students with disabilities. They also requested independent research proving the benefits of state-appointed Superintendent Mike Miles’ New Education System.
“As their duly elected State Representatives, we must hold a hearing to learn more about these concerning reports and efforts to subvert state laws and requirements,” the letter states.
From the Washington Post: New voting laws in swing states could shape 2024 election
Catching up with state legislatures and the modifications they continue to make to their election laws.
- Click here for the article.
Voting in Michigan will be easier for many people this fall than it was four years ago. There will be nine days of early voting. All mail ballots will have prepaid return postage. And every community will have at least one drop box for absentee ballots because of a measure adopted by voters with the support of the state’s top Democrats.
The two states illustrate how much voting has changed since the last presidential election. But whether Americans will have an easier or harder time casting a ballot than they did in 2020 will depend on where they live and, often, whether Democrats or Republicans have been in charge.
“It’s really kind of a tale of two democracies,” said Liz Avore, a senior adviser at the Voting Rights Lab.
States across the partisan spectrum abruptly changed their voting policies in 2020 to provide more options at the height of the coronavirus pandemic. Many eased the criteria for voting by mail, and some sent absentee ballot or ballot applications to all voters. Election officials installed ballot drop boxes, set up curbside voting programs and in some cases extended the deadlines for returning absentee ballots.
Former president Donald Trump has baselessly accused Democrats of using the loosened rules to rig the 2020 vote, turning election policy into the object of hyperpolarized disagreement.
Particularly in swing states, Republicans have generally pushed for tighter laws, such as voter ID requirements and limits on mail-in voting, in the name of election integrity. Democrats have advocated eliminating barriers that could suppress voter participation, including by making rules for registering to vote and casting ballots more flexible.
Some states have made the rules they established in 2020 permanent or further expanded options for voting. Others have enacted restrictions that go beyond what were in place before 2020 and made it easier to challenge others’ voter registrations and ability to cast ballots. Not all the rules are set yet; some could change because of last-minute legislation and a wave of litigation.
Nowhere are the changing rules more important than in the seven states most likely to determine the presidential election. Many of those states were decided by tiny margins in 2016 and 2020 and are again expected to be crucial.
Sunday, April 7, 2024
What is Case Law?
- Click here for the article.
Case law, also used interchangeably with common law, is a law that is based on precedents, that is the judicial decisions from previous cases, rather than law based on constitutions, statutes, or regulations. Case law uses the detailed facts of a legal case that have been resolved by courts or similar tribunals. These past decisions are called "case law", or precedent. Stare decisis—a Latin phrase meaning "let the decision stand"—is the principle by which judges are bound to such past decisions, drawing on established judicial authority to formulate their positions.
In common law countries (including the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand), it is used for judicial decisions of selected appellate courts, courts of first instance, agency tribunals, and other bodies discharging adjudicatory functions.
From LII: Adjudication
The central job description of the judiciary.
- Click here for it.
Adjudication refers to the legal process of resolving a dispute or deciding a case. When a claim is brought, courts identify the rights of the parties at that particular moment by analyzing what were, in law, the rights and wrongs of their actions when they occurred.
Adjudication also refers to the judicial decision itself. The effects of a judgment are determined by the doctrine of former adjudication. Under this doctrine, a final judgment in a prior action serves to bar re-litigation of the issues relevant to that determination.
Current news regarding our governing institutions - 4/7/24
- Crenshaw moves to block EPA crackdown on hazardous materials.
- What is Houston Public Works? What to know about the biggest issues facing the department.
- Tensions flare at Houston City Council over voter-approved historic rule change.
- Judge again considering ordering a redo of a 2022 Harris County judicial election.
- North Texas federal judges say they’ll ignore new rule aimed at curbing ‘judge shopping’.
- Texas appeals court overturns voter fraud conviction for woman on probation.
Jury Duty!
I changed the date to mid May so we wont have to miss class.
Expect to see few of these come your way.
From Harvard Law Today: Taylor’s Version of copyright At a Harvard Law School event, an expert in digital exploitation of intellectual property says Taylor Swift singlehandedly shifted composition copyright considerations
Tying together stuff we're talking about in class with Taylor Swift.
It's what I do.
- Click here for the article.
In 2005, a teenaged Taylor Swift signed on to the Big Machine record label and became a global superstar by the time she left the company in 2018. By that time, she’d recorded six albums for the label, all multimillion sellers.
Rather than buy into this agreement, Swift announced she would remake the albums. Under her new record deal with Universal Music Group, she’d now own whatever masters she produced. Because she is usually the main songwriter, she would already have rights to the musical works. As the author and owner of her newest masters, Swift now has majority control of her work. Hence, Greenstein said, he’d need to pay Swift royalties if he played one of her songs during the lecture.
No major artist had previously invested the time and energy to re-record their catalogue, but Swift’s move paid off, as the new versions were major commercial and critical successes. When Greenstein asked the class whether they listened to the originals or to Taylor’s Version, most picked the latter.
“Does that sound good to Shamrock Holdings?” he asked, to negative response. “Congratulations,” Greenstein said, “You just passed Contracts 101.”
As a result, he said, Shamrock now owned something far less valuable. They could still sell the original albums, but there is now less demand for them. And because Swift holds licensing rights as the creator of the musical work, she can make sure that the lucrative licensing deals (for movies, television, etc.) go to her own versions rather than Big Machine’s.
Saturday, April 6, 2024
Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward
The case that helped fuel the rise of business corporations in the US.
- Click here for the Wikipedia entry.
. . . a landmark decision in United States corporate law from the United States Supreme Court dealing with the application of the Contracts Clause of the United States Constitution to private corporations. The case arose when the president of Dartmouth College was deposed by its trustees, leading to the New Hampshire legislature attempting to force the college to become a public institution and thereby place the ability to appoint trustees in the hands of the governor of New Hampshire. The Supreme Court upheld the sanctity of the original charter of the college, which predated the creation of the State.
The decision settled the nature of public versus private charters and resulted in the rise of the American business corporation and the American free enterprise system.
Thursday, April 4, 2024
From the Texas Tribune: Texas wind energy firms need more technicians. Can they drum up student interest without state support?
A look at the labor supply.
- Click here for the article.
. . . Texas leaders have publicly committed to creating pipelines for Texans to join well-paying, high-demand fields, but the state has done little to funnel more young people into wind energy jobs. Political backing for the wind sector has waned in recent years as Texas Republicans have rushed to prop up the oil and gas industry. Notably, state lawmakers ended a program last year that gave wind companies a tax break in exchange for making investments in local schools, giving them a chance to introduce the idea of a career in the wind industry early in students' lives.
Links - 4/4/24
- On May 11, 1976, an ammonia truck disaster killed 7 Houstonians and injured nearly 200.
- At its two-year anniversary, the bipartisan infrastructure law continues to rebuild all of America.
- H.R.3684 - Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
- Members - Texas Animal Health Commission.
- A Guidebook to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
- How to Address the Supply-Chain Staffing Crisis.
- Cyber Warfare.
- Allan Shivers.
- John Connally.
- U.S. Department of Homeland Security Public Org Chart - June 25, 2019.
Wednesday, April 3, 2024
Catching up with the Texas Tribune
The focus is on the governing institutions.
- Texas emergency director calls for firefighting air force after historic Panhandle fires.
- Influential conservative PAC wades into Texas Legislature primaries.
- Years ago, Texas hustled to get kids on state health care. Now it’s kicking them off.
- Texas emergency director calls for firefighting air force after historic Panhandle fires.
- Influential conservative PAC wades into Texas Legislature primaries.
- Years ago, Texas hustled to get kids on state health care. Now it’s kicking them off.
Tuesday, April 2, 2024
The Texas Tribune: House Speaker Dade Phelan’s immigration record central in bid to oust him
Catching up with the Texas speaker.
- Click here for the article.
Early in the 2023 legislative session, Republican House Speaker Dade Phelan vowed to present “a very innovative solution” to combat the surge in migrants attempting to enter Texas from Mexico — one that would test the limits of states’ roles in immigration enforcement.
HB 20 has since been overshadowed by Senate Bill 4, which lets any law enforcement officer arrest someone suspected of illegally crossing the border, a boundary-testing immigration law that has been put on hold amid legal challenges.
But the earlier proposal has resurfaced in the speaker’s own GOP primary as his critics blame him for its demise in their broader effort to paint the Beaumont Republican as soft on the border and overly deferential to Democrats. Phelan has slammed the attacks as “absurd” and “misleading” attempts to deflect from his oversight of other far-reaching border laws and a record $6.5 billion spending spree to pay for Abbott’s Operation Lone Star, which includes building a state border wall.
That has not stopped David Covey — the GOP activist and energy consultant who pushed Phelan into a May runoff for his House seat — from also condemning the speaker for not casting a vote on SB 4. Two of Covey’s most prominent backers, former President Donald Trump and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, have echoed the same attack.
House speakers rarely vote on legislation, and they control whether a bill can reach the floor — meaning SB 4 could not have passed without the green light from Phelan. The speaker argued as much in a post touting SB 4 as “the strongest border security law in the nation.” It would let authorities arrest people they suspect of illegally entering the state from another country and allow judges to order their removal, essentially granting deportation powers long reserved for the federal government.
The way immigration is playing into Phelan’s primary serves as a telling example of where things stand in Texas politics: the issue is being used as a cudgel to jeopardize the political career of a Republican speaker whose record includes an eightfold increase in Texas’ border security spending and passage of laws that dramatically expand state law enforcement’s immigration role.
Matthew Wilson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University, said it’s no surprise that Covey is trying to convince voters he is more committed to border issues than Phelan, given that “poll after poll shows that immigration and border issues are a central concern for Republicans.”
Monday, April 1, 2024
Mother Jones: Does “And” Really Mean “And”? Not Always, the Supreme Court Rules.
A look at how the Supreme Court can haggle over words.
- Click here for the article.
Just when you thought “and” meant “and,” and “or” meant “or,” along comes the Supreme Court to deliver the unsettling news: Your grammar is all wrong.
For anyone who isn’t a legal scholar, a copy editor, or an obsessive grammar nut, the debate here can be tough to follow. At issue was whether “and” in a provision of the Trump-era First Step Act was intentionally or mistakenly written to conjoin requirements for eligibility. For thousands of defendants, relief from mandatory minimum sentencing rested on whether “and” should be read as combining the set of conditions after the words “does not have.” In the puzzling provision, a defendant is eligible for relief if:
the defendant does not have—
(A) more than 4 criminal history points…;
(B) a prior 3-point offense…; and
(C) a prior 2-point violent offense…
(“Points” refers to the system of sentencing based on points assigned to various types of crimes.)
As I reported last year, lower courts were sharply divided on the vital question of whether “and” bundles the conditions—as in, you don’t have (A), don’t have (B), and don’t have (C)—which would mean a defendant who lacked any one of these conditions would be eligible for relief. The alternative reading, advocated by the Justice Department, holds that “and” really means “or”—that a defendant who met even one of the conditions would not be eligible for relief. In its 6–3 decision, the court sided with the DOJ’s interpretation, dramatically narrowing the scope of the law. The implications are profound: More than 10,000 people imprisoned since the law took effect will lose the chance to reduce their sentences, and thousands more will face stiffer sentencing in the future.
So how did the justices reach this conclusion?
Taken at face value, the petitioner’s reading seemed obvious: He was eligible for relief because he didn’t meet all three conditions bundled by “and.” But the court disagreed, saying that any of the conditions satisfies the “does not” test because the law’s calculations would be incoherent otherwise. Someone with both the 3-point offense from (B) and the 2-point offense from (C) would have at least 5 points and automatically exceed the 4 points in (A), making (A) extraneous. To give (A) meaning, the court said “and” has to function as “or.” The ordinary meaning of “and” would so disjoint the law mathematically that the court ruled from context, not just text.
The court also found unpersuasive the ordinary-meaning argument that “and” is always conjunctive after a negative, like “Don’t drink and drive” means you could maybe do either but can’t do both. Writing for the majority, Justice Elena Kagan brushed that example aside. “For every negative statement [the petitioner] offers up, another cuts the opposite way,” she noted, citing a counterexample: “If someone says ‘I’m not free on Saturday and Sunday’…he most likely means ‘I’m not free on Saturday and I’m not free on Sunday’; he is not saying that although he cannot go away for a full weekend, he can make plans on one of those days.”
Sunday, March 31, 2024
From the NYT: From Pizzagate to the 2020 Election: Forcing Liars to Pay or Apologize
Can misinformation be dealt with through the courts?
- Click here for the article.
Michael J. Gottlieb can never remember the exact amount — it’s $148,169,000— that a jury ordered Rudolph W. Giuliani to pay the Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. But Ms. Freeman’s words after the December 2023 victory are indelible to him.
“We are more than conquerors.”
Less than a decade ago, the two women would have struggled to find a lawyer. But Mr. Gottlieb, a partner at the firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher and a former associate counsel in the Obama White House, represented them for free. Convinced that viral lies threaten public discourse and democracy, he is at the forefront of a small but growing cadre of lawyers deploying defamation, one of the oldest areas of the law, as a weapon against a tide of political disinformation.
Mr. Gottlieb has also represented the owner of the Washington pizzeria targeted by “Pizzagate” conspiracy theorists as well as the brother of Seth Rich, a young Democratic National Committee staff member whose 2016 murder ignited bogus theories implicating his family. In the Giuliani case, Mr. Gottlieb, his law partner Meryl Governski and other members of his team worked with Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan group that pushes for laws and policies to counter what it sees as authoritarian threats.
The Washington Post: Half of senior staffers in Congress are so fed up that they may quit
Not great news. Staffers know how things work. This may help explain dysfunction in he institution.
- Click here for the article.
When it comes to job satisfaction, members of Congress aren’t the only ones considering calling it quits.
Given those assessments by the people who live and breathe these issues, this particularly glum finding should not come as a surprise: Almost half of senior congressional aides are considering leaving the Hill because of “heated rhetoric from the other party.”
These are just some of the findings from an investigation by the Congressional Management Foundation, a nonprofit that aims to improve both lawmaker effectiveness and constituent engagement. Situated seven blocks away from the Capitol in Eastern Market, the foundation conducts seminars for staff and offers research to outside groups trying to figure out the byzantine ways of the House and Senate.
Over the past seven years, the foundation has conducted three very deep dives into the lives of senior staff in Congress, understanding that these unelected officials wield tremendous clout and that their positive outlook — or lack thereof — can deeply affect the health of the institution.
The introduction to the latest “State of the Congress” report begins with a bleak three-word summation of things:
“Congress is broken.”
- Click here for the report.
Saturday, March 30, 2024
From the Texas Tribune: In El Paso, apathy, alienation and discontent with candidates drives low voter turnout
For our look at low voter turnout in Texas.
- Click here for the article.
On the sunny morning of Texas’ March primaries, Jorge Trujillo, 73, a retired packing factory salesperson, stood outside a senior center here canvassing for Homer Reza, a Democratic candidate for the Texas House.
“I think people have given up on politics,” Trujillo said, standing in the parking lot with his wife, Sylvia. “Seeing all this division, they simply don’t care anymore.”
The situation was stark, but not particularly surprising. This West Texas border town — with more than 677,000 residents, most of them Mexican American — is in a low voter-turnout county in a low voter-turnout state.
The county had 502,700 registered voters in the 2024 primaries, but only about 11% cast a ballot. That’s more than 7% lower than the last presidential primaries in 2020, and good for the second worst turnout rate in the state. In 2022 general midterm elections, 34% of El Paso’s registered voters cast a ballot, about 10% less than in the 2018 general midterms.
Statewide voter turnout for the 2024 primaries was 18%, lower than it was for the 2020 primaries. That’s typically low; Texas consistently ranks among the bottom 10 states in turnout.
While some political observers once again say the future of democracy is on the line in the 2024 presidential election, there appears to be voter fatigue — or apathy — in El Paso and elsewhere around the state.
On primary election day, The Texas Tribune spoke to voters and non-voters across various demographics and backgrounds in El Paso about why they were voting — or why they weren’t.
Among the reasons people gave: a general lack of knowledge about how to register, dissatisfaction with the two leading candidates for president and a lack of excitement for local candidates. Others said that state officials and presidential candidates are too focused on immigration, an issue they said that doesn’t directly affect them, even though they live on the border.
Some also expressed a feeling that has persisted for years in this border town nearly 600 miles from the state capital: El Paso is an afterthought for state officials in Austin.
Friday, March 29, 2024
What is a Strong Mayor?
Houston has one, but few other cities do.
- Wikipedia: Mayor–council government.
A mayor–council government is a system of local government in which a mayor who is directly elected by the voters acts as chief executive, while a separately elected city council constitutes the legislative body. It is one of the two most common forms of local government in the United States, and is the form most frequently adopted in large cities, although the other common form, council–manager government, is the local government form of more municipalities.
- Ballotpedia: Mayor-Council Government.
Mayor-council government is one of the five major types of municipal government found in cities and towns throughout the United States. The other four are council-manager, commission, town meeting, and representative town meeting.
In a mayor-council government, the mayor and city council work together to balance and pass a budget, draft and enforce legislation, and oversee city departments and appoint departmental heads. The dynamics of how the mayor and city council work together depend on the type of mayor-council government that a city uses.
For more:
- New Houston City Council powers are shifting the dynamic of the city's 'strong mayor' system.
- COUNCIL-MANAGER OR “STRONG MAYOR”
- The Houston mayor is a ‘strong mayor’ who will soon face a new limitation.
- How much power does Houston’s mayor have at City Hall? Maybe more than you think.
From Houston Chronicle: All the major leadership changes made by Houston Mayor Whitmire as he shakes up City Hall
For our look at the executive branch on the local level. Strong mayors can select the heads of city departments.
Relevant term: Strong Mayor.
See also: Houston City Departments.
- Click here for the article.
Houston Mayor John Whitmire has begun carrying out a series of leadership changes across city departments in a step toward delivering his campaign pledge to shake up key municipal operations.
Within the first month of his term, Whitmire has appointed new heads for the Finance Department, Department of Planning and Development and the Department of Neighborhoods. The ongoing personnel revamp has led to the departure of several long standing senior officials, some sparking public outcry.
Whitmire's election marked the first time in eight years that the city's top office changed hands. Here are the major personnel announcements made by the mayor or departing city officials.
Thursday, March 28, 2024
From NPR: California judge recommends disbarment of pro-Trump attorney John Eastman
- Click here for the story.
A California judge has formally recommended that attorney John Eastman lose his law license for his role in Donald Trump's legal effort to remain in power after losing the 2020 presidential election.
"Eastman's wrongdoing constitutes exceptionally serious ethical violations warranting severe professional discipline," wrote California State Bar Court Judge Yvette Roland in her decision. "Eastman made multiple patently false and misleading statements in court filings, in public remarks heard by countless Americans and to others regarding the conduct of the 2020 presidential election and Vice President Pence's authority to refuse to count or delay counting properly certified slates of electoral votes on January 6, 2021."
LII: Disbarment.
Disbarment is the most severe sanction for attorney misconduct, which involves the removal of an attorney's license to practice law. Since the court has exclusive responsibility to license lawyers, it has sole authority / discretion to remove the license; less severe sanctions like suspension, probation, and reprimand can also be used to sanction misconduct when appropriate.
State Bar of Texas: Punishment for Professional Misconduct.
Disbarment
This is the most severe discipline resulting in a complete loss of a respondent lawyer’s license to practice law. Once disbarred, the lawyer’s name is removed from the membership rolls of the Supreme Court and the lawyer is required to remit his or her law license and bar card.
After five years, a disbarred lawyer may petition a district court to be reinstated to the practice of law. The disbarred lawyer must prove that reinstatement is in the best interest of the public and the profession, as well as the ends of justice. If such an application is granted, the disbarred lawyer is not automatically granted a law license. The disbarred lawyer must still pass the Bar Exam administered by the Texas Board of Law Examiners.
During the 2011-12 Bar year, 8 disbarred lawyers filed petitions for reinstatement. Of those, 1 was dismissed by the respondent attorney, 1 was denied, and 6 remain pending.
The 2025 federal budget
- The federal budget process.
- White House: President’s Budget.
- House Budget Committee: Chairman Arrington Delivers Opening Statement at Hearing on The President’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Request with OMB Director Shalanda Young.
- Senate Budget Committee: The President’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Proposal.
Recent hearings in the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
A list of all the hearings held in 2024 through March.
- Click here for the committee.
By click on the links below we can get an idea about what networks exist surrounding each area of policy.
- Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Hearing - Advancing Scientific Discovery: Assessing the Status of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate
- Energy Subcommittee Hearing - Bridging the Valley of Death: ARPA-E's Role in Developing Breakthrough Technologies
- Environment Subcommittee Hearing - Winning in Weather: U.S. Competitiveness in Forecasting and Modeling
- Investigations & Oversight Subcommittee Hearing - Examining the Risk: The Dangers of EV Fires for First Responders
- Full Committee Hearing - Examining Federal Science Agency Actions to Secure the U.S. Science and Technology Enterprise
- Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Hearing - ISS and Beyond: The Present and Future of American Low-Earth Orbit Activities
- Joint Research & Technology and Energy Subcommittees Hearing - Federal Science Agencies and the Promise of AI in Driving Scientific Discoveries
- Research and Technology Subcommittee Hearing - From Risk to Resilience: Reauthorizing the Earthquake and Windstorm Hazards Reduction Programs
- Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Hearing - Returning to the Moon: Keeping Artemis on Track
- Click here for the committee.
By click on the links below we can get an idea about what networks exist surrounding each area of policy.
- Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Hearing - Advancing Scientific Discovery: Assessing the Status of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate
- Energy Subcommittee Hearing - Bridging the Valley of Death: ARPA-E's Role in Developing Breakthrough Technologies
- Environment Subcommittee Hearing - Winning in Weather: U.S. Competitiveness in Forecasting and Modeling
- Investigations & Oversight Subcommittee Hearing - Examining the Risk: The Dangers of EV Fires for First Responders
- Full Committee Hearing - Examining Federal Science Agency Actions to Secure the U.S. Science and Technology Enterprise
- Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Hearing - ISS and Beyond: The Present and Future of American Low-Earth Orbit Activities
- Joint Research & Technology and Energy Subcommittees Hearing - Federal Science Agencies and the Promise of AI in Driving Scientific Discoveries
- Research and Technology Subcommittee Hearing - From Risk to Resilience: Reauthorizing the Earthquake and Windstorm Hazards Reduction Programs
- Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Hearing - Returning to the Moon: Keeping Artemis on Track
From NASA: 20 Breakthroughs from 20 Years of Science aboard the International Space Station
Here is their list:
- Fundamental disease research
- Discovery of steadily burning cool flames
- Drug development using protein crystals
- Methods to combat muscle atrophy and bone loss
- Exploring the fifth state of matter
- Understanding how our bodies change in microgravity
- Testing tissue chips in space
- Stimulating the low-Earth orbit economy
- Growing food in microgravity
- Deployment of CubeSats from station
- Monitoring our planet from a unique perspective
- Collecting data on more than 100 billion cosmic particles
- A better understanding of pulsars and black holes
- Student access to an orbiting laboratory
- Capability to identify unknown microbes in space
- Opening up the field of colloid research
- The evolution of fluid physics research
- 3D printing in microgravity
- Responding to natural disasters
Wednesday, March 27, 2024
Tuesday, March 26, 2024
Argued before the U.S. Supreme Court: Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine
- Click here for ScotusBlog.
Issues:
(1) Whether respondents have Article III standing to challenge the Food and Drug Administration’s 2016 and 2021 actions with respect to mifepristone’s approved conditions of use;
(2) whether the FDA’s 2016 and 2021 actions were arbitrary and capricious; and
(3) whether the district court properly granted preliminary relief.
- Oyez.
- Wikipedia.
- What is the FDA?
- What is the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine?
From the U.S. House of Representatives: Committees No Longer Standing
The following Committees from the 117th Congress are no longer standing. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) will provide a website archive for these Committee websites in the Spring of 2023. Until those official archives are public, the links below provide access to the official documents of the committees no longer standing and access to known archival copies of the sites maintained by other House offices.
Visit GovInfo for published documents of Committees no longer standing prior to the 117th Congress.
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
- View official Committee reports,
- printed hearing records,
- and other publications of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis at GovInfo.gov
View the NARA archive of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis website
Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth
View official Committee reports,
- printed hearing records,
- and other publications of the Select Committee on Economic Disparity at GovInfo.gov
View the NARA archive of the Select Committee on Economic Disparity website
Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress
- View official Committee reports,
- printed hearing records,
- and other publications of the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress at GovInfo.gov
View the NARA archive of the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress website
Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol
- View official Committee reports,
- printed hearing records,
- and other publications of the Select Committee at GovInfo.gov
View the NARA archive of the January 6th Select Committee website
View the NARA archive of the January 6th Select Committee Report
- Congressman Bennie Thompson, the former Chair of the Select Committee, maintains an archival copy of content from the January 6th Select Committee website as part of his Congressional Member office website.
Visit GovInfo for published documents of Committees no longer standing prior to the 117th Congress.
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
- View official Committee reports,
- printed hearing records,
- and other publications of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis at GovInfo.gov
View the NARA archive of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis website
Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth
View official Committee reports,
- printed hearing records,
- and other publications of the Select Committee on Economic Disparity at GovInfo.gov
View the NARA archive of the Select Committee on Economic Disparity website
Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress
- View official Committee reports,
- printed hearing records,
- and other publications of the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress at GovInfo.gov
View the NARA archive of the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress website
Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol
- View official Committee reports,
- printed hearing records,
- and other publications of the Select Committee at GovInfo.gov
View the NARA archive of the January 6th Select Committee website
View the NARA archive of the January 6th Select Committee Report
- Congressman Bennie Thompson, the former Chair of the Select Committee, maintains an archival copy of content from the January 6th Select Committee website as part of his Congressional Member office website.
From the Washington Post: Baltimore Key Bridge collapses; search ongoing for 6 missing
The bridge is part of the federal interstate highway system, which means that the national government will handle cleanup and repairs.
We've been looking at the executive agencies set in motion after the collapse.
- Click here for the article.
Thursday, March 21, 2024
Wednesday, March 20, 2024
Word of the Day: Statecraft
From Merriam-Webster: the art of conducting state affairs.
Cambridge: the skill of governing a country.
From the State Department: 21st Century Statecraft.
Cambridge: the skill of governing a country.
From the State Department: 21st Century Statecraft.
From the Washington Post: Appeals court again blocks Texas from arresting and deporting migrants
Checks and balances and federalism at work here.
- Click here for the article.
A federal appeals court has again blocked a law that makes it a state crime for migrants to illegally cross the border into Texas, hours after the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority allowed the law to take effect while challenges to it continue through the court system.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit blocked enforcement of the law, known as S.B. 4, ahead of oral arguments scheduled for Wednesday morning.
Two justices in the Supreme Court majority had said the high court may again consider intervening after the 5th Circuit weighs the merits of the case. Their statement appeared to have an immediate effect, as the lower court quickly scheduled a hearing and later moved to block the law from implementation.
The law makes it a state crime for migrants to illegally cross the border and allows Texas officials to deport undocumented individuals, though Mexico said Tuesday that it would not accept anyone sent back by the state and condemned the law as “encouraging the separation of families, discrimination and racial profiling that violate the human rights of the migrant community.”
The statute was passed last year amid a record surge in border crossings, as part of Republican Gov. Greg Abbott’s push to expand the state’s role in immigration enforcement — historically part of the federal government’s control over international borders.
From Reason: Supreme Court Will Hear This Texas Woman's Challenge to a Politically Motivated Arrest
The problem with unrestrained police.
- Click here for the article.
Four years ago, Sylvia Gonzalez, a newly elected member of the Castle Hills, Texas, city council, was charged with concealing a government record, a misdemeanor that would have resulted in her removal from office if she had been convicted. Bexar County District Attorney Joe Gonzales declined to pursue the case, and it is not hard to see why. The charge, which was orchestrated by Gonzalez's political opponents, was based on what she describes as an honest mistake: After a city council meeting, she says, she accidentally picked up a bundle of petitions against City Manager Ryan Rapelye—petitions that she herself had organized—and placed it in her binder along with other papers.
- ScotusBlog: Gonzalez v. Trevino.
- Oyez: Gonzalez v. Trevino.
ScotusBlog: Court hears Texas city council member’s retaliatory arrest claim.
U.S. Supreme Court: Audio Recording.
Tuesday, March 19, 2024
Looking across the Rio Grande from Piedras Negras to Eagle Pass. March 2024
A video I took over the break.
Notable cities and counties with low population
As discussed in class today
- Carbonate, Colorado. - 0
- Monowi, Nebraska. - 1
- Loving County, Texas. - 64
- Carbonate, Colorado. - 0
- Monowi, Nebraska. - 1
- Loving County, Texas. - 64
Mussolini becomes absolute dictator (Il Duce) | The 20th century | World...
For out look at how dictators consolidate power.
Catching up with the Texas Tribune
- They counted primary ballots by hand. Now a Texas county Republican party says they found errors.
The election was a low-profile party primary, but stakes are high. Gillespie County Republicans, led by Campbell, decided months ago to hand-count more than 8,000 ballots. Experts agree and studies show the method is time-consuming, costly, less accurate, and less secure than using machines, but local Republicans, citing unsupported concerns about the accuracy of voting machines, were determined to try and show otherwise. Workers recruited and trained by the party counted until the early hours of the next morning, and declared the effort a success. Proponents of hand-counting are now touting Gillespie as a model.
The U.S. Supreme Court has blocked the law from going into effect and federal court challenges remain.
- Gov. Greg Abbott wants the Texas Legislature to rein in investors behind large-scale home purchases.
Gov. Greg Abbott called on state lawmakers Friday to try to limit Wall Street’s presence in the Texas housing market.
As the nation’s housing affordability crisis continues unabated, lawmakers and housing advocates have increasingly concentrated scrutiny on so-called institutional homebuyers, meaning investors big and small as well as corporations who buy single-family homes to rent them out. They accuse corporations and hedge funds of playing an outsized role in the homebuying market and outbidding would-be first-time homebuyers, even though estimates show investors own only a small percentage of the nation’s overall housing stock.
A spike in investor activity in the housing market in the COVID-19 pandemic era has since prompted lawmakers to try to curtail or even ban it as a means to bring down home prices and give first-time homebuyers a leg up in the market.
From ScotusBlog: Supreme Court skeptical of restricting government communications with social media companies
This covers both checks and balances and the free speech and/or press.
- Click here for the article.
After nearly two hours of oral argument on Monday, a majority of the justices appeared sympathetic to the Biden administration’s argument that a federal court in New Orleans went too far in an order that would limit the government’s ability to communicate with social media companies about their content moderation policies.
A federal judge in Louisiana agreed with the challengers that federal officials had violated the First Amendment by “coercing” or significantly encouraging” the content moderation decisions of social media platforms. U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty issued an order that limited communications between the White House and several other government agencies with social media platforms.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit largely upheld Doughty’s order, although it narrowed its application to a smaller group of officials, including the CDC, FBI, and the White House.
The Biden administration came to the Supreme Court, which agreed last fall to put Doughty’s order on hold and to weigh in on the merits of the case.
. . . Most of Monday’s argument, however, centered on the merits of the dispute – that is, whether the Biden administration’s contacts with social media platforms violated the challengers’ First Amendment rights. A majority of the justices appeared concerned that the challengers’ rule would sweep in too many government efforts to influence social media platforms, potentially prohibiting the government from acting to protect the public.
Fletcher described the government’s efforts to influence social media platforms in this case as a classic example of the “bully pulpit,” in which officials would “speak their mind and call on the public to act.” The court of appeals, he stressed, “mistook persuasion for coercion.” Efforts to persuade social media platforms cross the line only when they convey a threat of adverse government action, he insisted.
But Louisiana Solicitor General J. Benjamin Aguinaga countered that “the government’s levers of pressure are anathema to the First Amendment. Behind closed doors,” he told the justices, the government “badgers the platforms 24/7, it abuses them with profanity, it warns that the highest levels of the White House are concerned.”
. . . Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson outlined a hypothetical TikTok challenge involving teenagers jumping out of progressively higher windows, leading to serious injuries and even death. Could the government, she asked Aguinaga, “call the platforms and say: This information that you are putting up on your platform is creating a serious public health emergency, we are encouraging you to take it down?”
Aguinaga agreed that the government could call the platforms to flag the TikTok challenge as a problem, but he added that “the moment that the government tries to use its ability as the government and its stature as the government to pressure them to take it down, that is when you are interfering with the third party’s speech rights.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett also appeared concerned about the broad implications of the challengers’ position. She asked Aguinaga about a scenario in which he and other Louisiana state government officials were doxed, followed by social media posts “about how people should rally and do something about this.” Could the FBI, she queried, “really encourage” social media platforms to take down the posts?
Aguinaga appeared to suggest that it could not. “If what the FBI is trying to do is trying to persuade a speech intermediary to take down a private third party’s speech,” he reiterated, that would be “an abridgement of speech.”
- ScotusBlog: Murthy v. Missouri.
- Wikipedia: Murthy v. Missouri.
Monday, March 18, 2024
From the Houston Chronicle: Texas State Board of Education faces takeover by GOP challengers backed by influential donors
An example of the influence of money in politics.
- Click here for the article.
For more than 20 years, Fort Worth Republican Pat Hardy has been a reliably conservative voice on the State Board of Education.
But in 2024, Hardy is not conservative enough for Republican voters: She lost her primary election earlier this month against Brandon Hall, a former youth pastor who has pitched himself as a fighter for Christian conservative values.
In addition to Hardy’s outright loss, two other Republicans on the board — Pam Little and Tom Maynard — were forced into runoff elections against opponents pitching themselves as stronger conservatives. All three challengers received heavy financial support from Texans for Educational Freedom, a right-wing advocacy group that cut its teeth trying to sway local school board elections but has turned its attention to overhauling the state board, spending more than $300,000 this year.
Hall and the others are poised to have a big impact right away, as the board is scheduled to revise the state’s social studies curriculum standards next year for the first time in more than a decade. The board’s decisions will influence what children will learn about government, Texas history and American history, among other topics.
Despite getting contributions from three times as many donors, Hardy’s campaign only raised about a third as much as Hall, who brought in $146,623. Of that, $145,758 came from Texans for Educational Freedom — 99.4 percent.
Hall said he was proud to receive TEF’s support, which he said he earned because of his positions on the issues.
Fascism and Mussolini | The 20th century | World history | Khan Academy
Another look at how dictators consolidate power - this is what a system of separated powers is supposed to prevent.
Democracy Without Borders: Democracy declined in 42 countries in 2023, new V-Dem report says
A study by a think tank arguing that democracies are shrinking.
- Click here for the article.
The V-Dem Institute based in Gothenburg in Sweden has presented its annual report on the state of global democracy for the 8th consecutive year, gathering information from 202 countries and measuring over 600 different attributes of democracy. The report has become one of the most prominent sources in the state of democracy around the world.
According to V-Dem, the share of the world’s population living in autocratizing countries since 2009 has exceeded the proportion living in democratizing countries, with 71% of the world’s population or 5.7 billion people currently living in autocracies. This constitutes a 48% increase compared to ten years ago.
According to the report, autocratization in 2023 was ongoing in 42 countries, home to 35% of the world’s population, while democratization was taking place in 18 countries, hosting only 5% of the world’s population.
Sorted by the regime types identified by V-Dem, in 2023, 32 countries in the world were considered liberal democracies, 59 electoral democracies, 55 electoral autocracies and 33 closed autocracies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)