The Free Market, etc . . .

- The Free Market.

an unregulated system of economic exchange, in which taxes, quality controls, quotas, tariffs, and other forms of centralized economic interventions by government either do not exist or are minimal. As the free market represents a benchmark that does not actually exist, modern societies can only approach or approximate this ideal of efficient resource allocation and can be described along a spectrum ranging from low to high amounts of regulation.

- Supply and Demand.

relationship between the quantity of a commodity that producers wish to sell at various prices and the quantity that consumers wish to buy. It is the main model of price determination used in economic theory. The price of a commodity is determined by the interaction of supply and demand in a market. The resulting price is referred to as the equilibrium price and represents an agreement between producers and consumers of the good. In equilibrium the quantity of a good supplied by producers equals the quantity demanded by consumers.

- Market Failure. 

The failure of a market to deliver an optimal result. In particular, the economic theory of market failure seeks to account for inefficient outcomes in markets that otherwise conform to the assumptions about markets held by neoclassical economics (i.e., markets that feature perfect competition, symmetrical information, and completeness). When failure happens, less welfare is created than could be created given the available resources. The social task then becomes to correct the failure.

- - Public Goods

- - Externalities

- - Asymmetrical Information

- - Monopolies

- The U.S. Constitution and the Free Market:

- assure that the ground rules were fair (a fixed standard of weights and measures)
- encourage initiative and inventiveness (copyright and patent protection laws)
- provide a system of sound currency with an established value (gold and silver coin)
- enforce free trade (free from interfering special interests)
- protect individuals from the harmful acts of others

 - what else?

- The first congress.

- The evolution of executive agencies

Criticisms

Social Costs

- Rules biased in favor of suppliers

- The welfare of laborers

The City of Houston 2020 Budget

 This is dated, but it'll work for now.

- Click here for the source.

- Oklahoma gov calls on officials to resign after ‘hanging’ and racist remarks on tape.

 https://recordinglaw.com/united-states-recording-laws/one-party-consent-states/

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mccurtain-county-sheriff-kevin-clardy-illegal-recording_n_643ebeb7e4b011a819bd6016

What is the Labor Market?

The supply and demand for human labor.

Meaning you and me.

- From Investopedia: 

The labor market, also known as the job market, refers to the supply of and demand for labor, in which employees provide the supply and employers provide the demand. It is a major component of any economy and is intricately linked to markets for capital, goods, and services.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

- The labor market refers to the supply of and demand for labor, in which employees provide the supply and employers provide the demand.

- The labor market should be viewed at both the macroeconomic and microeconomic levels.

- Unemployment rates and labor productivity rates are two important macroeconomic gauges.

- Individual wages and the number of hours worked are two important microeconomic gauges.

- In the United States, the Bureau of Labor Statistics compiles detailed reports on national and local labor markets.

 

From the Des Moines Register: Senate passes bill loosening child labor laws to let Iowa teens work longer hours

Not law yet since it has not passed 

- Click here for the article.  

Iowa children would be allowed to work longer hours, including in jobs that are currently prohibited such as serving alcohol, under a bill passed by the Iowa Senate early Tuesday morning after a marathon session.

The Senate voted 32-17 just before 5 a.m. Tuesday to pass Senate File 542. Two Republicans, Sens. Charlie McClintock, R-Alburnett, and Jeff Taylor, R-Sioux Center, broke with their colleagues to join every Democrat in opposition.

The House must still pass the bill before it could go to Gov. Kim Reynolds for her signature.

The bill's Republican supporters said it will modernize Iowa's laws and teach children valuable skills through workforce training programs.

"While the responsibility of having a job might be more valuable than having a paycheck, the reward of the paycheck will allow these youth who want to have a job to possibly save for a car, maybe buy a prom dress, go to a summer camp, take a date out for the weekend," said Sen. Adrian Dickey, R-Packwood, the bill's floor manager.

Democrats argued the bill will increase the risk of workplace accidents by exposing inexperienced kids to more dangerous work environments. They tried unsuccessfully to amend the bill to offer additional workers compensation benefits for teenagers who get injured on the job.

"You don’t like it being branded as a bill about child labor, but yet your bill talks about kids getting injured in the workplace," said Sen. Nate Boulton, D-Des Moines. "So let’s make it about taking care of kids who are injured working in these jobs, because it will happen."

Senators stayed late Monday night and into the early hours of Tuesday morning before passing the bill at 4:52 a.m. The delay came after Dickey refused to yield to a question from Democrats about an amendment to the bill.

Democrats then went to hold a private caucus meeting, breaking up debate. Senate Republicans later drafted amendments to address some of the concerns Democrats were trying to raise.

The proposal has drawn condemnation from labor unions, which have held protests around the state in an effort to stop it.

And the U.S. Department of Labor's top lawyer, Solicitor of Labor Seema Nanda, criticized bills like those in Iowa and other states, calling it "irresponsible for states to consider loosening child labor protections."

Reynolds, a Republican, spoke favorably about the law earlier this month. She pointed to her own experience babysitting, waiting tables and working at Younkers when she was young.

"That’s good experience," she told reporters April 4. "You know, it teaches the kids a lot and if they have the time to do it and they want to earn some additional money I don’t think we should discourage that."

"Ultimately, parents and kids will decide if they want to work or not."

A Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll from March found 50% favor the proposal, while 42% oppose it and 8% are unsure.
What would Iowa's child labor bill do?

The bill would let the directors of the Iowa Department of Education or Iowa Workforce Development to grant exceptions allowing 14- to 17-year-olds to work in jobs currently banned for minors, as long as they are part of an approved training program with adequate supervision and safety precautions.

If the bill becomes law, 16- and 17-year-olds would be allowed to serve alcohol at restaurants, as long as the employer has written permission from the child's parent or guardian.

The Senate amended the bill early Tuesday to say minors could not serve alcohol in bars. The previous version of the bill would have allowed 16- and 17-year-olds to serve alcohol in both bars and restaurants.

"It was not intended to put minors in Tom’s Tavern slinging drinks, rather to allow these youth to work in Renee’s Restaurant," Dickey said.

The Senate also amended the bill Tuesday to clarify that 16- and 17-year-olds cannot work in strip clubs, although Senate Republicans said that has never been allowed under current law.

The bill would let kids under 16 work up to six hours a day, two more than the current maximum of four hours a day. And they could work longer into the evening — until 9 p.m. during the school year and until 11 p.m. during the summer.

Sixteen and 17-year-olds could work the same number of hours per day as adults.

It would also create a committee to study the possibility of letting teens 14 and older get a special driver's permit to drive to work. An earlier version of the bill would have simply authorized the new type of permits for teens.

Students ages 14½ or older can already get a special permit to drive to school.

And the bill says that teens who are injured on the job can seek benefits under the state's workers compensation program. The initial version did not include those protections for minors who could be hurt on the job.

The bill also eliminates decades-old provisions in current law that let children between the ages of 10 and 13 work in street occupations like selling newspapers, or migratory labor conditions.

From Texas: 

- Texas Child Labor Law – Labor Code Chapter 51

- Texas Child Labor Rules - Texas Administrative Code

- Texas Workforce Commission: Texas Child Labor Law.

 

- https://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/48654415.pdf

- https://www.epa.gov/superfund

- https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bondmarket.asp

From CBO: The Federal Budget in Fiscal Year 2021: An Infographic

- Click here for it. 

A good way to understand public policy is to note where the money is going. This should help.

The Income Tax and the Constitution

- History of taxation in the United States.

- The 16th Amendment.

- Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.

- Marginal Tax Rates.

- Development of the modern income tax.

- The 1040 Form.

- Deductions.

 https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2023/house-republican-five-families/

From the New York Times: How a Campaign Against Transgender Rights Mobilized Conservatives

For our look at social movements.

- Click here for the article. 

When the Supreme Court declared a constitutional right to same-sex marriage nearly eight years ago, social conservatives were set adrift.

The ruling stripped them of an issue they had used to galvanize rank-and-file supporters and big donors. And it left them searching for a cause that — like opposing gay marriage — would rally the base and raise the movement’s profile on the national stage.

“We knew we needed to find an issue that the candidates were comfortable talking about,” said Terry Schilling, the president of American Principles Project, a social conservative advocacy group. “And we threw everything at the wall.”

What has stuck, somewhat unexpectedly, is the issue of transgender identity, particularly among young people. Today, the effort to restrict transgender rights has supplanted same-sex marriage as an animating issue for social conservatives at a pace that has stunned political leaders across the spectrum. It has reinvigorated a network of conservative groups, increased fund-raising and set the agenda in school boards and state legislatures.

The campaign has been both organic and deliberate, and has even gained speed since Donald J. Trump, an ideological ally, left the White House. Since then, at least 20 states, all controlled by Republicans, have enacted laws that reach well beyond the initial debates over access to bathrooms and into medical treatments, participation in sports and policies on discussing gender in schools.

“We knew we needed to find an issue that the candidates were comfortable talking about,” said Terry Schilling, the president of American Principles Project, a social conservative advocacy group. “And we threw everything at the wall.”

About 1.3 million adults and 300,000 children in the United States identify as transgender. These efforts have thrust them, at a moment of increased visibility and vulnerability, into the center of the nation’s latest battle over cultural issues.

“It’s a strange world to live in,” said Ari Drennen, the L.G.B.T.Q. program director for Media Matters, a liberal media monitoring group that tracks the legislation. As a transgender woman, she said, she feels unwelcome in whole swaths of the country where states have attacked her right “just to exist in public.”

The effort started with a smattering of Republican lawmakers advancing legislation focused on transgender girls’ participation in school sports. And it was accelerated by a few influential Republican governors who seized on the issue early.

From the New York Times Magazine: How Much Power Should the Courts Have?

Very timely. Fits into our look at checks and balances.

- Click here for the article.

From the Washington Post: Russians boasted that just 1% of fake social profiles are caught, leak shows

Russia has always been good at propaganda.

- Click here for the article. 

The Russian government has become far more successful at manipulating social media and search engine rankings than previously known, boosting lies about Ukraine’s military and the side effects of vaccines with hundreds of thousands of fake online accounts, according to documents recently leaked on the chat app Discord.

The Russian operators of those accounts boast that they are detected by social networks only about 1 percent of the time, one document says.

That claim, described here for the first time, drew alarm from former government officials and experts inside and outside social media companies contacted for this article.

“Google and Meta and others are trying to stop this, and Russia is trying to get better. The figure that you are citing suggests that Russia is winning,” said Thomas Rid, a disinformation scholar and professor at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies. He added that the 1 percent claim was probably exaggerated or misleading.

The undated analysis of Russia’s effectiveness at boosting propaganda on Twitter, YouTube, TikTok, Telegram and other social media platforms cites activity in late 2022 and was apparently presented to U.S. military leaders in recent months. It is part of a trove of documents circulated in a Discord chatroom and obtained by The Washington Post. 

From the American Security Project: Propaganda: A Tool of Strategic Influence

This is a bit dated, but its makes the point that the use of propaganda is common in order to influence public opinion one way or another.

- Click here for it.

The purpose of this factsheet is to demonstrate that, regardless of the emotion aroused by the term, “propaganda” has been and will remain a prevalent aspect of U.S. foreign policy. Tis fact sheet does not purport to place a moral judgment on its use, but rather explore its institutional and legislative basis as a tool for influencing foreign audiences. Below is a brief look at the fundamentals of propaganda and the relationship it holds with public diplomacy and the U.S. Government.

Origin of the Term

Propaganda finds its root in the Latin word “propagare,” used to describe the process of aiding plant reproduction by using cuttings from the plant.

• The Roman Catholic Church assisted in the evolution of the term in the 17th
century with the establishment of the Congregatio de Propaganda Fide (the Congregation for Propagating the Faith).

• During the French Revolution, the term began to gain a more political rather than religious connotation.
        
• Continuing to evolve, by the mid-19th century, propaganda bore the political connotation it carries today.

Definition

Propaganda has many “official” definitions, however many of these carry subtle nuances. In its basic sense, propaganda can be defined as:

• Ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one’s cause or to damage an opposing cause.
Propaganda can be and often is completely truthful information. Tis information, while truthful, is often presented selectively to highlight some facts while omitting others that may present a differing view of an issue. As the term propaganda received an increasingly negative association, policy makers sought to distance themselves from outright promotion of its use. Illustrating this, Edmund Gullion, Dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University in1965, established the modern use of the term “public diplomacy” which he said, “deals with the influence ofp ublic attitudes on the formation and execution of foreign policies.”

Furthermore, in describing his effort to create a name for to the activities we now understand as public diplomacy, Gullion stated: “To connote this activity, we at the Fletcher School tried to find a name. I would have liked to call it ‘propaganda.’ It seemed like the nearest thing in the pure interpretation of the word to what we were doing. But ‘propaganda’ has always a pejorative connotation in this country. To describe the whole range of communications, information, and propaganda, we hit upon ‘public diplomacy’.”

Types

Propaganda comes in three different forms, white, grey and black:

• White: propaganda is correctly attributed to its true source and generally uses facts and truthful messages in a persuasive manner. Although it relies on truth, it is often presented in a biased manner.

• Grey: propaganda does not have a specifically identified source, and conceals its originator.

• Black: propaganda is falsely attributed to a source other than the true originator.

It can also describe the use of disinformation which spreads false information as truth to an audience with the intent that the audience does not realize it is being propagandized.

Propaganda vs. Public Diplomacy

Propaganda is better categorized as a sub-set of public diplomacy, rather than being equivalent to public diplomacy. Dr. Nicholas J. Cull, a leading scholar on the subjects of public diplomacy and propaganda, lays out some of the key differences between public diplomacy and propaganda:

U.S. Government Institutional and Legislative History

The use of propaganda in or by America is steeped in history dating back to the Revolution, with pieces like Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” a pamphlet which made the argument for American independence. Listed below is a chronological outline of some of the legislation and U.S. government institutions that have been tasked with conducting U.S. propaganda or related activities since the First World War:

• Woodrow Wilson created the Committee on Public Information with Executive Order 2594 on April13, 1917, which was designed to generate and maintain public support for U.S. participation in World War I. It conducts activities domestically and overseas.

• The Office of War Information (OWI) was established on June 13, 1942 and operated until September15, 1945. Its audience was both foreign and domestic. In 1943, Congress greatly cut OWI’s domestic budget for FY1944, primarily over its publication “Negroes and the War.”

Don't Be A Sucker (1947)

Thoughts on propaganda from the U.S. War Department following WW2.

Company Towns

 For our look at local governments

- Company Towns.

- List of company towns in the United States.

- The Controversial History of America's Company Towns.

- PBS: Company Towns.

- America’s Company Towns, Then and Now.

- The Modern Company Town.

Culture Wars

- Wikipedia. 

Bills discussed in GOVT 2306 SCHS

https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=88R&Bill=SB39

https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=88R&Bill=SJR6

_____

https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=88R&Bill=SB12

_____


https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=88R&Bill=SB728

 https://static.nomic.ai/pubmed.html. 

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.17012.pdf

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsurg.2022.864792/full?twclid=24zo6w0ixpomsg7n4jdyec0y04&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_content=i4&utm_campaign=imp_impart-_02-23_fsurg_en_n-fsurg-eur-nam-jpn-anz

 https://houston.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/CoverSheet.aspx?ItemID=28072&MeetingID=590&fbclid=IwAR0QZNbGbNJPsjCSePGm7Z3Iqm4igxwLW5exbUHLEgTBMlqMQOWps5Wekfs&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

The smearing of Garrett Foster

- From Radley Balko. 

Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration

 - Wikipedia.

City of Palestine vs. Jerry Laza

From Palestine, Texas

- Click here from it.

“An act concerning Servants and Slaves” (1705), etc . . .

- Click here for the text.

- Click here for the Wikipedia entry. 

__________

For related info: 

- Ordinance of Laborers, 1349.

- Texas Constitution, 1861: Article VIII: Slaves.

- Texas Black Codes, 1866.

From Virtual Jamestown: Articles, Lawes, and Orders, Divine, Politique, and Martiall for the Colony in Virginea

A good look at how hierarchy was established in the Jamestown Colony.

- Click here for it.

Greg Abbott's Jury Nullification

- Click here for it. 

- Abbott calls for pardon, lawyers call for new trial after Army sergeant is convicted of murder.

By request - my cats, about a year ago :)

 

From Legal Match: How to Sue in Texas

Don't tell me you haven't learned anything useful in this class. If I was still giving you written assignments I'd ask you to find something to sue me about. 

:) 

- Click here for it.

Catching up on the 88th Texas Legislature

These are the bills that have been sent to committee that deal with aspects of the Texas Judiciary.

- Texas House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence Committee. 

- Texas Senate Jurisprudence Committee.

Following up on the federal judges decision against Mifesprone

- Justice Department appeals Texas abortion pill ruling.

The Justice Department on Monday appealed a Texas judge’s decision that would block access to a key abortion drug across the country, arguing that the challengers had no right to file the lawsuit since they were not personally harmed by the abortion pill.

- - Click here for the appeal.

- - Appeals court temporarily keeps abortion pill available but limits access.

- - Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk.

- - - Wikipedia: Matthew J. Kacsmaryk.

- - - Click here for his original decision.

- - - For comparison, a contrary opinion from Washington state.

- - Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

What is Discovery?

Discovery is on the news currently because lawyers for Fox News apparently violated discovery rules and the judge in the case is not happy about it. 

- Judge Imposes Sanction on Fox for Withholding Evidence in Defamation Case.

The judge overseeing Dominion Voting Systems’ lawsuit against Fox News said on Wednesday that he was imposing a sanction on the network and would very likely start an investigation into whether Fox’s legal team had deliberately withheld evidence, scolding the lawyers for not being “straightforward” with him.

The rebuke came after lawyers for Dominion, which is suing for defamation, revealed a number of instances in which Fox’s lawyers had not turned over evidence in a timely manner. That evidence included recordings of the Fox News host Maria Bartiromo talking with former President Donald J. Trump’s lawyers, Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, which Dominion said had been turned over only a week ago.

In imposing the sanction on Fox, Judge Eric M. Davis of the Delaware Superior Court ruled that if Dominion had to do additional depositions, or redo any, then Fox would have to “do everything they can to make the person available, and it will be at a cost to Fox.”

He also said he would very likely appoint a special master — an outside lawyer — to investigate Fox’s handling of discovery of documents and the question of whether Fox had inappropriately withheld details about the scope of Rupert Murdoch’s role. Since Dominion filed its suit in early 2021, Fox had argued that Mr. Murdoch and Fox Corporation, the parent company, should not be part of the case because Mr. Murdoch, the chair, and other senior executives had nothing to do with running Fox News. But in the past few days, Fox disclosed to Dominion that Mr. Murdoch was a corporate officer at Fox News.

So what is it?

- From LII: Discovery.

In civil actions, the discovery process refers to what parties use during pre-trial to gather information in preparation for trial.

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have very liberal discovery provisions. Before the rules were adopted in 1938, plaintiffs essentially had to prove their case before filing suit. See notice pleading. The Federal Rules changed that such that under the rules' liberal discovery approach, plaintiffs who strongly suspect that they were wronged can file a lawsuit, even if they do not have solid evidence. Additionally, during discovery, they can force the defendant to give them evidence that they can use to build their case.

Discovery under the Federal Rules is very broad. According to Rule 26(b)(1), "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any non-privileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense." The federal rules also provide several tools that can be used to get information from other parties, including interrogatories, depositions, and requests for admission. A party may also compel other parties to give them access to documents, real property, or other things for review or testing. See Rules 26-37.

Complying with discovery rules is particularly difficult and expensive for institutional defendants because it takes time and incurs legal fees. This difficulty is somewhat mitigated by rules allowing defendants to simply grant plaintiffs access to their records, effectively telling them "if you want it, find it for yourself." See Rule 33. This does not, however, reduce the legal expenses involved in reviewing and responding to discovery requests. Depositions are particularly expensive.

In most states, an attorney’s work product is not obtainable through disclosure. This is an unqualified immunity regardless of subject matter. “Material prepared for litigation” is not absolutely protected, however. That generally means that work prepared by non-attorneys for the litigation would be discoverable. For example, in People v. Kozlowski, 11 N.Y.3d 223 (2008), notes from director interviews taken during a law firm’s internal investigation were not protected from a subpoena filed by the defendants.

From the ABA: How do Courts Work?

An insider look at the process.

- Click here for it. 

>>Diagram of How a Case Moves Through the Courts
>>Civil and Criminal Cases
>>Settling Cases
>>Pre-trial Procedures in Civil Cases
>>Jurisdiction and Venue
>>Pleadings
>>Motions
>>Discovery
>>Pre-Trial Conferences
>>Pre-trial Procedures in Criminal Cases
>>Bringing the Charge
>>Arrest Procedures
>>Pre-Trial Court Appearances in Criminal Cases
>>Bail
>>Plea Bargaining
>>Civil and Criminal Trials
>>Officers of the Court
>>The Jury Pool
>>Selecting the Jury
>>Opening Statements
>>Evidence
>>Direct Examination
>>Cross-examination
>>Motion for Directed Verdict/Dismissal
>>Presentation of Evidence by the Defense
>>Rebuttal
>>Final Motions
>>Closing Arguments
>>Instructions to the Jury
>>Mistrials
>>Jury Deliberations
>>Verdict
>>Motions after Verdict
>>Judgment
>>Sentencing
>>Appeals

For more:  

- Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

From Wikipedia: 2023 Pentagon document leaks

This didn't take long. This is worth following.

- Click here for it. 

In April 2023, two sets of classified documents of the United States began circulating on Twitter, Telegram, and 4chan. The documents, primarily relating to the Russo-Ukrainian War, included details about foreign nations, including North Korea, China, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates. The documents began spreading on the instant messaging platform Discord, and allegedly originate from a Discord server known as "Thug Shaker Central", according to a Bellingcat investigation. A subset of documents were sent to Discord servers for a British-Filipino YouTuber and the sandbox video game Minecraft in late February and early March. In April, a 4chan user posted several documents on the website's political imageboard /pol/. The documents were then spread throughout pro-Russian Telegram channels; at least one image was altered to show more Ukrainian casualties than Russian casualties.

The documents concern intelligence that the United States has on other nations, and contain operational briefs from the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Regarding the Russo-Ukrainian War, the documents suggest difficulties for both Russians and Ukrainians, in equal part; while one slide suggests that more Russians have died in the war than Ukrainians, several documents covering the Battle of Bakhmut suggest difficulties for Ukrainians in countering Russian flanking maneuvers and supply shortages in the area. Additionally, relations between Russia and other nations are covered, with multiple documents detailing efforts by Russian military intelligence agency GRU and paramilitary organization Wagner Group in promoting Russian ideals while downplaying American values. Other documents reveal attempts by Wagner Group to acquire weapons in Turkey, a NATO member. One set of documents alleges that Mossad encouraged staff and citizens to participate in judicial reform protests.

The leak has spurred a diplomatic crisis between the United States and the Five Eyes. An interagency effort—composed of the Department of Defense, the White House, the Department of State, and the U.S. intelligence community—are assessing the leak. Concurrently, the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation have opened a criminal inquiry into the leaker. U.S. officials have accused Russia of being behind the leak.[1][2] Ukraine and Russia have downplayed the leak, with both countries saying that the documents contain distorted figures. Specific claims in the leaks have been denied by some countries, such as by South Korea[3] and Egypt.

From ABC13: Changes could be coming to Texas courts as 2 bills prioritize murder trials, add more courts

A look at changes in the criminal justice system considered by the 88th Texas Legislature.

- Click here for the story.

Two important bills that can make an impact on the court system are making their way before the legislature in Austin this session.

The first bill is Senate Bill 402, the sponsors' goals are to prioritize murder and capital murder court cases.

The other is House Bill 130, it's the push for more courts to alleviate the backlog in Harris County.

This week, Harris County commissioners approved support for HB130 which would add six criminal courts in Harris County.

Here's why it's important.

"We haven't added but one court since 1984," county Commissioner Adrian Garcia said.

Since then, he says the population of Harris County has roughly doubled.

"So this is critical when you think about the growth and exposure of our population that we have to have a system that is sustainable from the standpoint of the need that comes our way," Garcia added.

State Rep. Ann Johnson, D-Houston, a sponsor of the bill, said in a statement that the citizens of Harris County need help restoring their faith in the justice system. According to lawmakers, in Harris County, there are more than 1,800 murder or capital murder cases still awaiting trial. Supporters of the bill hope it won't only reduce the backlog at the courthouse but the overcrowding at the jail. Meanwhile, critics are worried about the cost.

"From a budgetary, having a well-run courthouse has an impact on the sheriff's jail operations...it can keep us from having to outsource inmates that cost us over 11 million dollars a year," Garcia said.

A separate bill was passed by the Senate, SB402, this week that would prioritize murder and capital murder cases over other criminal trials. That bill has to pass the house before it can become law. Two important pieces of legislation we're watching closely.

Also: 

- Proposal to add more criminal courts to help ease backlog in Harris County.

Should Harris County add six extra district courts?

Harris County commissioners are exploring the proposal as a way to reduce the county's huge criminal case backlog.

As of Tuesday, there are 10,016 inmates at the Harris County Jail. 13 investigates reported jail overcrowding for more than a year.

So far, in 2023, four inmates have died. On Friday, Eyewitness News reported the jail is, once again, on the state inspector's non-compliance list.

According to district court statistics, there are more than 39,000 active cases pending. About 32% of them are more than a year old.

Adding courts isn't a new idea. Harris County brought in multiple visiting judges in January 2021 for the same purpose.

Since two Harris County commissioners court members boycotted multiple meetings in 2022, commissioners were unable to pass a new budget last year, and there are funding questions this year.

This proposal would mean asking the state legislature to allocate more money to put in the extra courts.

On Tuesday, every single commissioner expressed support for the plan. But a decision was delayed for another three weeks, while commissioners gathered more information.

"We've seen a 24% reduction in the backlog, but the jail is more overcrowded than ever. So does going through these things faster actually reduce overcrowded in the jail? Why is it that the jail population keeps growing? That's an open question that I'm going to ask our departments to go look into," County Judge Lina Hidalgo said.

The county budget office said the plan would cost an estimated $30 million in start-up costs and about $16 million in operating fees every year.

Judiciary of Puerto Rico

- Click here for it

- and here.

- United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico.

Can you patent an idea?

- Click here.

For 4/11/23

- U.S. Constitution: Article 3.

- - Avalon.

- - Annotated.

- U.S. Courts.

- Judicial Administration.

- U.S. Supreme Court.

- Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

- Southern District Court of Texas.

- Southern District of Texas: Houston Division.

Recent happenings in the judiciary:

For both 2305 and 2306.

Let's try to understand the nature of the conflict in each of these. And of course, there are many many more.



- Federal judge in Texas suspends FDA approval of abortion pill.

- U.S. Army sergeant found guilty of murder in 2020 shooting of Austin protester Garrett Foster.

- - Gov. Greg Abbott backs call for pardon for Daniel Perry, who killed Austin protester in 2020.

- The Army increasingly allows soldiers charged with violent crimes to leave the military rather than face trial.

- Jury Awards $26 Million to Family of Teenager Killed by Former Balch Springs Officer.

- Thousands of Cases Have Piled Up in Texas Courts—Here's What Lawyers Need to Know.

- Supreme Court sides with Texas death row inmate who says conviction was based on bad DNA evidence.

- Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and Supreme Court issue 12 opinions from March 6-12.

- Texas synagogue arsonist who confessed to crime in his journal pleads guilty to hate crime charges.

- Court orders anonymous jury in civil suit over alleged rape by Trump.

State Of The Judiciary - March 23, 2021

For more: 

- Texas Supreme Court chief justice calls for higher judicial salaries, business courts.

- 

From the NYT: Pressured by Their Base on Abortion, Republicans Strain to Find a Way Forward

An interesting example of the tension that can exist within a party due to the fact that the positions necessary to win a primary election may not be those necessary to win a general election. They may in fact jeopardize success in the general election.  

- Click here for the article. 

Republican leaders have followed an emboldened base of conservative activists into what increasingly looks like a political cul-de-sac on the issue of abortion — a tightly confined absolutist position that has limited their options ahead of the 2024 election season, even as some in the party push for moderation.

Last year’s Supreme Court decision overturning a woman’s constitutionally protected right to an abortion was supposed to send the issue of abortion access to the states, where local politicians were supposed to have the best sense of the electorate’s views. But the decision on Friday by a conservative judge in Texas, invalidating the Food and Drug Administration’s 23-year-old approval of the abortion pill mifepristone, showed the push for nationwide restrictions on abortion has continued since the high court’s nullification of Roe v. Wade.

Days earlier, abortion was the central theme in a liberal judge’s landslide victory for a contested and pivotal seat on the state Supreme Court in Wisconsin. Some Republicans are warning that the uncompromising position of their party’s activist base could be leading them over an electoral cliff next year.

“If we can show that we care just a little bit, that we have some compassion, we can show the country our policies are reasonable, but because we keep going down these rabbit holes of extremism, we’re just going to keep losing,” said Representative Nancy Mace, Republican of South Carolina, who has repeatedly called for more flexibility on first-term abortions and exceptions for rape, incest and the life and health of the mother. “I’m beside myself that I’m the only person who takes this stance.”

She is far from the only one.

The chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, Ronna McDaniel, has been showing polling to members of her party demonstrating that Americans largely accept abortion up to 15 weeks into a pregnancy and support the same exemptions that Ms. Mace wants. Dan O’Donnell, a conservative radio host in Wisconsin, wrote after the lopsided conservative defeat in the state Supreme Court contest that abortion was driving young voters to the polls in staggering numbers and that survival of the party dictated compromise.

“Because we keep going down these rabbit holes of extremism, we’re just going to keep losing,” said Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina, a Republican who supports flexibility on abortion rights.

“As difficult as this may be to come to grips with, Republicans are on the wrong side politically of an issue that they are clearly on the right side of morally,” he wrote.

From the Washington Post: Employment law still has roots in the Middle Ages. That’s terrible for workers.

Another example of unequal treatment.

- Click here for the article. 

Imagine clearing out your desk on the last day of your job, ready to begin a higher-paying position elsewhere. But just as you turn in your keys, your boss hands you a court order preventing you from taking your new job. Instead, you need to come back tomorrow to the same job — for the same pay — if you want to work at all.

This is exactly what happened in January to seven employees of ThedaCare, a health-care system in Wisconsin. As the employees were preparing to leave their positions for more lucrative jobs at Ascension, another regional health-care network, ThedaCare sued Ascension and asked a court for a restraining order — which was granted — to stop the workers from taking the Ascension jobs until ThedaCare could hire their replacements. This happened even though there was no dispute that the workers were “at-will” employees and supposedly free to quit at any time.

The restraining order was lifted three days later, but for those three days the employees were essentially held against their will by ThedaCare with no certainty about when — or if — the court would allow them to start their new jobs.

While observers expressed shock and outrage, the court's initial order is less surprising when considered in light of the historical roots of U.S. employment law, which has its origins in English laws governing the relationship between domestic servants and their masters.

Those laws, which arose from medieval norms that English courts enforced, created a rigidly hierarchical relationship between masters and servants. Servants were typically bound to work for their masters for a specific duration. During the term of service, a servant was expected to live in the master’s house, abide by the master’s rules and perform whatever tasks the master requested. No matter how bad working conditions were, the servant could not quit, since their labor was considered the property of the master. In fact, masters could have servants arrested if they attempted to leave their service early.

Beginning in the 1700s, scholars and judges began applying master/servant rules to other types of work relationships that were historically less hierarchical. By the late 1800s, the master/servant paradigm had effectively become the default legal model for all employment relationships in the United States. Factory workers who quit their jobs could be arrested for vagrancy and forced to choose between returning to the factory or staying in jail. Farmhands hired for the harvest season were forced to follow every one of their employer’s commands — no matter how unfair or dangerous — or else risk being fired without receiving any pay.

Laws passed by Congress and the states since then have hacked away some of the worst parts of this legal heritage. Employees today have the right, for example, to be paid a minimum wage, have a workplace free of health and safety hazards, and to engage in collective action or join a union to press for better pay and working conditions.

- Law, Labor, and Ideology in the Early American Republic.

- Ordinance of Labourers 1349.

The Ordinance of Labourers 1349 (23 Edw. 3) is often considered to be the start of English labour law. Specifically, it fixed wages and imposed price controls; required all those under the age of 60 to work; prohibited the enticing away of another's servants; and other terms.

The ordinance was issued in response to the 1348−1350 outbreak of the Black Death in England. During this outbreak, an estimated 30−40% of the population died. The decline in population left surviving workers in great demand in the agricultural economy of Britain.

Landowners had to face the choice of raising wages to compete for workers or letting their lands go unused. Wages for labourers rose and translated into inflation across the economy as goods became more expensive to produce. The wealthy elites suffered under the sudden economic shift. Difficulties in hiring labour created frustration. John Gower commented on post-plague labourers: "they are sluggish, they are scarce, and they are grasping. For the very little they do they demand the highest pay." On the other hand, while some workers suffered from increasing prices, others benefited from the higher wages they could command during this period of labour shortage.

The law was issued by King Edward III of England on 18 June 1349.

The ordinance required several things, including:

- Everyone under 60 must work.
- Employers must not hire excess workers.
- Employers may not pay and workers may not receive wages higher than pre-plague levels.
- Food must be priced reasonably with no excess profit.
- No one, under the pain of imprisonment, was to give any thing to able-bodied beggars 'under the colour of pity or alms'.

The ordinance has largely been seen as ineffective.[4] Despite the English parliament's attempt to reinforce the ordinance with the Statute of Labourers of 1351, workers continued to command higher wages and the majority of England (those in the labouring class) enjoyed a century of relative prosperity before the ratio of labour to land restored the pre-plague levels of wages and prices.

The BRUTAL Peasants' Revolt Of 1381

What was Feudalism?

Old Number 7 and Old Number 2

 

From Cision Distribution: FTX Debtors Release Report on FTX Group's Control Failures

An internal report on what went wrong at FTX. Apparently its what you would expect.

"While the FTX Group’s failure is novel in the unprecedented scale of harm it caused in a nascent industry, many of its root causes are familiar: hubris, incompetence, and greed."

As we get into public policy - and especially regulatory policy - we'll note that over history these types of things have led to the passage of laws creating regulations.

- Click here for the report. 

WILMINGTON, Del., April 9, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- FTX Trading Ltd. (d.b.a. FTX.com), and its affiliated debtors (together, the "FTX Debtors") today announced the release of their first report, which identifies and discusses control failures by FTX Group's previous management team in critical areas, including management and governance, finance and accounting, digital asset management, information security and cybersecurity (the "Report"). The Report is based on the Debtors' review of terabytes of electronic data and communications, more than one million documents, and interviews conducted with 19 former FTX Group employees, among other information. This work was undertaken by the Debtors through a team of legal, restructuring, forensic accounting, cybersecurity, computer engineering, cryptography, blockchain and other experts.

The Report and related information can be found on the docket of the Chapter 11 cases and posted on the quick links section of the FTX Debtors Kroll site at https://cases.ra.kroll.com/FTX/.

John J. Ray III, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Restructuring Officer of the FTX Debtors, said: "We are releasing the first report in the spirit of transparency that we promised since the beginning of the Chapter 11 process. In this report, we provide details on our findings that FTX Group failed to implement appropriate controls in areas that were critical for safeguarding cash and crypto assets. FTX Group was tightly controlled by a small group of individuals who falsely claimed to manage FTX Group responsibly, but in fact showed little interest in instituting oversight or implementing an appropriate control framework. We are continuing our efforts to review the events that factored into the fall of FTX and to identify and recover as much value as possible for creditors."

 https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/04/07/trucks-outnumber-cars/

The pros and cons of supermajorities.

At the heart of the recent events in Tennessee lies the problems when a group in a legislature becomes large enough to be a supermajority, meaning that they cannot be checked by any other forces within the legislature.

For an upcoming discussion: 

- Wikipedia: Supermajority.

- The Case for Supermajority Rules.

- The Problems with a Supermajority.

- Supermajority Votes in the House.

- Do Supermajority Rules Limit or Enhance Majority Tyranny? Evidence from the US States, 1960-1997.

 
 

Tudor Sumptuary Laws or Statutes of Apparel

An effective way to distinguish people according to rank.



- Britannica: Sumptuary Laws.

- Wikipedia: Sumptuary Law.

- Sumptuary Laws And Taxes, Colonial.

The Tennessee Purge

We discussed purges in previous lectures and the role they play in allowing one group to dominate an institution by simply getting rid of the others.

That's one way to think about what happened in Tennessee recently.

- Tennessee House Ousts 2 Democratic Lawmakers: What You Need to Know.

Article One of the U.S. Constitution contains a provision that allows the House and Senate to expel a member with a 2/3rds vote. 

From Academia: Land of the Freeholder: How Property Rights Make Local Voting Rights

Before voting rights come property rights.

- Click here for the article. 

Abstract

A large body of research documents the dominance of homeowners in local politics. There has been little scholarship, however, on the role that voting institutions have played in empowering homeowners from this country’s inception; indeed, most accounts describe property qualifications for voting and officeholding as largely fading from view by the mid-1800s. Combining a novel analysis of state constitutions and constitutional conventions with data on state statutes, this article explores the emergence of property qualifications for voting, with a particular emphasis on their role in local politics. We find that, counter most historical narratives, property requirements persisted well into the 20th century, with almost 90 percent of property requirements restricting voting and officeholding at the local level. Most centered on local bond referenda, school districts, and land use—suggesting that homeowner citizens were granted particular political control over local taxation and public services. These requirements were largely clustered in the American South and West—emerging alongside Jim Crow laws and mass availability of federal public lands—and were not eliminated until the Supreme Court took action. This article illuminates the important role that voting institutions played in linking homeownership with American democratic citizenship, especially at the local level. 

From the Galveston Daily News: Pagourtzis' attorneys seek to disqualify judge over past legal practice

This takes us back to the Santa Fe shooting. The trial has not exactly been speedy.

- Click here for the story.

Attorneys for accused Santa Fe school shooter Dimitrios Pagourtzis argue Judge Jeth Jones should be disqualified because of past association with a lawyer briefly involved in the case, according to a motion filed Tuesday.

Nicholas Poehl, the main attorney representing Pagourtzis, argues Jones, presiding judge of the 122nd District Court, should be disqualified because he was in legal practice with with Jared Robinson, who’s now judge of the 405th District Court, according to the motion.

Poehl, Robinson and attorney Robert Barfield spoke to and provided legal advice to Pagourtzis on May 18, 2018, the day of the shooting, which created an attorney-client relationship, according to the motion.

Robinson at the time was in practice with Jones through the firm Jones Robinson LLP, according to the motion. Robinson and Jones discontinued their association two days later, according to the motion.

"Although Robinson was briefly on the team and in a limited capacity, Jones is still considered a part of that group,” Poehl said. “Jones and Robinson are the same person for these purposes.”

Under Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, a judge must be disqualified from any proceeding in which the judge has served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter.

Judicial disqualification must meet two prongs: The judge or the judge’s firm was the attorney for the party in the case, and the matter before the judge is the same matter that was before the judge or judge’s law firm.

Pagourtzis’ defense team on March 13 filed a motion to recuse Jones from the case, which has yet to be heard by Administrative Judge Susan Brown.

Attorney General Ken Paxton also weighed in on the case March 30, when he filed a motion in the 122nd District Court to vacate Jones’ March 10 order to require Dr. Joseph Penn to perform a new competency examination of Pagourtzis.

Brown is scheduled to hear both the recusal motion and the motion to disqualify on April 20.

For more: 

- Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

- JETH JONES FOR GALVESTON 122ND DISTRICT COURT.

- Jeth Jones (Texas 122nd District Court, Texas, candidate 2022).

- 122nd Judicial District Court.

From ProPublica: Clarence Thomas and the Billionaire

A look at the influence of money on the Supreme Court - FYI, money is not supposed to influence the members of the Supreme Court. 

- Click here for the article.

IN LATE JUNE 2019, right after the U.S. Supreme Court released its final opinion of the term, Justice Clarence Thomas boarded a large private jet headed to Indonesia. He and his wife were going on vacation: nine days of island-hopping in a volcanic archipelago on a superyacht staffed by a coterie of attendants and a private chef.If Thomas had chartered the plane and the 162-foot yacht himself, the total cost of the trip could have exceeded $500,000. Fortunately for him, that wasn’t necessary: He was on vacation with real estate magnate and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, who owned the jet — and the yacht, too.

For more than two decades, Thomas has accepted luxury trips virtually every year from the Dallas businessman without disclosing them, documents and interviews show. A public servant who has a salary of $285,000, he has vacationed on Crow’s superyacht around the globe. He flies on Crow’s Bombardier Global 5000 jet. He has gone with Crow to the Bohemian Grove, the exclusive California all-male retreat, and to Crow’s sprawling ranch in East Texas. And Thomas typically spends about a week every summer at Crow’s private resort in the Adirondacks.

The extent and frequency of Crow’s apparent gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the U.S. Supreme Court.

These trips appeared nowhere on Thomas’ financial disclosures. His failure to report the flights appears to violate a law passed after Watergate that requires justices, judges, members of Congress and federal officials to disclose most gifts, two ethics law experts said. He also should have disclosed his trips on the yacht, these experts said.

Who is Harlan Crow? 

- From Wikipedia.

- From Open Secrets.

- From Crow Holdings.

- Statement from Harlan Crow.

What is forum shopping?

This is relevant to the link below: 

- LII: Forum Shopping. 

Forum shopping refers to the practice of pursuing a claim subject to concurrent jurisdiction in the court that will treat the claim most favorably. Forum shopping can occur between courts in different states, between federal and state courts in the same state, or between courts in separate countries. While forum shopping is still permitted under limited circumstances, the practice is generally discouraged in the modern legal system due to the Erie Doctrine and other conflict of law rules.

Under the Erie Doctrine, which was explicitly adopted to reduce forum shopping, a federal court sitting in diversity jurisdiction must apply the substantive law of the state in which it is sitting. As a result, a plaintiff cannot use forum shopping between federal court and state court within the same state to choose which laws will govern the merits of their claim. Additionally, the court’s ability to decline to exercise their jurisdiction through the power of forum non conveniens prevents plaintiffs from using forum shopping to burden the defendant by choosing to sue in highly inconvenient jurisdiction.

Nonetheless, even with the Erie Doctrine and other restrictive measures in place, a plaintiff may still find it beneficial to engage in forum shopping. For example, a plaintiff suing a large corporate defendant might choose to sue in state court rather than federal court because they believe that a local jury will be more sympathetic to their argument than a federal jury. Alternatively, a plaintiff might prefer one jurisdiction over another due to a quirk of its procedural rules or due to its conflict of law rules.

Sometimes, plaintiffs deliberately structure their state law claims against out-of-state defendants to prevent the out-of-state defendants from removing the case to federal court, which might otherwise have diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. For example, a plaintiff suing a major retailer might sue both the national parent company and its local store. By joining the in-state defendant, the plaintiff prevents federal courts from exercising diversity jurisdiction over the case for lack of complete diversity.

From the NYT: Judge Invalidates F.D.A. Approval of the Abortion Pill Mifepristone

For our look at federalism and the checks and balances.

- Click here for the article.

A federal judge in Texas issued a preliminary ruling invalidating the Food and Drug Administration’s 23-year-old approval of the abortion pill mifepristone, an unprecedented order that — if it stands through court challenges — could make it harder for patients to get abortions in states where abortion is legal, not just in those trying to restrict it.

The drug will continue to be available at least in the short-term since the judge, Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, stayed his own order for seven days to give the F.D.A. time to ask an appeals court to intervene.

Less than an hour after Judge Kacsmaryk’s ruling, a judge in Washington state issued a ruling in another case, which contradicted the Texas decision, ordering the F.D.A. to make no changes to the availability of mifepristone in the 18 states that filed that lawsuit.

The conflicting orders by two federal judges, both preliminary injunctions issued before the full cases have been heard, appear to create a legal standoff likely to escalate to the Supreme Court.

Presumption of innocence

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

Squire Patton Boggs

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squire_Patton_Boggs

Jack Daniel's Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products (old number 2)

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2022/22-148.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-jack-daniels-case-free-speech-fight-over-dog-toy-2023-03-19/

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-takes-up-jack-daniels-dog-toy-trademark-rumpus-2022-11-21/

https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/bad-spaniels-barking-line-between-permitted-parody-trademark-infringement-2023-02-15/

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2022/22-148

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/jack-daniels-properties-inc-v-vip-products-llc-2/

https://mydogtoy.com/

Some detail on falsifying business records

What are business records? 

- Wikipedia:

A business record is a document (hard copy or digital) that records an "act, condition, or event" related to business. Business records include meeting minutes, memoranda, employment contracts, and accounting source documents.

It must be retrievable at a later date so that the business dealings can be accurately reviewed as required. Since business is dependent upon confidence and trust, not only must the record be accurate and easily retrieved, the processes surrounding its creation and retrieval must be perceived by customers and the business community to consistently deliver a full and accurate record with no gaps or additions.

Most business records have specified retention periods based on legal requirements and / or internal company policies. This is important because in many countries (including the United States) many documents may be required by law to be disclosed to government regulatory agencies or to the general public. Likewise, they may be discoverable if the business is sued. 

- The Sarbanes–Oxley Act:

The Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 is a United States federal law that mandates certain practices in financial record keeping and reporting for corporations.

The act, (Pub. L. 107–204 (text) (PDF), 116 Stat. 745, enacted July 30, 2002), also known as the "Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act" (in the Senate) and "Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, and Transparency Act" (in the House) and more commonly called Sarbanes–Oxley, SOX or Sarbox, contains eleven sections that place requirements on all U.S. public company boards of directors and management and public accounting firms. A number of provisions of the Act also apply to privately held companies, such as the willful destruction of evidence to impede a federal investigation.

The law was enacted as a reaction to a number of major corporate and accounting scandals, including Enron and WorldCom. The sections of the bill cover responsibilities of a public corporation's board of directors, add criminal penalties for certain misconduct, and require the Securities and Exchange Commission to create regulations to define how public corporations are to comply with the law.

- Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act:

The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, commonly referred to as Dodd–Frank, is a United States federal law that was enacted on July 21, 2010. The law overhauled financial regulation in the aftermath of the Great Recession, and it made changes affecting all federal financial regulatory agencies and almost every part of the nation's financial services industry.

Dodd–Frank reorganized the financial regulatory system, eliminating the Office of Thrift Supervision, assigning new responsibilities to existing agencies like the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and creating new agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The CFPB was charged with protecting consumers against abuses related to credit cards, mortgages, and other financial products. The act also created the Financial Stability Oversight Council and the Office of Financial Research to identify threats to the financial stability of the United States, and gave the Federal Reserve new powers to regulate systemically important institutions. To handle the liquidation of large companies, the act created the Orderly Liquidation Authority. One provision, the Volcker Rule, restricts banks from making certain kinds of speculative investments. The act also repealed the exemption from regulation for security-based swaps, requiring credit-default swaps and other transactions to be cleared through either exchanges or clearinghouses. Other provisions affect issues such as corporate governance, 1256 Contracts, and credit rating agencies.

 
- Falsifying Business Records: NY PL 175.10 and 175.15.

- FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE Penal Law § 175.10.

- Texas: PENAL CODE - TITLE 8. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION - 
CHAPTER 37. PERJURY AND OTHER FALSIFICATION.

For 4/6/23

- From Axios: Read: The 34-count indictment against Trump.

- Wikipedia: Michael Cohen: Federal Investigations.

US Constitution - Institutions: 
- Executive: Article 2.
- Judicial: Article 3.

US Constitution - Public Policy
- Article 1, Section 8.
- Article 1, Section 9.
- Article 2, Section 2 and 3.

The Creation of the Executive Branch
- The First Congress.

U.S. Criminal Code
- Title 18 of the United States Code.

__________

Public Policy

__________


Equal Protection.

U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 1: 
- Congress.gov.
- Founders Constitution. 

The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several States, and the elector in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature.

Slavery Clauses.

U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 3, Clause 3: Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons.(The previous sentence was superseded by Amendment XIV).

U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1: The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year 1808, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importations, not exceeding 10 dollars for each person.

U.S. Constitution, Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3: No person held to service or labour in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labour, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labour may be due.(This clause superseded by Amendment XIII)

U.S. Constitution, Article 5: . . . no amendment which may be made prior to the year 1808, shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article

__________


Civil War Amendments: 

- 13th Amendment: 

Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.

1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

- 14th Amendment:

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of Electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a State, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or Elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State Legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

5. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

- 15th Amendment:

Passed by Congress February 26, 1869. Ratified February 3, 1870.

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 
__________

Texas Constitutions: 

1836 - General Provisions.

1845 - Article VIII Slaves.

1861 - Article VIII Slaves.

1866 - Article VIII Freedman.

1869 - Article VI Suffrage.

1876 - Article VI Suffrage.