Tuesday, July 12, 2022

From Wikipedia: NASA

- Click here for the entry's section on history.

Beginning in 1946, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) began experimenting with rocket planes such as the supersonic Bell X-1.[14] In the early 1950s, there was challenge to launch an artificial satellite for the International Geophysical Year (1957–1958). An effort for this was the American Project Vanguard. After the Soviet space program's launch of the world's first artificial satellite (Sputnik 1) on October 4, 1957, the attention of the United States turned toward its own fledgling space efforts. The U.S. Congress, alarmed by the perceived threat to national security and technological leadership (known as the "Sputnik crisis"), urged immediate and swift action; President Dwight D. Eisenhower counseled more deliberate measures. The result was a consensus that the White House forged among key interest groups, including scientists committed to basic research; the Pentagon which had to match the Soviet military achievement; corporate America looking for new business; and a strong new trend in public opinion looking up to space exploration.[15]

On January 12, 1958, NACA organized a "Special Committee on Space Technology," headed by Guyford Stever.[9] On January 14, 1958, NACA Director Hugh Dryden published "A National Research Program for Space Technology," stating,[16]

It is of great urgency and importance to our country both from consideration of our prestige as a nation as well as military necessity that this challenge [Sputnik] be met by an energetic program of research and development for the conquest of space ... It is accordingly proposed that the scientific research be the responsibility of a national civilian agency ... NACA is capable, by rapid extension and expansion of its effort, of providing leadership in space technology.[16]

While this new federal agency would conduct all non-military space activity, the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) was created in February 1958 to develop space technology for military application.[17]

On July 29, 1958, Eisenhower signed the National Aeronautics and Space Act, establishing NASA. When it began operations on October 1, 1958, NASA absorbed the 43-year-old NACA intact; its 8,000 employees, an annual budget of US$100 million, three major research laboratories (Langley Aeronautical Laboratory, Ames Aeronautical Laboratory, and Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory) and two small test facilities.[18] Elements of the Army Ballistic Missile Agency and the United States Naval Research Laboratory were incorporated into NASA. A significant contributor to NASA's entry into the Space Race with the Soviet Union was the technology from the German rocket program led by Wernher von Braun, who was now working for the Army Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA), which in turn incorporated the technology of American scientist Robert Goddard's earlier works.[19] Earlier research efforts within the US Air Force[18] and many of ARPA's early space programs were also transferred to NASA.[20] In December 1958, NASA gained control of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a contractor facility operated by the California Institute of Technology.

NASA 60th: How It All Began

From Wikipedia: James Webb Space Telescope

- Click here for the entry. 

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is a space telescope designed primarily to conduct infrared astronomy. As the most powerful telescope ever launched into space, its greatly improved infrared resolution and sensitivity will allow it to view objects too old, distant, or faint for the Hubble Space Telescope. This is expected to enable a broad range of investigations across the fields of astronomy and cosmology, such as observation of the first stars and the formation of the first galaxies, and detailed atmospheric characterization of potentially habitable exoplanets.

JWST was launched in December 2021 on a European Space Agency (ESA) Ariane 5 rocket from Kourou, French Guiana, and entered orbit in January 2022. As of July 2022, JWST is intended to succeed the Hubble as NASA's flagship mission in astrophysics. On 11 July 2022, NASA and US president Joe Biden revealed the first image from JWST during a White House event, setting a new standard for high resolution images of distant regions of the Universe.

NASA led JWST's development in collaboration with ESA and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA). The NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in Maryland managed telescope development, the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore on the Homewood Campus of Johns Hopkins University operates JWST, and the prime contractor was Northrop Grumman. The telescope is named after James E. Webb, who was the administrator of NASA from 1961 to 1968 during the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs.

- Who was James Webb? 

James Edwin Webb (October 7, 1906 – March 27, 1992) was an American government official who served as Undersecretary of State from 1949 to 1952. He was also the second appointed administrator of NASA from February 14, 1961, to October 7, 1968. Webb oversaw NASA from the beginning of the Kennedy administration through the end of the Johnson administration, thus overseeing each of the critical first crewed missions throughout the Mercury and Gemini programs until days before the launch of the first Apollo mission. He also dealt with the Apollo 1 fire.

In 2002, the Next Generation Space Telescope was renamed the James Webb Space Telescope as a tribute to Webb.

From the Texas Tribune: Execution halted as court questions whether Ramiro Gonzales should have been sentenced to life in prison

- Click here for the article. 

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals halted the execution of Ramiro Gonzales Monday, two days before he was scheduled to die by lethal injection.

Gonzales, 39, was sentenced to death for kidnapping, raping and killing Bridget Townsend when they were both 18 in Medina County. On Monday, the court said his sentence should be revisited after a state expert said he wrongly told jurors during the 2006 trial that people who commit a sexual assault would be very likely to do it again.

To hand down a death sentence after finding someone guilty of capital murder, jurors must find that the person will likely be a future danger. The only alternative sentence is life in prison without the possibility of parole.

In its ruling, the all-Republican court said it seemed the expert’s statements at trial on recidivism rates “were false and that that false testimony could have affected the jury’s answer to the future dangerousness question at punishment.”

Gonzales’ case will now go back to Medina County, where local officials will weigh the effect of the trial testimony. His guilt in Townsend’s murder is not in question, only his punishment of death over life in prison.

In 2001, Gonzales kidnapped Townsend after she intervened while he was trying to steal drugs at the home of her boyfriend and Gonzales’ dealer, according to court records. He raped her before fatally shooting her. The next year, after he pled guilty to the rape and kidnapping of another woman and received two life sentences, he confessed his guilt in Townsend’s murder and guided police to her remains.

At his trial for Townsend’s death, the defense did not push back when jurors weighed guilt or innocence, and he was quickly found guilty. When jurors were deciding his punishment, however, Medina County prosecutors brought forward Dr. Edward Gripon, a forensic psychiatrist.

“Regarding the likelihood of recidivism for sexual offenses, I testified that there is lots of data out there about the person who commits forcible rape and the likelihood that they will continue that. The percentages are way up in the eighty percentile or better,” Gripon wrote in a May report. “However, we now know this statistic to be inaccurate.”

In his new report, Gripon said that 80% number has been traced to a “bare assertion” in a psychology magazine from the 1980s, written without citations or data by someone without credentials. He said peer-reviewed statistical studies have instead shown the likelihood of committing new sexual offenses is much lower — especially when the offender is young, like Gonzales was.

https://ij.org/staff/mbindas/

https://www.maine.gov/ag/about/division_chief_bios.shtml?id=2734266

https://www.c-span.org/person/?1018654/MalcolmLStewart

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Thompson_(attorney)

https://www.arnoldporter.com/en/people/t/theodore-elisabeth-s

https://www.linkedin.com/in/sarah-boyce-b5b61017 

https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/survivors/

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/examplemax.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Cabazon_Band_of_Mission_Indians

https://www.linkedin.com/in/lanora-pettit-12aa1183

https://www.c-span.org/person/?9276105/AnthonyYang

https://www.wickphillips.com/professionals/martin-brant/

Monday, July 11, 2022

From Roll Call:

- Appeals court lets House panel subpoena Trump financial records.

- Biden issues executive order responding to abortion ruling.

- States would set lower highway emissions goals under proposed rule.

- Immigration enforcement policy fight reaches Supreme Court.

 

Representing Reagan National Advertising:

- Oyez: Kannon K. Shanmugam.

- Wikipedia: Kannon Shanmugam.

- Wikipedia: Kirkland and Ellis. 

- Wikipedia: Harvard Law Review.

 - Council for New England.

The Council for New England was a 17th-century English joint stock company that was granted a royal charter to found colonial settlements along the coast of North America. The Council was established in November of 1620, and was disbanded (although with no apparent changes in land titles) in 1635. It provided for the establishment of the Plymouth Colony, the State of New Hampshire, the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the New Haven Colony, and the eventual State of Maine. It was largely the creation of Sir Ferdinand Gorges.

- 
Dutch East India Company.

The Dutch East India Company, officially the United East India Company (Dutch: Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie;[f] VOC), was a multinational corporation founded by a government-directed consolidation of several rival Dutch trading companies (voorcompagnieën) in the early 17th century. It is believed to be the largest company to ever have existed in recorded history.[9][10] It was established on March 20, 1602, as a chartered company to trade in pepper and spices with South Asia and Southeast Asia after the Spanish tried to block access to trade routes.

- 
Plymouth Company.

The Plymouth Company, officially known as the Virginia Company of Plymouth, was a division of the Virginia Company with responsibility for colonizing the east coast of America between latitudes 38° and 45° N.

Ep 2: The Pilgrims Meet the Merchant Adventurers - 400 Years Ago Today |...

 


Merchant Adventurers

Among other things, they financed the Mayflower.

- From Mayflower History: The Merchant Adventurers.

- Company of Merchant Adventurers to New Lands.

- The Merchant Adventurers' Company in the Reign of Elizabeth.

- The London Company of Merchant Adventurers of England for the Discovery of Lands Unknown.

- Adventurers' Act.

Sunday, July 10, 2022

From Community Impact News:

- Gov. Abbott declares drought disaster for over 150 counties.

- Local officials fight for reform as property values increase.

- Pearland ISD now taking applications for free, reduced-price lunch.

- Gov. Abbott orders authorities to return undocumented migrants to U.S.-Mexico border.

- Texas launches recovery grant program for tourism businesses negatively impacted by COVID-19.

Regarding colonization

- Colonization.

- British colonization of the Americas.

- Charter Colony. 

- Proprietary Colony.

- Royal Colony.

The Litigants in highlighted October 2021 Supreme Court cases

We will go over who these are in class. I plan on focusing on these people and organizations as we go through the textbook material.

Arizona, et al.
City and County of San Francisco, et al.
Philip E. Berger, president pro tempore of the North Carolina State Senate
North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
Joe Biden, President of the United States (The Biden Administration)
Missouri
Joe Biden, President of the United States (The Biden Administration)
Texas
David Carson, Parent of O.C.
A. Pender Makin, commissioner of the Maine Department of Education
City of Austin
Reagan National Advertising of Texas Inc.
Cummings
Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C.
Merle Denezpi, member of the Navajo tribe
United States
Department of Homeland Security
New York
Dobbs, State Health Officer of the Mississippi Department of Health
Jackson Women's Health Organization
Erik Egbert, Customs and Border Patrol agent
Robert Boule, owner Smuggler's Inn
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Sheik Yassir Fagaza, et al
Federal Election Commission
Ted Cruz for Senate
Darrell Hemphill, criminal defendant
New York
Houston Community College System
David Wilson, member HCC Board of Trustees
Joseph A. Kennedy
Bremerton School District
Bradley LeDure, conductor for Union Pacific Railroad Company
Union Pacific Railroad Company
Mississippi
Tennessee
Michael Wade Nance, prisoner on death row
Timothy Ward, Commissioner, Georgia Department of Corrections and Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison
National Federation of Independent Business
Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration
New York State Rifle and Pistol Association
Kevin P. Bruen, in His Official Capacity as Superintendent of New York State Police, et al.
Oklahoma
Victor Manuel Castro-Huerta, convicted prisoner
John Ramirez, prisoner on death row
Bryan Collier, Executive Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, et al.
Tim Shoop, Warden
Raymond Twyford, prisoner on death row
Harold Shurtleff, Director Camp Constitution
City of Boston, Massachusetts, et al.
Alfred H. Siegel,
John P. Fitzgerald, III,
Southwest Airlines
Latrice Saxon, ramp supervisor Southwest Airlines
Larry Thompson, defendant
Pagiel Clark et al,
Le Roy Torres, Trooper Texas Department of Public Safety
Texas Department of Public Safety
Unicolors, Inc
H&M Hennes & Mauritz, LP
United States
Justin Eugene Taylor, criminal defendant
United States
State of Texas, et al.
United States
Tsarnaev, prisoner on death row
United States
Jose Luis Vaello-Madero, SSI recipient in Puerto Rico
United States
State of Washington, et al
United States
Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn, aka Abu Zubaydah, et al., accused terrorist
Carlos Vega, deputy Los Angeles Sheriff's Department
Terence B. Tekoh, criminal defendant
West Virginia, et al.
Environmental Protection Agency, et al.
Whole Woman's Health, et al.
Austin Reeve Jackson, Judge, District Court of Texas, 114th District, et al.
William Dale Wooden, criminal defendant
United States
Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, et al., federally recognized tribe
State of Texas

Thursday, July 7, 2022

Local Government

Federalism

- National
- State
- Local

States have the delegated power to create local governments. With the exception of the nation's capitol, the national government cannot create local governments. However, the national government has complete authority over the land it owns.

- Article 4, Section 3: The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States.

- Wikipedia: Federal Lands.

The states were recognized as having sovereign jurisdiction over local governments in a court case, meaning it is part of case law.

- Dillon's Rule: The Dillon Rule is the principal that local government only exercises (1) powers expressly granted by the state, (2) powers necessarily and fairly implied from the grant of power, and (3) powers crucial to the existence of local government.


Local Governments

Two general types: 
- Multi - Purpose
- Single -Purpose

Multi - Purpose
Two types
- Cities
- Counties

Single Purpose - AKA Special Districts
Two examples: 
- Independent School Districts
- Community College Districts

__________

Definitions: 

Cities: A city is a human settlement of a notable size. It can be defined as a permanent and densely settled place with administratively defined boundaries whose members work primarily on non-agricultural tasks. Cities generally have extensive systems for housing, transportation, sanitation, utilities, land use, production of goods, and communication. Their density facilitates interaction between people, government organizations, and businesses, sometimes benefiting different parties in the process, such as improving the efficiency of goods and service distribution.

County: Counties in U.S. states are administrative or political subdivision of the state in which their boundaries are drawn.

Special (Single) Purpose Districts.

- Texas Comptroller: In Texas, thousands of local governments called special purpose districts provide a variety of services including water conservation, toll roads, hospitals, libraries, utilities and fire control efforts. In 2014, the Texas Senate Research Center updated a comprehensive explanation of special-purpose districts, including tables showing establishing authority, allowable purposes and financing mechanisms. Download Invisible Government: Special Purpose Districts in Texas (PDF) from the Senate Research Center.

- Brazoria County Profile.


Textbook Terms: 

Dillon's Rule
Counties
Cities / Municipalities
Municipal Utility District
Fiscal Federalism
Administrative Federalism
Commissioners Court
Partisan Elections
County Officials
- sheriff
- county clerk
- county attorney
- tax assessor
- justice of the peace
- constable
- auditor
bureaucracy
civil service 
- county civil service system
- merit based service system
- patronage
privatization
contract outsourcing
cities
general law city
home rule cities
ordinance
city charter
annexation
extra territorial jurisdiction
machine politics
zoning
property taxes
bonds
- municipal
- revenue
- general obligation 
homeowners association
independent school districts
community college districts
special districts

What is Federalism?

What is Federalism?

Competing definitions: 
- Wikipedia: Federalism is a combined and compound mode of government that combines a general government (the central or "federal" government) with regional governments (provincial, state, cantonal, territorial, or other sub-unit governments) in a single political system, dividing the powers between the two.

- Cornell: Federalism is a system of government in which the same territory is controlled by two levels of government. Generally, an overarching national government is responsible for broader governance of larger territorial areas, while the smaller subdivisions, states, and cities govern the issues of local concern. Both the national government and the smaller political subdivisions have the power to make laws and both have a certain level of autonomy from each other.

- Britannica: mode of political organization that unites separate states or other polities within an overarching political system in a way that allows each to maintain its own integrity. Federal systems do this by requiring that basic policies be made and implemented through negotiation in some form, so that all the members can share in making and executing decisions. The political principles that animate federal systems emphasize the primacy of bargaining and negotiated coordination among several power centres; they stress the virtues of dispersed power centres as a means for safeguarding individual and local liberties.

- Congress.gov: the division and sharing of power between the national and state governments.1 By allocating power among state and federal governments, the Framers sought to establish a unified national government of limited powers while maintaining a distinct sphere of autonomy in which state governments could exercise a general police power.2 Although the Framers’ sought to preserve liberty by diffusing power,3 Justices and scholars have noted that federalism has other advantages,4 including that it allows individual states to experiment with novel government programs as laboratories of democracy5 and increases the accountability of elected government officials to citizens.6

The three levels in American government: 

- National
- State
- Local

What authorizes each level?

- National: The People of the U.S. (The Preamble to the U.S. Constitution)
- State: The People of Texas (The Preamble to the Texas Constitution)
- Local: The State of Texas. (Articles 9 and 11 of the Texas Constitution)

What does each level do? 

- National
- - limited to what is allowed, directly or indirectly, in the U.S. Constitution.
- - internal and external security
- - promote and develop interstate and international commerce
- - coordinating state activities
- - enhance equal protection of the law and secure voting rights
- - delegated powers
- - implied powers
- - inherent powers
- - concurrent powers
- - prohibited powers

- State
- - Elections - the one power clearly delegated to the states 
- - anything that is not forbidden by the U.S. Constitution
- - police powers: the power to secure the health, safety, welfare, and morals of the community.
- - promote commerce within the state 
- - the creation of local governments
- - reserved powers
- - concurrent powers
- - prohibited powers

- Local
- - powers defined by the state
- - Dillon's Rule
- - actual enforcement of most state laws
- - basic infrastructure
- - resolve local disputes

Where can we see the specific powers laid out in legal documents?

- National:
- - U.S. Constitution: Article 1, Section 8.
- - U.S. Constitution: Article 2, Section 2.
- - U.S. Constitution: Article 3, Section 2.
- - U.S. Amendments 1 - 10 (limitations)
- - U.S. Amendments 11 - 27.
- - U.S. Code.
- - Code of Federal Regulations.
- - Case Law: Supreme Court Cases By Topic.
- - U.S. Executive Agencies
- - House Committees
- - Senate Committees

- State Powers:
- - U.S. Constitution: Article 1, Sections 2, 3, and 4.
- - U.S. Constitution: Article 1, Section 10. (prohibited powers)
- - Texas Constitution
- - Texas Statutory Code
- - Texas Fiscal Size-Up
- - Texas Sunset Review Commission
- - Texas House Committees
- - Texas Senate Committees

- Local Powers:
- - Texas Constitution Articles 9 and 11
- - Texas Local Government Code
- - Texas Constitution Article 3, Section 56 (limits on states)
- - Codes of Ordinances
- - City Departments


Terminology: 

federalism
nationalism
three levels of government
- national
- state
- local
concurrent powers
inherent powers
reserved powers
granted powers
enumerated powers
expressed powers
prohibited powers
implied powers
- examples of each
democracy
- direct
- indirect
unitary
confederal
federal 
Civil War
civil war amendments
- 13
- 14
- 15
progressive movement
Great Depression
matching grants
categorical grants
block grants
civic voluntarism
necessary and proper clause
full faith and credit clause
supremacy clause
- preemption
commerce clause
equal protection clause
dual federalism
cooperative federalism
- the New Deal / Great Society
- fiscal federalism
new federalism
- devolution
- privatization
- diffusion
- - regulatory policies
grants-in-aid
- categorical
- block
state republican government
expansion of the executive
judicial interpretation

From Roll Call: Georgia grand jury subpoenas Sen. Lindsey Graham over calls

- Click here for the article. 

A grand jury in Georgia issued a subpoena Tuesday for Sen. Lindsey Graham to testify next week as part an investigation into potential criminal interference in the state’s 2020 elections, according to copies obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

The special grand jury seeks testimony from the South Carolina Republican about at least two telephone calls he had with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and Raffensperger’s staff, according to a certificate to secure an out-of-state witness.

Georgia officials allege that during the telephone calls, Graham “questioned Secretary Raffensperger and his staff about reexamining certain absentee ballots cast in Georgia in order to explore the possibility of a more favorable outcome for former President Donald Trump,” the certificate states.

The certificate also states Graham “possesses unique knowledge” of the substance of the calls, “the circumstances surrounding his decision to make the calls” and the logistics of setting up the calls. It also states Graham has knowledge about any coordination of the calls with the Trump campaign and “other known and unknown individuals involved in the multi-state, coordinated efforts to influence the results of the November 2020 election in Georgia and elsewhere.”

A spokesman for Graham could not immediately be reached for comment Tuesday. Last year, a Graham spokesman told The Washington Post and other outlets that a grand jury investigation into the call with Raffensperger was “ridiculous.”

From the Texas Tribune: Volkswagen argues that Greg Abbott’s choice of judges in lawsuit could tilt emissions case in Texas’ favor

- Click here for the article. 

German car manufacturers Volkswagen and Audi — facing a lawsuit from Texas that could cost the companies millions stemming from the emissions cheating scheme uncovered in 2015 — argue that Gov. Greg Abbott could unfairly tilt the scales in the state’s favor by appointing two temporary justices to help decide the case.

Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Nathan Hecht on June 24 asked Abbott to temporarily commission two justices to the state’s high court in order to decide a case related to an emissions-cheating lawsuit against Volkswagen and Audi. Volkswagen in 2015 admitted to deceiving regulators by designing software that circumvented U.S. emissions tests.

With tens of thousands of vehicles impacted in Texas, several millions of dollars could be at stake in the Texas case, according to the state’s civil penalties code. The issue before the state’s high court centers on whether Texas has jurisdiction over the foreign parent companies, Germany-based Volkswagen and Audi.

Justices Jimmy Blacklock and Evan Young recused themselves from the case, Hecht wrote in the letter, leaving the court with seven remaining members to rule on the case. The Texas constitution requires at least five justices to agree, one way or the other, in order to issue a supreme court decision, suggesting the remaining justices were split.

But because the state is a party in Attorney General Ken Paxton’s cases against the companies, Volkswagen and Audi’s lawyers have argued that allowing the Texas governor to appoint justices to a case for which the state stands to win a substantial amount of money would give “the impression that the State has had undue influence.”

“Although the Governor and the Attorney General are different officers, they both represent the same entity: the state of Texas,” wrote Jeffrey Wall, an attorney for Volkswagen in a letter to the court that was also sent to Abbott.

Hecht declined to comment on the letter, but a spokesperson for the Supreme Court of Texas said that there have been at least 13 other instances since 1995 in which the governor was asked to appoint temporary justices.

Constitutions, Charters, Statutory Code, etc . . .

For both 2305 and 2306

The terminology below is meant to familiarize you with the types of laws that we will spend the semester reading about. In the first section we will focus primarily on constitutions, but it is useful to understand what all of these types of laws are, and how they relate to each other.

Here are some useful definitions that will make our discussion of future material more efficient.


Constitution:

The basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it.

- U.S. Constitution.
- Texas Constitution.


Charters:

- a grant or guarantee of rights, franchises, or privileges from the sovereign power of a state or country. a written instrument that creates and defines the franchises of a city, educational institution, or corporation.

- Wikipedia: the grant of authority or rights, stating that the granter formally recognizes the prerogative of the recipient to exercise the rights specified. It is implicit that the granter retains superiority (or sovereignty), and that the recipient admits a limited (or inferior) status within the relationship, and it is within that sense that charters were historically granted, and it is that sense which is retained in modern usage of the term.

- The First Virginia Charter of 1606. 


Statutes: 

- Wikipedia: A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs the legal entities of a city, state, or country by way of consent. Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy. Statutes are rules made by legislative bodies; they are distinguished from case law or precedent, which is decided by courts, and regulations issued by government agencies.

Statutory Code:

A statutory code is a subject-based arrangement of the laws of a general and permanent nature passed by the jurisdiction's legislature. Unlike

- U.S. Code.
- Texas Statutory Code


Ordinance:

- a piece of legislation enacted by a municipal authority.

- Cornell: An ordinance is a law or decree by a municipality. Put differently, an ordinance is a local law. Usually ordinances forbid or restrict some type of activity. For example, § 4-03 of The Rules of the City for New York City states that, “vehicular traffic facing such signal [a steady red light] shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection and shall remain standing until an indication to proceed is shown. In other words, in New York City, no turn on red.

Municipal governments can pass ordinances on matters that the state government allows to be regulated at the local level. The ordinance carries the state’s authority and has the same effect as a state statute.

- Houston Code of Ordinances.



Case Law:

- Cornell: Case law is law that is based on judicial decisions rather than law based on constitutions, statutes, or regulations. Case law concerns unique disputes resolved by courts using the concrete facts of a case. By contrast, statutes and regulations are written abstractly. Case law, also used interchangeably with common law, refers to the collection of precedents and authority set by previous judicial decisions on a particular issue or topic. In that sense, case law differs from one jurisdiction to another.

- Texas State Law Library: Texas uses a common-law system. In a common-law system, decisions from high courts are binding on lower courts — a concept known as setting a precedent. Case law is derived from these past decisions made by the courts. Because the courts are always hearing new cases and interpreting the law, case law is constantly evolving.

- Wikipedia: also used interchangeably with common law, is 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.


Administrative Law:

- Cornell: Administrative law refers to the branch of law governing the creation and operation of administrative agencies. The powers granted to administrative agencies are particularly important, along with the substantive rules that such agencies make, and the legal relationships between agencies, other government bodies, and the public at large.

- Wikipedia: a division of law governing the activities of executive branch agencies of government. Administrative law includes executive branch rule making (executive branch rules are generally referred to as "regulations"), adjudication, and the enforcement of laws. Administrative law is considered a branch of public law. Administrative law deals with the decision-making of such administrative units of government that are part of the executive branch in such areas as international trade, manufacturing, the environment, taxation, broadcasting, immigration, and transport.

- Library of Congress: Administrative law (commonly called regulatory law) is law promulgated and enforced by an administrative body (usually an agency) according to that body’s area of responsibility. Administrative law sometimes receives less attention than its more prominent "law" siblings (statutes and case law), but from building a bridge to baking a bundt (and everything in between), administrative law has a big impact on the everyday lives of citizens.



Military Law:

- Cornell: Generally, in the United States, Military Law is a body of law that oversees the members of the armed forces. Essentially, the usage of military law on the members of the armed forces was a recognition that military individuals are subjected to different rules and expectations than ordinary civilian citizens.

- Military.com: The military justice system is based on the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which applies to all branches. While the UCMJ is similar to civilian law, it is also more strict in several areas. The UCMJ contains everything from a list of crimes and offenses to rules for trials and sentencing. All active duty personnel, activated reservists & Guard members as well as retirees are subject to the UCMJ at all times. If a military member commits a crime while off-duty that does not involve the military they can still be subject to the UCMJ as well as civilian penalties.

- Uniform Code of Military Justice: the foundation of the system of military justice of the armed forces of the United States. The UCMJ was established by the United States Congress in accordance with their constitutional authority, per Article I, Section 8, which provides that "The Congress shall have Power . . . to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval forces" of the United States.

Wednesday, July 6, 2022

From the Texas Tribune: Justice Department is investigating Texas’ Operation Lone Star for alleged civil rights violations

- Click here for the article. 

The Department of Justice is investigating alleged civil rights violations under Operation Lone Star, a multibillion-dollar border initiative announced last year by Gov. Greg Abbott, according to state records obtained by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune.

The Legislature last year directed more than $3 billion to border measures over the next two years, a bulk of which has gone to Operation Lone Star. Under the initiative, which Abbott said he launched to combat human and drug smuggling, the state has deployed more than 10,000 National Guard members and Department of Public Safety troopers to the border with Mexico and built some fencing. Thousands of immigrant men seeking to enter the country have been arrested for trespassing onto private property, and some have been kept in jail for weeks without charges being filed.

Since the operation’s launch, a number of news organizations, including ProPublica and the Tribune, have outlined a series of problems with state leaders’ claims of success, the treatment of National Guard members and alleged civil rights violations.

An investigation by the Tribune, ProPublica and The Marshall Project found that in touting the operation’s accomplishments, state officials included arrests with no connection to the border and statewide drug seizures. The news organizations also revealed that trespassing cases represented the largest share of the operation’s arrests. DPS stopped counting some charges, including cockfighting, sexual assault and stalking, after the publications began asking questions about their connections to border security.

Another investigation by the Tribune and Army Times detailed troubles with the National Guard deployment, including reports of delayed payments to soldiers, a shortage of critical equipment and poor living conditions. Previous reporting by the Army Times also traced suicides by soldiers tied to the operation.

Tuesday, July 5, 2022

Summer 2 1000 word essay - Major cases from the 2021-2022 Supreme Court session

I'll assign you one of these in class.

Arizona v City and County of San Francisco
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-1775
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/arizona-v-city-and-county-of-san-francisco-california/
- public charge
- final rule
- non-citizen

Berger v North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-248
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/berger-v-north-carolina-state-conference-of-the-naacp/
- voter ID laws
- state attorney general
- state legislatures
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedures
- - 24(a)(2)

Biden v Missouri
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21A240.
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/biden-v-missouri/.

Biden v Texas
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-954.
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/biden-v-texas-2/.
- Migrant Protection Protocols (remain in Mexico).
- Administration Procedure Act.
- Department of Homeland Security.
- Immigration and Nationality Act
- - 1225(b)(2)(C)


Carson v Makin
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-1088.
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/carson-v-makin/.

Austin v Reagan
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-1029.
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/city-of-austin-texas-v-reagan-national-advertising-of-texas-inc/

Cummings v Premier Rehab
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-219
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/cummings-v-premier-rehab-keller-p-l-l-c/

Denezpi v United States
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-7622

Department of Homeland Security v New York
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-449

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/19-1392

Egbert v Boule
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-147

Federal Bureau of Investigation v Fagaza
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-828.

|____________________________________________________
Federal Election Commission v Ted Cruz for Senate
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-12

|____________________________________________________
Hemphill v New York
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-637

|____________________________________________________
Houston Community College System v Wilson

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-804
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/houston-community-college-system-v-wilson/.

Question: Does the First Amendment restrict the authority of an elected body to issue a censure resolution in response to a member’s speech?

Holding: Respondent David Wilson does not possess an actionable First Amendment claim arising from his purely verbal censure by the Board of Trustees of the Houston Community College System.

- The Houston Community College (HCC) System
- Board of nine trustees
- each of which is elected by the public to serve a six-year term without remuneration
- David Wilson was elected to the Board as a trustee on November 5, 2013.
- Wilson criticized the other trustees
- alleging that they had violated the Board’s bylaws
- made various other criticisms of the Board.
 - the Board censured Wilson
- barred him from holding officer positions on the Board
- receiving travel reimbursements.
- Wilson sued HCC
- the censure violated his First Amendment right to free speech.
- The district court ruled against him
- the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed
- the Fifth Circuit concluded that the First Amendment precludes community college boards from censuring members for their speech.
- purely verbal censure
- an actionable First Amendment claim
- “abridging the freedom of speech,”
- includes a prohibition on “retaliatory actions”
- protected speech.
- elected bodies have long exercised the power to censure their members
- Court’s precedents
-  affirm that mere censure does not afoul of the First Amendment
- an elected official
- the censure itself was mere speech by other members within the same elected body
- the censure was not a materially adverse action and thus did not give rise to a First Amendment claim.


|____________________________________________________
Kennedy v Bremerton School District
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-418

|____________________________________________________
Lange v. California
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2020/20-18.
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/lange-v-california/,
- misdemeanors
- search and seizure
- exigent circumstances

|____________________________________________________
LeDure v Union Pacific Railroad Company
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-807

|____________________________________________________
Mississippi v Tennessee
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/143-orig

|____________________________________________________
Nance v Ward
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-439

|____________________________________________________
 National Federation of Independent Business v Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21A244

____________________________________________________
New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-843
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/new-york-state-rifle-pistol-association-inc-v-bruen/.

Question: Does New York's law requiring that applicants for unrestricted concealed-carry licenses demonstrate a special need for self-defense violate the Second Amendment?

Holding: New York’s proper-cause requirement for obtaining an unrestricted license to carry a concealed firearm violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

- The state of New York
- special need for self-protection
- unrestricted license to carry a concealed firearm outside the home
- Robert Nash
- Brandon Koch
- “proper cause.”
- district court dismissed their claims
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed.
- the Second Amendment
- the Fourteenth Amendment
- ordinary self-defense
- right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense.
- deeply rooted in history
- no other constitutional right requires a showing of “special need” to exercise it.
- “sensitive places” restrictions might be appropriate
- Manhattan is not a “sensitive place.”
- Gun restrictions are constitutional only if there is a tradition of such regulation in U.S. history.
- concurring opinion arguing that the effect of guns on American society is irrelevant to the issue.
- concurring opinion, in which Chief Justice John Roberts joined, noting that many state restrictions requiring background checks, firearms training, a check of mental health records, and fingerprinting, are still permissible because they are objective
- discretionary nature of New York’s law.
- dissenting opinion, in which Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined. Justice Breyer argued that states should be able to pass restrictions in an effort to curb the number of deaths caused by gun violence
- Court’s decision “severely burdens the States’ efforts to do so.”


____________________________________________________
Oklahoma v Castro-Huerta

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-429.

____________________________________________________
Ramirez v Collier

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-5592

____________________________________________________
Shoop v Twyford
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-511

____________________________________________________
Shurtleff v Boston
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-1800


____________________________________________________
Siegel v Fitzgerald
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-441

____________________________________________________
Southwest Airlines v Saxon
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-309

____________________________________________________
Thompson v Clark
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-659

____________________________________________________
Torres v Texas Department of Public Safety
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-603
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/torres-v-texas-department-of-public-safety/.

Question: Did Congress properly abrogate state sovereign immunity for claims arising under the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA)?

Holding: By ratifying the Constitution, the states agreed their sovereignty would yield to the national power to raise and support the Armed Forces; Congress may exercise this power to authorize private damages suits against non-consenting states, as in the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994.

- Leroy Torres
- U.S. Army Reserve
- Texas Department of Public Safety
- trooper
- served until his deployment to Iraq in 2007
- honorably discharged
- sought reemployment by DPS
- lung condition he acquired in Iraq
- Torres requested employment with DPS in a position different from the one he held before. - DPS offered Torres only a “temporary duty offer,” which he declined.
- Torres sued DPS in 2017
- alleging that the agency’s failure to offer him a job that would accommodate his disability violated
- the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA)
- prohibits adverse employment actions against an employee based on the employee’s military service
- trial court ruled in favor of Torres
- USERRA properly abrogated DPS’s sovereign immunity under Congress’s constitutional war powers
- The appellate court reversed.
- PennEast (PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey)
- Congress could, pursuant to its eminent domain power, authorize lawsuits against nonconsenting States because, upon entering the federal system, the States implicitly agreed that their “eminent domain power would yield to that of the Federal Government.”
- Under PennEast, the test for structural waiver is whether the federal power is “complete in itself, and the States consented to the exercise of that power—in its entirety—in the plan of the Convention.”
- Congress’s power to build and maintain the Armed Forces fits PennEast’s test.
- Thus, in joining together to form a Union, the States agreed to sacrifice their sovereign immunity for the good of the common defense.

Unicolors, Inc v H&M Hennes & Mauritz, LLP
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-915

United States v Taylor
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-1459

United States v Texas
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-588

United States v Tsarnaev
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-443

United States v Vaello-Madero
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-303

United States v Washington
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-404

United States v Zubayda
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-827

Vega v Tekoh
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-499

West Virginia v Environmental Protection Agency
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-1530

Whole Woman's Health v Jackson
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/21-463
- Scotusblog.
- SB8: Fetal Heartbeat Bill
- civil penalty
- state sovereign immunity



Wooden v United States
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-5279

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v Texas
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-493

Friday, July 1, 2022

Colonization / Settler Colonialism

- Colonization: 

In the Colonial Era, colonialism in this context refers mostly to Western European countries' colonization of lands mainly in the Americas, Africa, Asia and Oceania. The main European countries active in this form of colonization included Spain, Portugal, France, the Kingdom of England (later Great Britain), the Netherlands, and the Kingdom of Prussia (now mostly Germany), and, beginning in the 18th century, the United States. Most of these countries had a period of almost complete power in world trade at some stage in the period from roughly 1500 to 1900. Beginning in the late 19th century, Imperial Japan also engaged in settler colonization, most notably in Hokkaido and Korea.

While many European colonization schemes focused on shorter-term exploitation of economic opportunities (Newfoundland, for example, or Siberia) or addressed specific goals (Massachusetts or New South Wales), a tradition developed of careful long-term social and economic planning for both parties, but more on the colonizing countries themselves, based on elaborate theory-building (note James Oglethorpe's Colony of Georgia in the 1730s and Edward Gibbon Wakefield's New Zealand Company in the 1840s).

Colonization may be used as a method of absorbing and assimilating foreign people into the culture of the imperial country, and thus destroying any remnant of the cultures that might threaten the imperial territory over the long term by inspiring reform. The main instrument to this end is linguistic imperialism, or the imposition of non-indigenous imperial (colonial) languages on the colonized populations to the exclusion of any indigenous languages from administrative (and often, any public) use.


- Settler Colonialism:

In the context of the United States, early colonial powers generally respected the territorial and political sovereignty of the indigenous tribes, due to the need to forge local alliances with these tribes against other European colonial powers (i.e. British attempts to check French influence, etc.).[citation needed] The Euro-American colonial powers created economic dependency and imbalance of trade, incorporating Indigenous nations into spheres of influence and controlling them indirectly with the use of Christian missionaries and alcohol.[22] However, with the emergence of an independent United States, desire for land and the perceived threat of permanent indigenous political and spatial structures led to violent relocation of many indigenous tribes to the American West, including the notable example of the Cherokee in what is known as the Trail of Tears.[19]

Frederick Jackson Turner, the father of the "frontier thesis" of American history, noted in 1901: "Our colonial system did not start with Spanish War; the U.S. had had a colonial history from the beginning...hidden under the phraseology of 'interstate migration' and territorial organization'".[22] While the United States government and local state governments directly aided this dispossession through the use of military forces, ultimately this came about through agitation by settler society in order to gain access to indigenous land, which in some cases (especially in the American South) used in order to build a plantation society and perpetuate the practice of slavery in the creation of said plantation.[19] The settler colonialism extended past the removal and extermination of the Indigenous people. The practice of disappearing the prior existence also was implemented, and continues to be perpetuated in local histories.

From Wikipedia: The Council of New England, 1620 - 1635

- Click here for the article. 

The Council for New England was a 17th-century English joint stock company that was granted a royal charter to found colonial settlements along the coast of North America. The Council was established in November of 1620, and was disbanded (although with no apparent changes in land titles) in 1635. It provided for the establishment of the Plymouth Colony, the State of New Hampshire, the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the New Haven Colony, and the eventual State of Maine. It was largely the creation of Sir Ferdinand Gorges.

Some of the persons involved had previously received a charter in 1606 as the Plymouth Company and had founded the short-lived Popham Colony within the territory of northern Virginia (actually in present-day Maine in the United States). The company had fallen into disuse following the abandonment of the 1607 colony.[1] The Council was re-established after, with support from Gorges, (1) Captain John Smith had completed a thorough survey of the Atlantic side of New England (and named it such), (2) Richard Vines over-wintered in 1616, off the Maine coast and discovered that a plague was decimating Native Americans and (3) a friendly English speaking local Native American had been placed in the most likely colonization spot.

In the new 1620 charter granted by James I, the company was given rights of settlement in the area now designated as New England, which was the land previously part of the Virginia Colony north of the 40th parallel, and extending to the 48th parallel.[2] In 1622 the Plymouth Council issued a land grant to John Mason which ultimately evolved into the Province of New Hampshire.

- Ferdinando Gorges.
- John Mason.

Thursday, June 30, 2022

The Origins of Colonial America - Dates of establishment of colonies

- Harbor Grace Colony: 1583.
- Roanoke Colony: 1585.
- Plymouth Company: 1606
- Popham Colony: 1606
- Virginia: 1607
- Cuper's Cove: 1610.
- Plymouth  Colony: 1620 - 1691
- Bristol's Hope: 1618.
- New Netherland: 1621
- Nantasket (Hull): 1621
- Province of Maine: 1622.
- Cape Ann Colony: 1623.
- Massachusetts Bay Colony: 1629 / also 1641
- Province of New Hampshire: 1629
- Province of Maryland: 1632 - 1778
- Saybrook: 1635
- Providence Plantation: 1636
- Connecticut: 1636
- New Haven: 1637 - 1664
- New Sweden: 1638 - 1655
- Province of Carolina: 1683 - 1712
- Province of New Jersey: 1664
- Province of New York: 1664
- Province of East Jersey: 1674 - 1702
- Province of West Jersey: 1674 - 1702
- Province of Pennsylvania: 1681
- Dominion of New England: 1686 - 1689
- Province of Massachusetts Bay: 1691
- Delaware Colony: 1701
- North Carolina: 1712
- South Carolina: 1712
- Province of Georgia: 1732

From Wikipedia: Labor Rights

- Click here for the entry. 

Labor rights or workers' rights are both legal rights and human rights relating to labor relations between workers and employers. These rights are codified in national and international labor and employment law. In general, these rights influence working conditions in relations of employment. One of the most prominent is the right to freedom of association, otherwise known as the right to organize. Workers organized in trade unions exercise the right to collective bargaining to improve working conditions.

. . . Core labor standards

Identified by the ILO in the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work,[2] core labor standards are "widely recognized to be of particular importance".[3] They are universally applicable, regardless of whether the relevant conventions have been ratified, the level of development of a country or cultural values.[4] These standards are composed of qualitative, not quantitative standards and don't establish a particular level of working conditions, wages or health and safety standards.[2] They are not intended to undermine the comparative advantage that developing countries may hold. Core labor standards are important human rights and are recognized in widely ratified international human rights instruments including the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC), the most widely ratified human rights treaty with 193 parties, and the ICCPR with 160 parties.[5] They have been incorporated into different provisions that are related to labor in soft law instruments such as the UN's Global Compact, the OECD Guidelines, and the ILO MNE Declaration.[6]

- The core labor standards are:Freedom of association:[7] workers are able to join trade unions that are independent of government and employer influence;

- The right to collective bargaining:[8] workers may negotiate with employers collectively, as opposed to individually;

- The prohibition of all forms of forced labor:[9] includes security from prison labor and slavery, and prevents workers from being forced to work under duress;[10]

- Elimination of the worst forms of child labor:[11] implementing a minimum working age and certain working condition requirements for children;

- Non-discrimination in employment: equal pay for equal work.

Very few ILO member countries have ratified all of these conventions due to domestic constraints yet as these rights are also recognised in the UDHR, and form a part of customary international law they are committed to respect these rights. For a discussion on the incorporation of these core labor rights into the mechanisms of the World Trade Organization, see Labour standards in the World Trade Organization. There are many other issues outside of this core, in the UK employee rights includes the right to employment particulars, an itemised pay statement, a disciplinary process at which they have the right to be accompanied, daily breaks, rest breaks, paid holidays and more.

What is Labor Law?

From Wikipedia: Labor Laws: 

Labour laws (also known as labor laws or employment laws) are those that mediate the relationship between workers, employing entities, trade unions, and the government. Collective labour law relates to the tripartite relationship between employee, employer, and union. Individual labour law concerns employees' rights at work also through the contract for work. Employment standards are social norms (in some cases also technical standards) for the minimum socially acceptable conditions under which employees or contractors are allowed to work. Government agencies (such as the former US Employment Standards Administration) enforce labour law (legislature, regulatory, or judicial).

From Wikipedia: United States labor law:

United States labor law sets the rights and duties for employees, labor unions, and employers in the United States. Labor law's basic aim is to remedy the "inequality of bargaining power" between employees and employers, especially employers "organized in the corporate or other forms of ownership association".[3] Over the 20th century, federal law created minimum social and economic rights, and encouraged state laws to go beyond the minimum to favor employees.

Components of labor laws / Areas of conflict with business

1 - Contract and rights at work
- Scope of protection
- Contract of employment
- Wages and pay
- Working time and family care
- Pensions
- Health and safety
- Civil liberties

2 - Workplace participation
- Labor unions
- Collective bargaining
- Right to organize
- Collective action
- Right to vote at work

3 - Equality and discrimination
- Constitutional rights
- Equal treatment
- Equal impact and remedies
- Affirmative action
- Free movement and immigration

4 - Job security
- Termination and cause
- Economic layoffs
- Full employment
- Trade and international law

Development of Labor Laws

British 

- Ordinance of Labourers 1349.
- Statute of Labourers 1351.
- Statute of Artificers 1562.

American

- Railway Labor Act of 1926.
- National Labor Relations Act of 1935.
- Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
- Employment Act of 1946.

From the U.S. Department of Labor: Summary of the Major Laws of the Department of Labor.