Tag Archives: court

Forget Immigration and Affirmative Action. Chief Justice Roberts Wants to Talk About Peat Moss.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

With a month left before its summer recess, the Supreme Court has yet to issue rulings on several landmark cases involving immigration, reproductive rights, and affirmative action. So on Monday morning, TV cameras were parked outside, and the courtroom was buzzing with anticipation when the justices convened to release orders and opinions.

Then Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. read an opinion about peat moss.

Reporters in attendance, at least one of whom had driven all the way from Charlottesville, Virginia, for the occasion, hoped at least for a decision in Fisher v. University of Texas, the long-awaited case involving race in college admissions that was argued back in December. Or perhaps an opinion in the state of Texas’ case challenging the Obama administration’s executive action on immigration, which would defer the deportation of millions of undocumented immigrants. Even a ruling in Puerto Rico’s bankruptcy case would have been more exciting than US Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., a technical regulatory dispute involving peat moss and the Clean Water Act that was the subject of the first and only opinion of the day.

Reading from the bench, Roberts toyed with deflated reporters by jauntily discussing the benefits of peat, “an organic material that forms in waterlogged grounds, such as wetlands and bogs,” and its uses in gardening and golf. “It can also be used to provide structural support and moisture for smooth, stable greens that leave golfers with no one to blame but themselves for errant putts,” he continued. He ad libbed an observation about peat’s use in brewing whiskey, which was not in the published opinion.

But peat is not all golf balls and highballs, or the case wouldn’t have been at the high court. The Hawkes Co. wanted to harvest about 500 acres of peat moss from swampland in Minnesota for use in golf courses and landscaping. But the Army Corps told the company that the tract in question included wetlands, which it asserted were protected under the Clean Water Act. The Army Corps argued that its decision couldn’t be reviewed by the courts, but the company sued. The suit led Roberts to expound on the virtues of peat and ultimately to rule in the company’s favor by allowing the courts to oversee such wetlands determinations.

After Roberts cheerfully finished reading his opinion, he announced that there were no more decisions in the queue. Further opinions won’t come until next Monday.

While the unanimous Hawkes decision has the potential to weaken enforcement of the Clean Water Act, it isn’t among the court’s pending high-profile cases that could affect large numbers of people and tip the scales in the culture wars—the kinds of cases that make news. The cases that remain undecided are significant, and there are a lot of them. By one count, the court still needs to issue opinions in 24 cases argued this term. Right now there are only four days in June scheduled for the release of new decisions before the summer recess.

What explains the backlog? The court is not a transparent institution, so observers can only hypothesize. But the February death of Justice Antonin Scalia is no doubt a major factor. There’s been some speculation, for instance, that Scalia had been assigned to write the opinion in a case involving Puerto Rican self-governance. Puerto Rico v. Sanchez Valle remains the only case argued in January that hasn’t been decided. When Scalia died, the opinion in that case may have had to be reassigned to a different justice.

It’s possible that other half-written Scalia opinions, especially if they involved other contentious, potential 5-4 cases, are also in limbo or need to be retooled by other justices. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said last week, eight “is not a good number for a multi-member court.”

Regardless of the reasons for the slowdown, if the justices want to get out of town before the Fourth of July weekend and partake in some of those peat-enhanced activities, they’re going to have to start cranking out a lot more decisions.

Link: 

Forget Immigration and Affirmative Action. Chief Justice Roberts Wants to Talk About Peat Moss.

Posted in Casio, FF, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, organic, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Forget Immigration and Affirmative Action. Chief Justice Roberts Wants to Talk About Peat Moss.

BP takes Colorado to court and wins millions in tax breaks

BP takes Colorado to court and wins millions in tax breaks

By on May 11, 2016Share

It’s not too often one comes across a brand-new fossil fuel handout in 2016, but the Colorado Supreme Court just delivered the oil and gas industry a fat one. In a case pitting BP against the state’s Department of Revenue, the Court decided in late April to authorize some hefty tax deductions for the oil and gas giant. Taxpayers are now on the hook for up to $100 million in payments to BP and other companies this year — and since the ruling sets a precedent, they’ll take the hit in perpetuity.

As a company extracting natural resources in Colorado, BP must pay a severance tax to the state. However, natural gas extractors are allowed to deduct costs they can attribute to “transportation, manufacturing, and processing.” In the case, originally filed in 2005, BP argued that foregone dollars that the company “could have earned had they invested in other ventures rather than in building transportation and processing facilities” should count as these types of costs.

In other words, BP alleged that the money they theoretically could have earned, had they spent it elsewhere, represented a deductible cost to the company. And the Colorado Supreme Court agreed.

“It is absolutely a subsidy,” said Jessica Goad, communications director at Conservation Colorado. But Colorado is by no means alone in offering breaks to oil and gas companies. The United States spends some $20 billion in national fossil fuel production subsidies annually.

Colorado already has the lowest effective severance tax in the West. Under state law, oil and gas companies are able to count property taxes against severance tax payments.

In a last-ditch effort to disallow this kind of deduction under state law, Colorado House Democrats introduced a bill on Monday — but it died a procedural death on Tuesday night. Colorado’s legislative session ends on Wednesday. “It’s hard to write a brand new bill that solves a brand new problem in three days,” said Goad.

BP and others will continue to collect this windfall unless the legislature returns to the issue next session.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Visit link: 

BP takes Colorado to court and wins millions in tax breaks

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Oster, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on BP takes Colorado to court and wins millions in tax breaks

Flint Mayor Ordered Staffer to Divert Charitable Donations to Her Campaign Fund, Lawsuit Claims

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In November, Flint residents elected a new mayor, Karen Weaver, who promised to help solve the city’s lead crisis and hold local authorities accountable. Now, she’s mired in a controversy of her own.

On Monday, former City Administrator Natasha Henderson filed a lawsuit in US District Court against Weaver and the city of Flint, claiming she was wrongfully fired after raising concerns that Weaver was steering donations for Flint families into a campaign fund. According to the complaint, Henderson was approached in February by a tearful city employee, Maxine Murray, who told Henderson “she feared going to jail.” The mayor, the suit claims, had instructed Murray and a volunteer to direct donations from Safe Water Safe Homes, a fund created to repair antiquated plumbing in Flint homes, to a campaign account called Karenabout Flint, and give them “step-by-step” instructions on how to make a donation.

As CNN notes, “Karenabout Flint” is not a state-registered PAC, though “Karen About Flint” was the mayor’s campaign slogan, Twitter handle, and campaign website. According to the lawsuit, Henderson, the city’s top unelected official, reported the matter to Flint’s chief legal council in February and requested an investigation. Three days later, she was terminated on the account that there was no room in the city budget to fund her position—though Henderson noted that her position was funded by the state. The mayor’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Read the full complaint below.

DV.load(“https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2828814-Henderson-vs-Weaver.js”,
width: 630,
height: 500,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-2828814-Henderson-vs-Weaver”
);

Henderson vs Flint and Weaver (PDF)

Henderson vs Flint and Weaver (Text)

Link to article – 

Flint Mayor Ordered Staffer to Divert Charitable Donations to Her Campaign Fund, Lawsuit Claims

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, solar power, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Flint Mayor Ordered Staffer to Divert Charitable Donations to Her Campaign Fund, Lawsuit Claims

This West Virginia election is full of twists and coal money influence

This West Virginia election is full of twists and coal money influence

By on May 9, 2016Share

This story was originally published by Mother Jones and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

In 2004, with his company facing a $50 million fraud judgment, Don Blankenship, then the CEO of coal giant Massey Energy, spent $3 million in a successful effort to elect a little-known attorney named Brent Benjamin to the West Virginia Supreme Court, where Blankenship planned to appeal the judgment. A few years later, Benjamin voted to overturn the $50 million verdict. It was such a perfect illustration of money’s corrupting influence that it inspired a John Grisham novel.

Twelve years later, Blankenship has been sentenced to a year in prison for conspiring to violate mine safety regulations in the lead-up to a deadly explosion at one of his company’s mines in 2010. But the legacy of his political activism in the state — where he poured millions of dollars into conservative candidates and causes — has not ebbed. As Benjamin runs for reelection for the first time on Tuesday, following a 12-year term, funds from Blankenship allies are again flooding the race. But this time, this outside money is working against Benjamin, whom Blankenship’s allies deem insufficiently conservative. And Benjamin, without the financial backing of the business community, has been forced to turn to the very public financing system that was established as a response to his initial Blankenship-funded election.

Benjamin’s 2004 race haunts this year’s contest. The state Supreme Court justice he challenged that year was a liberal stalwart named Warren McGraw. Blankenship anticipated he would lose his appeal unless he could change the makeup of the five-member court, so he spent about $3 million to elect McGraw’s Republican challenger, Benjamin, then a Charleston attorney. Much of that money was channeled through a nonprofit called And for the Sake of the Kids, which ran ads accusing McGraw of voting to set a child molester free. Blankenship also personally paid for ads supporting Benjamin, solicited money to help elect him, and sent out letters urging doctors to donate to Benjamin’s campaign on the grounds that he would help lower their malpractice premiums, according to court documents.

Benjamin won. When Blankenship’s case came before the state Supreme Court a few years later, Benjamin joined a 3-2 majority in support of Blankenship and Massey Energy, tossing out the $50 million judgment.

That wasn’t the end of the case. Hugh Caperton, the man who had sued Massey, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on the grounds that Benjamin’s failure to recuse himself violated his right to a fair trial. The Supreme Court agreed with Caperton and sent the case back to West Virginia to be reheard with Benjamin recused. (Blankenship won again on the basis that the case should have been filed in the state of Virginia, where it is ongoing.)

Now, as he campaigns for reelection, Benjamin has found the dynamics that helped put him on the bench 12 years ago reversed. In 2004, Blankenship carried the torch for conservative causes in the state; today, Blankenship’s former personal aides continue his work to elect Republican legislators and pro-business justices. The difference is that Benjamin is no longer one of the candidates they favor.

“They’ve turned on him viciously,” says Tim Bailey, a prominent plaintiff’s lawyer who often challenges the coal companies in the state.

Operatives and allies once in Blankenship’s orbit are now actively working against Benjamin. Greg Thomas, whom Blankenship hired to run And for the Sake of the Kids, was until last year the executive director of a conservative legal advocacy group called West Virginia Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse (CALA). Last summer, CALA began raising questions about Benjamin’s record, highlighting cases where Benjamin joined the more liberal justices in favor of personal-injury plaintiffs and against the interest of businesses. When a conservative lawyer named Beth Walker announced that she would challenge Benjamin last June, CALA supported her. (CALA’s current executive director, Roman Stauffer, ran Walker’s first Supreme Court campaign in 2008, which she narrowly lost.) Thomas, who is now a Republican consultant, told the Charleston Gazette-Mail last year that Blankenship spent heavily on the 2004 race in order to unseat McGraw — not because he particularly liked Benjamin.

Walker was formerly a partner at one of the state’s top corporate law firms, Bowles Rice, which frequently represents coal companies and big business. Walker’s husband, Mike Walker, is a former executive at his family’s machinery company, which was a major contractor with coal companies. Walker Machinery donated $25,000 to And for the Sake of the Kids in 2004.

Leading conservative groups have rallied around Walker, using outside spending to flood the airwaves in the final weeks before Tuesday’s election. As of May 5, the Republican State Leadership Committee, which is active in judicial elections across the country, had spent nearly $750,000 on Walker’s behalf and another $1.9 million against her opponents. The West Virginia Chamber of Commerce has spent almost $270,000 to back Walker.

“Conservative business people, who are mostly Republicans, expected that after [Benjamin] got elected that he would rule their way all the time, and he hasn’t done that,” says Anthony Majestro, a personal-injury attorney who also represents Democrats running for office. “In a couple of high-profile cases, he voted, I think the business community would say, the wrong way. I think they saw a 12-year seat up for grabs and they handpicked somebody they think will vote their way all the time.”

One case cited by CALA, the conservative legal group, as evidence that Benjamin does not deserve reelection was a 2006 decision in which Benjamin joined the majority in ruling that an injured forklift operator in Virginia had the right to sue the product distributor in West Virginia. (The only dissenting justice was photographed vacationing with Blankenship in the French Riviera the same month the case was decided.) CALA also cites a case in which Benjamin joined a 3-2 majority in finding that individuals addicted to prescription drugs could sue the pharmacies that encouraged and profited from that addiction. CALA argued that the addicts shouldn’t be able to sue because they obtained or took the drugs illegally, and CALA’s executive director wrote last November that Benjamin “decided to enable criminals and their attorneys to profit from illegal behavior.”

“CALA and the people who support them care about stopping lawsuits,” says Majestro. “And so what their problem with Justice Benjamin was, is he didn’t go far enough.”

Without the support of the business community, Benjamin turned to the state’s public financing program to fund his reelection campaign — a program that was born as a reaction to the conspicuous circumstances of his 2004 election. “From a personal standpoint,” Benjamin explained to the West Virginia radio network Metro News, “I made the decision I could not judge cases and then know that my campaign committee was going to those very same people appearing in front of me, whether they be lawyers or clients of the lawyers, and asking for money.”

But it’s not easy to qualify for public financing in West Virginia. Benjamin needed to raise at least $35,000 from a minimum of 500 individual contributors from across the state. So an unlikely group helped secure Benjamin public financing: the trial attorneys and personal-injury lawyers who go up against the coal and business interests who backed Benjamin’s 2004 election.

In 2004, Majestro helped McGraw raise money in his race against Benjamin. This year, he went to work for Benjamin. “I helped qualify him for public financing, which is among the ironies of this,” he says. Majestro says he helped Benjamin raise about $20,000 in a few days from fellow plaintiff’s attorneys.

That the plaintiff’s bar decided to help out Benjamin is a testament to his record on the bench. “Most lawyers feel that he’s conservative but very fair,” says Bob Fitzsimmons, a well-known personal-injury lawyer in Wheeling. “A lot of the stuff that went on in that whole [2004] election gives an impression that I don’t necessarily ascribe to. I always have felt that he was a really good lawyer and a good person.” Bailey says that, considering who backed Benjamin in 2004, he turned out to be “a heck of a lot more fair than we assumed.”

A group run by plaintiff’s lawyers, Just Courts for West Virginia Political Action Committee, has spent more than $200,000 on an ad attacking Walker. It invokes Blankenship’s role in the 2004 election, portraying Walker — not Benjamin — as beholden to Blankenship. “In 2004, Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship spent $3 million to elect a Supreme Court justice,” the narrator says, not mentioning that that justice was Benjamin. “Before her first campaign, Beth Walker met with Blankenship and hired his operative to run it. Now, Blankenship’s operatives and executives are funding Walker’s current campaign.” The ad concludes, “Don’t let special corporate interests buy Beth Walker a seat on our Supreme Court.”

Benjamin and Walker aren’t the only candidates in the race. In 2014, Republicans took control of the West Virginia legislature for the first time in more than 80 years and moved quickly to pass several judicial reforms. Among them, the legislature made judicial elections nonpartisan — a longtime goal for Republicans, since Democrats still outnumber them in party registration — and eliminated primaries, instead setting the election on the day of the state’s primaries. The result is a system in which a candidate can win a 12-year Supreme Court term with a plurality of the vote in a low-turnout election.

This year, there are five candidates in the race, allowing a candidate with high name recognition to come out on top over a divided field. On Jan. 30, the deadline for candidates to file, a surprise entrant upended the race: Darrell McGraw, the 79-year-old brother of former Justice Warren McGraw, whom Benjamin unseated in 2004. Darrell McGraw is well known throughout the state. He already served as a state Supreme Court justice from 1976 to 1988, and then spent 20 years as the Democratic state attorney general. The 2014 judicial reforms, intended to help elect conservative justices, may instead hand the seat to one of the state’s most prominent liberals.

McGraw took the lead in an early poll — there have not been any recent polls — and became the main target of attack ads from outside Republican groups. The presidential primary election could also pose a problem for Walker and Benjamin. The fact that Donald Trump is now the de facto Republican nominee could dampen GOP turnout, while the Democratic primary between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders is still drawing Democrats to the polls. (Trump reportedly told supporters on Thursday to stay home from the primary now that he is the presumptive nominee.) The Supreme Court hopefuls are also near the bottom of the ballots, which may run longer than 20 pages in some counties, and many voters may stop voting before they reach the end.

The number of twists and turns in this contest have made the outcome anyone’s guess. In the 12 long years since Benjamin was elected, alliances have been turned upside down, nonpartisan campaigns have replaced partisan ones, and a public financing system has emerged. But in other ways, not a lot has changed.

“If Don Blankenship drops $3 million into an election years ago with a shadow group called And for the Sake of the Kids,” says Bailey, the plaintiff’s attorney, “and [now] the Chamber and the Republican Party drop in $2 million on a nonpartisan, one-shot primary type deal, you tell me what improvement we’ve had.”

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Source: 

This West Virginia election is full of twists and coal money influence

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This West Virginia election is full of twists and coal money influence

The Supreme Court Just Made Government Hacking Much Easier

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A Supreme Court ruling issued Thursday could make it much easier for the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies to hack computers across the country, angering privacy advocates and drawing a rebuke from Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

The court approved a change to Rule 41 of the federal rules of criminal procedure, which outlines how federal criminal cases are run. The current version of the rule says search warrants are only valid in the relatively small judicial districts where they were issued. Under the new rule, magistrate judges would be able to issue warrants that apply to computers throughout the country, allowing law enforcement officers to hack and infect them remotely. The change still has to be approved by Congress, which has until December 1 to reject or alter the rule change before it automatically takes effect.

The government says the change is necessary to keep up with wide-ranging computer networks and criminals who use tools to hide their physical locations online. Courts in Oklahoma and Massachusetts threw out evidence this month in two child pornography cases stemming from the government’s takeover of a dark-web site called Playpen, which it used to insert tracking tools into the computers of people accessing child porn. Because the order allowing the takeover was issued by a judge in Virginia, the judges in the two cases said, the evidence from the investigation could not be used elsewhere.

But privacy advocates say the rule change is an attempt by the government to expand its hacking powers without public debate. “Instead of directly asking Congress for authorization to break into computers, the Justice Department is now trying to quietly circumvent the legislative process by pushing for a change in court rules, pretending that its government hacking proposal is a mere procedural formality rather than the massive change to the law that it really is,” said Kevin Bankston, the director of the Open Technology Institute at the liberal-leaning New America Foundation, in a statement.

Sen. Ron Wyden also attacked the rule change as overly broad. “Under the proposed rules, the government would now be able to obtain a single warrant to access and search thousands or millions of computers at once; and the vast majority of the affected computers would belong to the victims, not the perpetrators, of a cybercrime,” he said in a press release. Wyden has promised to introduce a bill that would reverse the Supreme Court’s ruling.

See original article: 

The Supreme Court Just Made Government Hacking Much Easier

Posted in Anchor, Casio, Cyber, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Just Made Government Hacking Much Easier

Will Citizens United Save Bob McDonnell From Prison?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United, which overturned restrictions on corporate and union campaign contributions, has been blamed for a lot of things: a flood of “ads that pull our politics into the gutter” (per President Barack Obama), the increased power of billionaires in politics, and even the rise of Donald Trump. This year, critics might be able to add another item to that list: keeping disgraced former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell out of prison.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the criminal case against the former rising star of the Republican Party. In January 2015, a federal judge sentenced McDonnell to two years in prison on corruption charges, stemming from his acceptance of loans and gifts from a political supporter. McDonnell is now fighting the sentence before the Supreme Court. The former governor argues that the charges against him should be thrown out, pointing to the court’s ruling in Citizens United where the court’s majority rejected the notion that political favors are always equivalent to criminal corruption. If the court agrees with McDonnell, prosecutors might have a more difficult time going after public corruption in the future.

Here are the facts of the case. When McDonnell took office in 2010, he and his wife were in deep financial trouble, in large part because of bad real estate investments. He owed credit card companies nearly $75,000 and was losing money on rental properties he owned with his sister in Virginia Beach that were mortgaged to the hilt. He’d borrowed $160,000 from friends and family to stay afloat.

Continue Reading »

See the article here – 

Will Citizens United Save Bob McDonnell From Prison?

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, Landmark, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Will Citizens United Save Bob McDonnell From Prison?

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona’s Right to Ensure Minority Representation

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Supreme Court upheld an Arizona redistricting commission’s right to draw legislative districts in a way that ensures minority representation, delivering a crushing rebuke on Wednesday to a group of Arizona tea party activists who’d sought to strike down the state’s redistricting maps in order to increase the voting power of rural white voters.

In Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, the plaintiffs were taking on Arizona’s Independent Election Commission, a body created through a 2000 ballot initiative intended to make redistricting less partisan. The commission produced its first legislative maps after the 2010 census. Its work came under fire almost immediately, primarily by Republicans. At one point, then-Gov. Jan Brewer (R) attempted to impeach the commission’s chair in what was seen as a power grab. When that failed, in 2012, the Republican-led state legislature filed a lawsuit arguing that the ballot measure that created the commission was unconstitutional because it deprived the legislature of its redistricting power. The lawsuit went all the way to the US Supreme Court, which last June ruled 5-4 in the commission’s favor.

In the current lawsuit, filed in 2014, the plaintiffs, all Republicans, argued that the commission diluted their voting power by packing more people into Republican districts while underpopulating Democratic ones. They wanted the court to mandate that all district have almost exactly equal populations; the current ones vary by 4 to 8 percent. The commission, in turn, responded that it drew the districts in such a way as to win approval from the Justice Department, in compliance with the Voting Rights Act. Due to Arizona’s long history of suppressing minority voting, it was one of the jurisdictions required under the Voting Rights Act to clear any changes to legislative districts with the Justice Department before implementing them. The Supreme Court gutted this requirement in Shelby County v. Holder in 2013, but it was in place when Arizona redrew its legislative maps.

If the Harris plaintiffs had been successful, the case could have opened the floodgates to lawsuits challenging how states around the country draw their legislative districts. But in an opinion written by Justice Stephen Breyer, the court ruled unanimously that Arizona’s maps were indeed designed to comply with federal law in ensuring minority representation, and that the minor population deviations were acceptable.

It’s the second time this term the court has rejected challenges to state redistricting plans from tea party conservatives upset about the growing clout of Latino voters. In Evenwel v. Abbott, decided earlier this month, a pair of Texas plaintiffs argued that states should create state legislative districts based on the number of eligible voters in them, as opposed to total population. The move would have granted more power to rural, white areas that lean Republican over more populated urban areas that are home to large minority (and Democratic-leaning) populations. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the Evenwel plaintiffs.

Continue Reading »

See original article: 

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona’s Right to Ensure Minority Representation

Posted in Anchor, cannabis, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Supreme Court Upholds Arizona’s Right to Ensure Minority Representation

The Supreme Court Justices Are in a Jam on Immigration

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

When the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in a critical case, the justices often provide hints in their questions about how they might rule. But after Monday’s arguments in United States v. Texas, a challenge by 26 states to President Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration, the only thing that seemed clear was that the court was in a massive bind, having been asked to settle a contentious political question that it was not keen to address.

There were few, if any, hints—and this probably doesn’t bode well for the president’s attempt to bring 4 million immigrants out of the shadows and allow them a foothold into the legal employment market. The questions from the justices showed a marked lack of consensus on all the key issues at play. And if the court ends up deadlocked with a 4-4 vote, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling against the administration will stand, and Obama’s immigration action will be eviscerated.

The case stems from a lawsuit filed in December 2014, a month after the Obama administration ordered immigration officials to defer the deportation of millions of law-abiding immigrants who had come to the country illegally but had children who were US citizens or legal permanent residents. The action, which was blocked by the lower court before it could be implemented, wouldn’t grant any immigrants legal status, but it would permit many of them to apply for legal work authorizations and the ability to participate in the Social Security system.

Continue Reading »

Originally posted here: 

The Supreme Court Justices Are in a Jam on Immigration

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Justices Are in a Jam on Immigration

The Time Ted Cruz Defended a Ban on Dildos

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In one chapter of his campaign book, A Time for Truth, Sen. Ted Cruz proudly chronicles his days as a Texas solicitor general, a post he held from 2003 to 2008. Bolstering his conservative cred, the Republican presidential candidate notes that during his stint as the state’s chief lawyer before the Supreme Court and federal and state appellate courts, he defended the inclusion of “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, the display of the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the state capitol, a congressional redistricting plan that assisted Republicans, a restrictive voter identification law, and a ban on late-term abortions. He also described cases in which he championed gun rights and defended the conviction of a Mexican citizen who raped and murdered two teenage girls in a case challenged by the World Court. Yet one case he does not mention is the time he helped defend a law criminalizing the sale of dildos.

The case was actually an important battle concerning privacy and free speech rights. In 2004, companies that owned Austin stores selling sex toys and a retail distributor of such products challenged a Texas law outlawing the sale and promotion of supposedly obscene devices. Under the law, a person who violated the statute could go to jail for up to two years. At the time, only three states—Mississippi, Alabama, and Virginia—had similar laws. (The previous year, a Texas mother who was a sales rep for Passion Parties was arrested by two undercover cops for selling vibrators and other sex-related goods at a gathering akin to a Tupperware party for sex toys. No doubt, this had worried businesses peddling such wares.) The plaintiffs in the sex-device case contended the state law violated the right to privacy under the 14th Amendment. They argued that many people in Texas used sexual devices as an aspect of their sexual experiences. They claimed that in some instances one partner in a couple might be physically unable to engage in intercourse or have a contagious disease (such as HIV) and that in these cases such devices could allow a couple to engage in safe sex.

Continue Reading »

Taken from:  

The Time Ted Cruz Defended a Ban on Dildos

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, Pines, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Time Ted Cruz Defended a Ban on Dildos

The world’s largest private coal company just went bankrupt

The world’s largest private coal company just went bankrupt

By on 13 Apr 2016 5:08 amcommentsShare

In a move that has environmentalists hunting for graves to dance on, Peabody Energy, the world’s largest private-sector coal company, has filed for bankruptcy.

It’s the fourth major U.S. coal company to go bankrupt in the last year. The dirtiest fossil fuel sector has been hit hard by the natural gas boom and dropping prices for renewables. Further adding to coal’s woes are Obama’s pending Clean Power Plan and aggressive anti-coal organizing by climate activists.

In a statement, the company said that with the Chapter 11 filing, it intends to reduce its debt level, improve its cash flow, and “position the company for long-term success, while continuing to operate under the protection of the court process.” At the time of writing, nobody had yet had the heart to tell CEO Glenn Kellow that the coal industry itself might not be poised for the kind of success that could eventually revive the company.

Peabody is more than $6 billion in debt. Last month, the company missed a $71 million interest payment and its credit rating was downgraded to a “D” by Standard and Poor’s. Recently, Peabody had been attempting to sell off mines in New Mexico and Colorado in order to stay afloat, but the company’s statement notes that those planned sales have been terminated. (Peabody’s Australian arm is not part of the bankruptcy filing.)

Last week, we reported that Peabody had “self-bonded” to cover $1.4 billion in mine reclamation and cleanup costs, and that those costs were in danger of being passed along to taxpayers if the company went bankrupt. But the company claims that won’t happen. “Peabody intends to continue to work with the applicable state governments and federal agencies to meet its reclamation obligations,” its statement says. Here’s hoping.

In the meantime, enjoy that grave dance.

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Link to article – 

The world’s largest private coal company just went bankrupt

Posted in alo, Anchor, Energy, Inc., FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The world’s largest private coal company just went bankrupt