Federal Court Refuses To Review Prop 8 Setting Stage for Potential Supreme Court Battle
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has declined to review California’s Gay Marriage Ban passed by the…
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has declined to review California’s Gay Marriage Ban passed by the…
Most of the left considered the election of an African-American president to be an historic moment back in 2008. Since that time, most probably have felt various senses of frustration and disappointment in the lackluster and largely cautious and centrist presidency of Barack Obama.
However, this week President Obama undoubtedly reminded many on the left of the still unfulfilled promise of his presidency, which is why many will undoubtedly hold their nose, given no other real choice, and vote to reelect the man.
The Reuters news item was startling:
The WHO [World Health Organization] has convened a special meeting on Wednesday [March 21, 2012] to discuss whether the emergence of TB strains that seem to be resistant to all known medicines merits a new class definition of “totally drug-resistant TB”, or TDR-TB.
A number of people have noted to me over the past few weeks that I have been unusually quiet about the Trayvon Martin shooting. The truth is that I have withheld judgment on this case, and thus commentary, precisely because something did not sit well with me.
This is indeed a horrible tragedy and my heart goes out to the family of Mr. Martin. But frankly I am appalled at the conduct of the media and in particular the TV networks who, for some time, seemed to be seizing on the thinnest of reeds to condemn George Zimmerman and make this into an act of racism.
At the same time, while covering a war zone, one has to know there are risks and accept them. Covering the occupation of a bank, perhaps less so.
In fact, that number is probably larger than Mr. Obama’s vote share in 2008, simply because there is a subset of people who would not vote for Mr. Obama but might have voted for a black Republican.
This is not a new question, we first pondered this back in May of 2007 with a commentary called, “When ‘Fair and Balanced’ is Less Accurate.”
Occupy groups from across the region converged on Davis this morning to protest and block operations of Monsanto. The protest is part of a “Global Days of Action to Shut Down Monsanto” in dozens of U.S. cities and several countries.
There was a recent article that appeared in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS December 2011-Vol. 59, NO. 12 Autonomy When Doctors and Daughters Disagree), in regard to the limitations of advanced health care directives (AHCDs). A case study cited in the article is illustrative of the difficulties inherent in these problematic legal documents.
An 83 year old woman with multiple and massive health problems, completed a legal advanced directive at her primary care physician’s office, expressing a wish to forgo intubation and any attempted cardiopulmonary resuscitation should the need arise. Once this elderly lady did become acutely ill, she was rushed to the emergency room for medical treatment. Emergency personnel asked the family for permission to intubate, and the woman’s two daughters agreed. This was done despite the patient’s previously expressed wishes to the contrary, which all parties were well aware of.
According to a variety of news accounts, a clash ensued yesterday between members of the Occupy Oakland movement, who journeyed to the state Capitol to counter a rally by a group called the South African Project, and that group, which claims to be in existence to stop the murder, torture and genocide of the white South Africans.
According to the Associated Press, the clash erupted on Monday afternoon, as the California Highway Patrol and Sacramento police were escorting 35 members of the South African group, who had a permit to demonstrate, following their rally outside the Capitol.
The new legislation, according to a release from Senator Leno’s office, SB 1506, does not apply to anyone involved in selling, manufacturing or possessing drugs for sale. The bill would help alleviate overcrowding in state prisons and county jails, ease pressure on California’s court system and result in millions of dollars in annual savings for both state and local governments.
When the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its ruling on Proposition 8, defenders of the ban on gay marriage were quick to point out that the Ninth Circuit has a history of liberal opinions that have been overturned on further appeal and that this simply marks the latest one.
However, the argument that the Ninth Circuit is the most overturned federal appellate court is actually more statistical artifact than premise based on any higher frequency of overturned decisions. The fact is, the Ninth Circuit court represents more states than other courts and handles a higher case load. Statistically speaking, the overturn rate is in line with other courts.
“Prior to November 4, 2008, the California Constitution guaranteed the right to marry to opposite-sex couples and same-sex couple alike,” the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals began in what will be a landmark decision, marking the first time a federal circuit court has ruled in favor of equal rights for same sex couples.
“On that day,” the court continued, “the People of California adopted Proposition 8, which amended the state constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. We consider whether that amendment violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United State Constitution. We conclude that it does.”
The following are interesting tidbits emanating from the Penn State University sex abuse scandal (in which former football coach Joe Paterno only reported molestation allegations of a minor, by one of his defensive coordinators Jerry Sandusky, to his immediate superiors but not to law enforcement):
In the past, executive pay limits have not been successful, but given the renewed focus on fee hikes, the Occupy movement and student protests, there is a good chance the latest effort by Senator Leland Yee to introduce legislation to prohibit pay raises for top university administrators during bad budget years, or when student fees are increased, will be successful.
According to the release from the Senator’s office, the bill will also prohibit incoming executives from earning more than 105 percent of their predecessors’ pay. UC and CSU have historically given new administrators more than double-digit pay hikes. In May 2009, the UC Board of Regents approved a $400,000 salary for UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi, which equated to a 27 percent hike from her predecessor.
It all started on Wednesday, when the freshman legislator was boarding a flight to Sacramento at the Ontario Airport when he was stopped and cited by airport police. Why? He was carrying in his bag, a .45-caliber Colt Mark IV that had four rounds in its magazine and a spare magazine with five additional rounds.
Redevelopment Fallout
The first of many takes on redevelopment comes from the Sacramento Bee, one of the few entities critical of the existing system. They argue the Supreme Court “delivered a complete rebuke to cities and redevelopment agencies, deservedly so.”
Throughout the Occupy Movement, I have heard some interesting comments, such as “The camps have become a place where the local homeless population has taken up residence.” As if homeless people somehow do not have legitimate grievances with their government.
One thing that has become clear in the aftermath of the pepper-spraying incident at UC Davis is the need for new voices on the UC Board of Regents. In his final appointment, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger named David Crane.