Ravitch Fiscal Reform Plan- Full Text

The following is an e-mail from Emily which mentions the work of the White House open government working group and includes a request for suggestions regarding specific types of information and datasets you would like to see agencies publish. Although Emily's e-mail is directed primarily to law librarians I am posting it here because of the value of this initiative to the entire legal community.

FROM: Emily Feldman
March 10, 2010

The White House’s open government working group has held several meetings with stakeholders, including AALL, to develop criteria to measure agency open government plans, which must be published by April 7. At a meeting last Friday, I was pleased to learn that the working group adopted Mary Alice’s suggestion that Executive Branch agencies be evaluated based in part on whether they commit in their plans to publish new information (e.g., reports and publications) on their Web sites, in addition to new high-value datasets in XML on Data.gov.

We’re looking for specific types of information and datasets that you’d like to see agencies publish. The working group is also very interested in any cross-agency datasets you’d like to see added to Data.gov (e.g., crime data from DOJ/DHS, health data from EPA/HHS).

Some of the suggestions we’ve received so far include:

· All historic content that agencies have digitized (presuming that agencies followed the Paperwork Reduction Act and didn’t make exclusive deals)

· All the legislative histories that have been digitized by the Department of Justice Library

· Dataset on "charges of discrimination" filed from the EEOC

Are there other information holdings or datasets that you’d like to see added? Please email me the title and name of the publishing agency by COB next Wednesday, March 17.

Thanks,

Emily

Emily Feldman
Advocacy Communications Assistant
American Association of Law Libraries
25 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 500
Washington, D.C. 20001

202-942-4233

Fax: 202-737-0480
efeldman@aall.org

http://www.aallnet.org/aallwash

103nd Annual Meeting & Conference / Denver, CO. / July 10-13, 2010

On March 2, 2010 for very different reasons the present criminal court building in Manhattan was evacuated due to smoke and water damage caused by an electrical fire in the basement.. When the last people were out, policemen, firemen and court officers took charge of the building and for a time did not permit anyone to enter the building except for business related to coping with the emergency situation..

As noted earlier there were many differences in the two events. By most accounts the old criminal courts building was in very poor condition by 1909. The present Criminal Courts buiilding is perfectly safe and in good condition with lingering smoke and other residual damage from the fire causing the building to remain closed until March 8.

We do not know how the courts, the office of district attorney, and other departments functioned during the evacuation of 1909; but by all accounts work continued quite efficiently during the present evacuation with many working in adjacent buildings and some using computers to work from their homes.

Let's hope we don't have another evacuation during the next one hundred years.

The New York Times has been doing a good job keeping concerns about helth care alive through its ongong list of articles and editorials telling us what is happening and where they think we might be going. Here are links to a few:

Editorial:

If Reform Fails
Published: March 7, 2010

"There are some basic facts Americans need to know as Congress decides whether to approve comprehensive health reform or continue with what we have."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/opinion/07sun1.html

This editorial is a part of a comprehensive examination {by the New York Times] of the debate over health care reform. You can read all of these editorials at: nytimes.com/edhealthcare2009

Recent Article:

Health
Prescriptions: A Handy Road Map for the Final Weeks
By By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
Published: March 8, 2010
With the health care debate in the home stretch, the main action is now in the House.

Oregon Law Libraries RFP Rev4_1

For more information, contact:

Laura J. Orr

Law Librarian

Washington County Law Library

111 NE Lincoln St

Hillsboro, OR 97124

Phone: 503-846-8880

Email: lawlibrary@co.washington.or.us
URL: http://www.co.washington.or.us/lawlibrary
Oregon Legal Research Blog: http://oregonlegalresearch.blogspot.com/

While we cannot provide you a copy of the actual Survey, the Deloitte whitepaper, Cyber Crime: A Clear and Present Danger reports on several of the survey findings and includes Deloitte's interpretation of key results. Quoting from the Introduction to the white papter: "By its very nature, interpretation goes beyond simple reporting of results...and may prompt disagreement and even controversy"

With that, we invite you to download the white paper from the link below, read it, and draw your own conclusions

Cyber Crime: A Clear and Present Danger

David Badertscher

Of special concern to many readers of this blog is the severe negative impact these judicial line item reductions are having on judicial law libraries in the State of Connecicut, as indicated in testimony of the Connecticut Chief Court Administrator to the Appropriations Committee included in this post and by the many expressions of concern among Connecticut citizens as reported elsewhere.

The Chief Court Administrator of Connecticut, Judge Barbara M. Quinn has argued before the Appropriations Committee on February 9 that the unilateral reduction of Other Judicial Expense line items by the Executive Branch infringes on the Separation of Powers and can be remedied by OPM simply transmitting the Judicial request unchanged to the legislature. Two sections of Judge Quinn's testimony are especially important and are highlighted below in this posting. The section on Law Libraries which highlights the importance of law libraries in Connecticut to both the Judiciary and the public has relevance both in Connecticut and throughout the nation. A second part of Judge Quinn's testimony highlighted below is her statement on "Concurrence in Allotment Reductions and Rescissions," which frames the issue nicely.

Sections of Testimony Highlighted:

Law Libraries
"The Governor's proposed budget provides no funding for law libraries. If this provision is enacted, it will be the second year in a row of zero funding. This is a critical gap; law libraries cannot function without updated research materials.

Let me explain something about law libraries that makes them different from your local library where perhaps you could curtail purchasing new books for a while and then start up again. Because the law is constantly evolving, the most up-to-date information must be made available to anyone who has cases pending before the court. Up-to-date legal research tools, in both electronic and printed form, are essential in order for judges to render rulings that are consistent with law and legal precedent because case law is only as good as the last case decided. And that case law is updated daily. This is what makes law libraries distinct from other libraries - just not buying the latest books is not an option"

Concurrence in allotment reductions and rescissions
Undoubtedly, the most critical budget reform that we seek is one that would curb the unilateral and increasingly untenable budget reductions that are imposed upon the Branch after the Legislature has adopted the budget. Virtually all of our budgetary problems over the past 2 years, and in particular this year, are the result of allotment reductions and rescissions about which neither the Branch nor the Legislature were consulted. I would respectfully propose to you that in the future, any post-budget adoption reductions that are made to the Judicial Branch should require the concurrence of the Legislature. The Branch will be submitting legislation for your consideration that would implement these vital budget reforms.

A bill, "An Act Concerning Funding For the Judicial Branch" (No. 5148) which seeks to correct the matter has recently been introduced in the Connecticut legislature.

Below are links to the full text of both the Testimony and pending legislation referred to in this posting.

Testimony of Chief Court Administrator to Appropriations Commett

An Act Concerning Funding For the Judicial Branch

In the absence of a stay, misdemeanor cases will again only be assigned to judges who have been appointed to the New York Supreme Court. The plan is for judges to continue sitting in hybrid parts, with misdemeanors being heard as Criminal Court cases and felonies as Supreme Court matters.

In dissent, Justice Rolando T. Acosta warned that the majority's "unbridled judicial activism effectively upends tens of thousands of mesdemeanor convictions in Bronx County over the past five years."

Those who need additional background information are referred to the link below to the New York City Bar. Report on the Merger of the Bronx Supreme and Criminal Courts, June 2009.

ABCNY Report on the Merger of the Bronx Supreme and Criminal Courts, June 2009

Note that free DVDs of this talk are available to libraries,
educators, and other interested in running screenings - email
dvd@isoc-ny.org and ask for DVD1710.

http://www.isoc-ny.org/?p=1338

From: ISOC-NY Announcements February 23, 2010

In a 5 - 1 decision the New York Court of Appeals found that the legislature and the executive branches had undermined the independence of the judicial branch by tying judges pay raises to unrelated legislation, including bills to raise legislators own salaries, thereby violating the separation of powers doctrine. The last pay raise for New York judges was in 1998.

In his dissent Judge Robert S. Smith stated that while he shares his colleagues' dismay at the Legislature's behavior in dealing with, or rather failing to deal with, judges' salaries, he "cannot agree that any of its actions or inactions are unconstitutional...."

The current Chier Judge of the Court of Appeals, Jonathan Lippman, recused himself from the deliberations because he was a plaintiff in one of the cases the ruling addresses.

Public Statement of Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, delivered on February 23, 2010 at 1:PM.

Here are excerpts from the beginning and end of the decision:

PIGOTT, J.:

"The constitutional arguments raised in these judicial compensation appeals are premised upon, among other things, alleged violations of the New York State Constitution's Compensation Clause and the Separation of Powers Doctrine. Because the Separation of Powers doctrine is aimed at preventing one branch of government from dominating or interfering with the functioning of another co-equal branch, we conclude that the independence of the judiciary is improperly jeopardized by the current judicial pay crisis and this constitutes a violation of the Separation of Powers Doctrine."

Conclusion
It is unfortunate that this Court has been called upon to adjudicate constitutional issues relative to an underlying matter upon which all have agreed; namely, that the Judiciary is entitled to a compensation adjustment. By ensuring that any judicial salary increases will be premised on their merits, this holding aims to strike the appropriate balance between preserving the independence of the Judiciary and avoiding encroachment on the budget-making authority of the Legislature. Therefore, judicial compensation, when addressed by the Legislature in
present and future budget deliberations cannot depend on unrelated policy initiatives or legislative compensation adjustments. Of course, whether judicial compensation should be
adjusted, and by how much, is within the province of the Legislature. It should keep in mind, however, that whether the Legislature has met its constitutional obligations in that regard is within the province of this Court (see Marbury v Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177 [1803]). We therefore expect appropriate and expeditious legislative consideration.

Accordingly, In Maron, the order of the Appellate Division should be modified, without costs, by remitting to Supreme Court for - 35 - No. 016; 017; 018 - 35 - further proceedings in accordance with this opinion, and as so modified, affirmed.

In Larabee, the order of Appellate Division should be modified, and in Chief Judge, the judgment of Supreme Court and the order of the Appellate Division should be modified, without costs, by granting judgment declaring that under the circumstances of these cases, as a matter of law, the State defendants' failure to consider judicial compensation on the merits violates the Separation of Powers Doctrine, and by allowing for the remedy discussed in this opinion, and, asmodified, affirmed.

SEE FULL TEXT OF DECISION AT:

New York Court of Appeals Judicial Compensation Decision February 23, 2010

The President's health care proposal as released on February 22 purports to put "...American families and small business owners in control of their health care. To help those who are following this issue we are providing in this post, links to a 10+ page Summary prepared by the White House. This document provides a good overview and discussion regarding provisions in the proposed legislation.

SUMMARY

Exploring the Proposal

This is a link for those who want to really explore the President Obama's Health Care Proposal through more comprehensive Section by Section analysis .

Both of the above links will lead you to very useful information. We would urge everyone to explore these documents.

Roll Call article.

Family Law
Law Student Charged with Contempt for Exposing Daughter to Christianity
Feb 17, 2010, 06:46 am CST

Careers
Will Deferred Associates Idea Backfire for Law Firms?
Feb 16, 2010, 09:33 am CST

Law Practice Management
Firm Hit Over Partner's Hiring Question: How Can We Identify New Mom's Commitment?
Feb 16, 2010, 09:05 am CST

Juries
'Scary' Jurors Spur Switch to Bench Trial, Highlighting Growing Problem
Feb 16, 2010, 05:29 am CST

Solos/Small Firms
BigLaw Lawyers Jump to Small Firms, Law's Fastest Growing Sector
Feb 16, 2010, 06:00 am CST

Plus: 2 Partners of Well-Known Firm Downsize, Now Answer Own Phones at Own Shop
Attorney Fees
McGuireWoods Denied Fee in $49M BAR/BRI Settlement; Conflict Cited
Feb 18, 2010, 07:50 am CST

Careers
Tired of Law Practice? You Can Still Work at a Law Firm
Feb 17, 2010, 09:25 am CST

U.S. Supreme Court
Scalia Opines on Right to Secede in Letter to Screenwriter
Feb 17, 2010, 08:06 am CST

Law Professors
Law Prof Backs First Amendment Over Ban of R-Word
Feb 18, 2010, 05:30 am CST

Labor & Employment
EEOC Hit with $4.5M Legal Fee Award in Losing 'Pattern & Practice' Case, Plans Appeal
Feb 17, 2010, 04:56 pm CST

The following are two very informative profiles from the New York Times:

The first profile contains both information about Hon. Jonathan Lippman and emphasizes the impact he has had during his first year as Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals:

Top Judge Sets Liberal Course for New York
By WILLIAM GLABERSON
Published: February 17, 2010
Jonathan Lippman has helped turn the Court of Appeals into a scrappier, more divided and more liberal panel.

The second profile discusses various perceptions of David Paterson as Governor of the State of New York:

As Campaign Nears, Paterson Is Seen as Increasingly Remote
By DANNY HAKIM, SERGE F. KOVALESKI and NICHOLAS CONFESSORE
Published: February 18, 2010
Interviews with aides, legislators and friends reveal criticism about the management and election efforts by Gov. David A. Paterson of New York.

By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: New York Times February 9, 2010

EXCER[TS FROM ARTICLE:

While in prison, a former bank robber transformed himself into an accomplished Supreme Court practitioner....

Mr. Hopwood spent much of that time in the prison law library, and it turned out he was better at understanding the law than breaking it. He transformed himself into something rare at the top levels of the American bar, and unheard of behind bars: an accomplished Supreme Court practitioner....

He prepared his first petition for certiorari a request that the Supreme Court hear a case for a fellow inmate on a prison typewriter in 2002. Since Mr. Hopwood was not a lawyer, the only name on the brief was that of the other prisoner, John Fellers ...

Mr. Hopwood was released from prison in the fall of 2008. Mr. Fellers was out by then, and he owned a thriving car dealership in Lincoln. ...

Here, Mr. Fellers said, presenting his jailhouse lawyer with a 1989 Mercedes in pristine condition. Thank you for getting me back to my daughter....

Mr. Hopwood now works for a leading printer of Supreme Court briefs, Cockle Printing in Omaha.

MORE INFORMATION ABOUT JAIL HOUSE LAWYERS:

For those who want to read further about this topic, Numia Abu-Jamal has written a book, Jailhouse Lawyers: Prisoners Defending Prisoners in the USA which, according to Kirkus Reviews provides a series of stories based "on correspondence with two-dozen jailhouse lawyers around the country, Abu-Jamal discusses the lives and work of men and women—some educated, others barely able to read and write—who do legal research, file grievances and litigate cases, often earning reputations as troublemakers and dealt with accordingly by prison authorities. Thousands of such lawyers now work among the 2.3 million inmates of America’s prison system, 'to help, to uplift, and even to free others' "