- U.N. rapporteur lectures U.S. on Indian rights, calls for “some form of land restoration” [IPSNews] “So, the UN Wants the U.S. to Return Land to Indian Tribes…” [Claudia Rosett] In Chapters 10 and 11 of Schools for Misrule, I discuss the growing cooperation between Indian land-claim activists in this country and international organizations both within and without of the U.N. system. (More: I expand theme into a Daily Caller piece).
- “Union Uses NAFTA To Fight Alabama Immigration Law” [Sean Higgins, IBD]
- “UN hunger expert investigates Canada” [Hillel Neuer, National Post]”Everyone’s grievances can thus be transformed into human rights violations” [Jacob Mchangama and Aaron Rhodes, Freedom Rights Project, PDF]
- Admittedly, at a “lefty Quaker school in the Northeast”: “You know international law is getting some traction when your fourth-grader is being taught about the Convention on the Rights of the Child.” [Peter Spiro, OJ]
- New Third Circuit opinion in remanded U.S. v. Bond case, which tested limits of treaty power, could tee up issue for another SCOTUS outing [Spiro/OJ, FedSoc Blog, Liberty and Law; earlier]
- “Canada’s Much Better and Very Different Alien Tort Statute” [Ku/OJ]
- Implementation of United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) could draw inspiration from U.S. experience with institutional reform lawsuits [Michael Perlin via Bagenstos]
Archive for May, 2012
Onboard-recorder trucker mandate
It’s the old story: many smaller truckers have been trying to resist the mandate, which costs an estimated $1,500 per truck, but some larger truckers that already use the devices have encouraged its passage. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) estimates that the mandate will cost $2 billion; it’s meant to make it easier to monitor compliance with limits on how many hours truckers can be on the road. [James Gattuso, Heritage]
Consumer finance arbitration
Many trial lawyers yearn to get rid of arbitration clauses in credit card and other consumer finance contracts, which (among their other effects) block them from rolling many small claims into large class actions. Will the new Consumer Protection Finance Bureau (CPFB) go along with their wishes? [Daniel Fisher, Forbes] Related: Alison Frankel, Reuters.
Unclear on the First Amendment in Albany
More than two dozen members of the New York state assembly, including nearly half its GOP members, have signed on to a flagrantly unconstitutional bill that would empower complainants to force the takedown of anonymous online speech by claiming to have been victimized by it. To avoid takedown, the website sponsor would have to disclose information about the authorship of the supposedly offensive post including the writer’s name and home address. Eugene Volokh:
Nor would this be limited to comments that allegedly libel someone, or even insult someone (though that would be bad enough), despite all the talk of preventing cyber-bullying by the bill’s backers. Rather, the law would apply any time anyone makes a “request” that a comment be removed, even if the comment doesn’t mention anyone by name but is simply religiously or politically offensive to the “request[er].” The same would apply to anonymous material added to Wikipedia, if Wikipedia were found to be subject to New York jurisdiction, anonymous videos posted to YouTube, and so on.
The sponsors of the bill claim that it is part of a legislative effort against “cyber-bullying.” Scott Greenfield’s post has the best headline: “New York to Publius: You’re Done, Bully-Boy.” Related on “cyber-bullying” here (& welcome Above the Law readers).
“Obesity is not the result of market failure.”
Another government report is out pushing the case for more regulation of the food market to deal with expanding waistlines, but a new Mercatus Center study by Michael L. Marlow and Sherzod Abdukadirov argues that, to quote its summary,
* Consumers already have ample access to information on healthy dietary choices.
* Markets already are responding with products and services to address the problem.
* Individual decision-making—not market responsiveness—is the main factor.
Related: Jacob Sullum (does obesity impose externalities on others, and is that relevant to policy?)
FMLA leave meets ADA “reasonable accommodation”
The intersection of the Americans with Disabilities Act’s “reasonable accommodation” mandate with the Family and Medical Leave Act’s mandate of unpaid time off for illness has long posed a head-scratcher for employers. The EEOC is planning to issue clarifying guidelines on leave-as-accommodation, but organized employers fear the commission’s very liberal leadership may be working up new and extra-onerous legal interpretations. [Bloomberg Business Week; EEOC; Susan Lessack, Pepper Hamilton; Marie Larsen, Recruiter.com]
But there’s no more room to cut the budget
“There are plenty of charities that do good work without including Weather Underground co-founders on their boards of directors and openly praising prison rioters on their websites.” [National Review’s Robert VerBruggen on $400,000 in U.S. Department of Justice grants to the W. Haywood Burns Institute, its board adorned by Northwestern lawprof Bernardine Dohrn; more, Chicago Sun-Times] Speaking of gruesome austerity in public expenditure, there’s clearly no room left to cut the state of Connecticut’s budget either [Chris Powell on $300,000 for the New Haven People’s Center]
Patent troll vexes municipal transit agencies
Greater Greater Washington covers a story we linked a while back:
Jones doesn’t actually develop or sell any technology relating to real-time vehicle tracking, but that hasn’t stopped him (and his two offshore firms, ArrivalStar and Melvino Technologies) from punishing anyone who does. To date, he’s filed more than 100 lawsuits against anyone who uses such technology—everyone from Ford to Abercrombie & Fitch to American Airlines to FedEx. He’s now one of the top 25 filers of patent infringement suits, according to PriorSmart.com.
Prominent among ArrivalStar’s recent targets have been municipal transit agencies, at least ten of whom it has sued, with another eight getting demand letters. Several have settled, including the New York City, Boston, Chicago and Maryland authorities; critics say the settlements are typically for less than the cost of defending the suits and are accompanied by nondisclosure clauses in which the transit operators agree not to talk about their experience.
Education roundup
- Thomas Cooley Law School in Michigan, facing class-action suit, subpoenas Colorado lawprof Paul Campos, vocal critic of schools’ disclosure policies [Campos, Scott Greenfield]
- “Maintenance of effort”: Yielding to special ed lobby, feds won’t let local school districts cut outlays [Nirvi Shah, Ed Week] “Havoc in classrooms” feared as NYC pushes least restrictive placement of disabled students [NY Post] Feds to universities: it’s an ADA violation to ask suicidal students to leave [WFAE, Popehat]
- Arizona lawmaker proposes ban on political viewpoint discrimination in faculty hiring [Inside Higher Ed]
- “University of Maryland Cuts Varsity Cheer Program” [Washington Post, Doug Robinson/Deseret News via Saving Sports]
- Due-process revolution in school discipline hasn’t worked out as intended [Richard Arum, The Atlantic] Heavy police presence in schools is something new [J.D. Tuccille, Reason] “Education Department Pushes Racial Quotas in School Discipline” [Hans Bader, CEI]
- “What Yale and the Times Did to Patrick Witt” [KC Johnson, Minding the Campus]
State tobacco bonds begin to wobble
And Michael Greve is cheering for the wheels to come off [Law and Liberty] I devoted a chapter of The Rule of Lawyers to the states’ Great Tobacco Robbery, which you can also read about here. More: Coyote (“We changed our mind. Please go smoke.”)