Tonight I have learned news that I pass along with the deepest sense of regret and loss: Hot Doug’s — my favorite Chicago hot dog stand — is closing. I have previously discussed Hot Doug’s and my view (and many others) that it is the premier Chicago hot dog restaurant, a distinction difficult to obtain in a famous for its hot dogs.
Category: Society

In a blow to secularists and civil libertarians, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 in Greece v. Galloway to allow Christian prayers at a local council. The Court again left little clarity on the standard for future cases in what proved a highly fractured decision. Justice Anthony Kennedy tipped the balance in favor of the Town of Greece with Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Justice Clarence Thomas. However, his opinion was left in pieces by a series of concurring opinions. Scalia and Thomas specifically bolted over Part II-B of Kennedy’s opinion (except as to Part II–B, concluding that the town’s prayer practice does not violate the Establishment Clause.) Alito wrote a concurring opinion, joined by Justice Scalia. Justice Thomas also wrote a concurring opinion joined by Justice Scalia in part. Even the dissenting justices divided with a Breyer opinion for himself and a dissent by Kagan that was joined by Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor. In other words, an unholy mess.

There is an important case pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on liability over Internet speech for blogs and websites. The court heard arguments in Jones v. Dirty World Entertainment, where gossip blog, The Dirty, is appealing the decision of U.S. District Judge William Bertelsman that the site is liable of defamatory statements by third parties and cannot claim immunity under the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § 230. The site was sued by Sarah Jones, an ex-Bengals cheerleader and a former high school teacher in northern Kentucky, who was libeled on the site by commentators.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has handed down a major decision on responsibility for 9-11 liability. In a decision by Judge Dennis Jacobs, a panel ruled that American Airlines, United Airlines and the World Trade Center leaseholder are not liable for environmental cleanup costs for the attacks in New York City. It is not the conclusion but the rationale that raises concerns about the immunity decision. The panel ruled that none of these parties were responsible for the attacks because it constitutes an act of war. That rationale negates the obvious responsibility of not just the government in ignored numerous indicators of the attacks but the refusal of the airlines to take rudimentary security changes advocated for years such as secure cockpit doors and flight protocols. The decision is In Re September 11 Litigation, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 8293.
We often discuss civility on this blog and we have had some serious challenges to our rule from those who have denounced civility as a standard, including the hosts of some blogs. Indeed, we have discussed the gradual decline of civility and courtesy in society from sporting events to television. Now the California bar is taking a commendable stand and requiring new lawyers to take an oath to behave with “dignity, courtesy and integrity.” That may surprise you if you assumed that such a commitment is already express in the oath of lawyers in all states. It is not and the change was a direct response to what the California bar found was (much like our own experience) a rapid decline in civility among lawyers.
Continue reading “California To Require New Lawyers To Swear To Civility In Practice”
By Mike Appleton, Weekend Contributor
“It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities.”
–Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 225 (1963) (Justice Clark)
“The nation is in danger because of its ignorance of what God has taught. . . . If we don’t know it, our future is going to be very scary.”
-Steve Green, Templeton Biblical Values Award acceptance speech, April 15, 2013.
The three children of Edward and Sidney Schempp attended public school in Abington, Pennsylvania in the 1950s. A Pennsylvania statute in effect at the time mandated that, “At least ten verses of the Holy Bible shall be read, without comment, at the opening of each public school on each school day. Any child shall be excused from such Bible reading, or attending Bible reading, upon the written request of his parent or guardian.” The readings were followed by recitation of the Lord’s Prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mr. and Mrs. Schempp, as practicing Unitarians, objected that various doctrines contained in the readings violated their religious beliefs and sought to enjoin the exercises as a violation of the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court agreed, finding that the Pennsylvania law violated the principle of “strict neutrality” required under the First Amendment. Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963).
But while the Court found the statute unconstitutional due to its openly sectarian character, it emphasized that its ruling did not preclude entirely the use of the bible as a valuable educational source. “Nothing we have said here indicates that the study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment.” 374 U.S. at 225. The test of constitutionality, said the Court, is whether a statute has “a secular legislative purpose and a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion.” 374 U.S. at 222.
In the years since the Schempp decision, a variety of academic programs incorporating the bible have been successfully implemented in public schools in a number of states. But there is about to be one more, and the early indications are that this one won’t pass constitutional muster. Continue reading “The Hobby Lobby Bible Curriculum and the Constitution”
Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw) Weekend Contributor
When I think of places that would be ideally suited for taking advantage of solar power, Arizona is high on the list. There are approximately 20,000 Arizona buildings utilizing solar collection technology to replace or supplement normal power sources. However, that number may soon decrease if a new “solar tax” is implemented.
“A new interpretation of state law in Arizona could force customers to pay property taxes on leased solar panels. In a state with an estimated 20,000 solar customers and 85 percent of new solar installations being leased systems, the implications of an extra charge are tremendous. The new tax could result in an additional $152 per year for a residential solar array and even more for larger installations, the Arizona Republic reported. What’s more, the tax would apply to both new and existing customers.” Think Progress
At first glance, I guess it should not surprise anyone that a new tax may be initiated. However, when that tax is a tax on solar panels on commercial and residential buildings and includes solar panel arrays that are leased, it raised some eyes in Arizona. Why would the State of Arizona decide on a tax on the collection of power of the sun? The answer may surprise you. Continue reading “The Arizona Solar Tax and Who Benefits From It”

I have been a long critic of many of Justice Clarence Thomas’ opinions which often reject basic individual rights while embracing police and national security powers. However, I believe that Thomas is often treated unfairly for being a black conservative on the Court. While others like Justices Alito, Scalia, and Roberts routinely vote along the same lines, Thomas’ race is commonly cited in commentary while that is not a factor in the other justices on the right of the Court. This unfairness was vividly shown by the comments of Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) that Thomas is an “Uncle Tom” and suggested that he was not an authenticate black person. He has refused to retract or apologize of the attack. In the meantime, Democrats are uniformly silent in the face of this uncivil and outrageous attack.
This story stood out on Reddit because the killing occurred near where I spent many of my summers with my Italian grandparents in Cherry Valley, California. Troy Cansler, 47, (left) is a husband and a father who refused to stand by and watch a woman be stabbed for her purse on Sunday. He gave chase after police say Vincent Alex DeLeon, 26, stabbed and robbed the woman who had a baby in a stroller. DeLeon then proceed, according to the charges, to stab this brave man to death.
Continue reading “California Man Dies In Pursuit Of Suspect Who Stabbed Mother In Parking Lot”
I have previously written about the proliferation of toll roads in the United States as governments shift the cost of highways to citizens while spending wildly on foreign wars and losing billions of waste. Congress allows billions to literally disappear in places like Iraq and Afghanistan or give billions in aid to affluent countries like Israel, but it insists that American citizens already struggling financially should be forced to pay to use their federal roads. The change is a fundamental shift in our approach to highways which were viewed as the basic service supplied to taxpayers. However, the Administration has quickly open the door in the new transportation bill to end the long tradition of free federal highways. Of course, do not take too much cash on the highways, because it can be seized by police in the growing number of pretext stops called “policing for profits.”
Continue reading “Obama Administration Moves Toward Tolls On Interstate Highways”
I have been writing recently about police forfeitures on highways and how it has become a source of new revenue for departments despite questions of pretext stops and probable cause. Humboldt County has now settled a variety of cases where police took money without any connection or plausible suspicion of a crime. One such seizure was captured on tape and it is a chilling example of what is called “policing for profit.” Las Vegas is a perfect place for this technique since people drive around with a lot of cash. The video captures Humboldt County Deputy Lee Dove confronting one witness by taking his cash and asking “That’s not yours, is it?” The driver responds ‘That’s mine” and Dove simply declares “Well, I’m seizing it.”
We have been following the continuing abuse of citizens who are detained or arrested for filming police in public. (For prior columns, click here and here). Despite consistent rulings upholding the right of citizens to film police in public, these abuses continue. There is a new case out of Miami of a citizen, freelance disc jockey Lazaro Estrada, who was arrested for obstruction of justice despite the fact that witnesses say that he was merely taping an arrest at a store.

For many, the use of the word “literally” is literally the bane of their existence. People often use it for emphasis when the literal meaning of the sentence could not possibly be true. Take statement of Vice President Joe Biden who loves to use the word and, on Monday, told a crowd that he has met “literally every” world leader at my school, George Washington University. It was funny enough that Carrie Dann of NBC News had to tweet it.
Continue reading “Biden: I Have Met “Literally Every” World Leader”


