Suit: US grouse protections driven by politics, not science

(Hat tip: KimR) - Rural Nevadans suing to block the Obama administration's sage-grouse protections say a trail of internal government documents shows politics was the driving force behind a pre-determined policy that flies in the face of its experts' own best science. Read more at KTVZ.com Read More......

Democrats attempt to set legal framework to sue the gun industry out of existence

Well, most of the Democratic 2016 field supports this, as do anti-gun activists, so it's no surprise that some members of Congress are trying to gut the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in 2005 (via the Hill):  Gun manufacturers could be sued by victims of gun violence under new legislation from Democrats.

Read more at Hotair.com
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Linn County to lead $1.4 billion class-action lawsuit against state

In a legal action that could have major implications for Oregon Forest Trust Lands, Linn County officials say they intend to file a $1.4 billion class-action suit against the state, charging that mismanagement of the lands has cost counties $35 million a year since 1998. --Linn County plans to file the lawsuit, alleging breach of contract, on behalf of it and 14 other counties that receive money based on annual timber harvests on the Oregon Forest Trust Lands.

Read more at the Albany Democrat-Herald
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

House Republicans just won a major, unexpected victory in a battle with Obama

US District Court Judge Rosemary M. Collyer ruled Wednesday against the Obama administration's motion to dismiss the case. Collyer said House Republicans do have the standing to pursue their challenge, which argues that the Obama administration violated the US Constitution by spending money on the law that had not been appropriated by Congress.

Read more at Yahoo Finance
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

In Trashing Land, The EPA Has Nothing On The Forest Service

Americans now comprehend fully the disdain the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has for truth-telling, the rights of others, and the environment. Forget the last six spiteful years; the Colorado mine disaster suffices. The EPA’s wanton malfeasance — experts warned of a catastrophic blowout — unleashed three million gallons of orange arsenic-, cadmium-, and lead-laden wastewater into an Animas River tributary trashing public, private, and tribal lands and waters in Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and the Navajo Nation. Even so, the EPA has nothing on the U.S. Forest Service.

Read more at the Daily Caller
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Obama administration pays $400,000 for harassing ICE attorney trying to enforce immigration law.

Patricia M. Vroom is the top attorney for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency in Arizona. When the Obama administration initiated its unilateral policy of “prosecutorial discretion”, allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. as long they have not yet been convicted of a serious felony crime, they found attorney Vroom too slow in authorizing the release of illegal aliens who had committed crimes in the U.S. but did not yet meet the administration’s high threshold for seeking deportation of such undocumented aliens.

Read more at Newsworks
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Yes, Really: 141 Counties Have More Registered Voters Than People Alive

The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) has put 141 counties on notice across the United States that they have more registered voters than people alive. PILF has sent 141 statutory notice letters to county election officials in 21 states. The letters are a prerequisite to bringing a lawsuit against those counties under Section 8 of the federal National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).

Read more at PJ Media
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Work in BigTech for Hire: Americans Need Not Apply

American technology workers won a big victory in the federal courts this month. The D.C. District Court ruled that a STEM-related visa program created by the Department of Homeland Security was potentially damaging to the domestic labor market and also in violation of federal rule-making procedure. For the plaintiffs in the case, the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers, however, the fight against BigTech lobbyists and Homeland Security has only just begun.

Read more at National Review
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Youths file federal climate change lawsuit in Eugene

Alleging that they are victims of a federal government that has long ignored science in favor of promoting the development and use of fossil fuels, 21 youths on Wednesday filed a lawsuit in Eugene that asks a judge to force the government to significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to climate change.

Read more at the Eugene Register-Guard
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

What You Need to Know About the House’s Obamacare Lawsuit

The U.S. House of Representatives had its first day in court today after filing a lawsuit against the Obama administration for making unilateral changes to the Affordable Care Act in November. Now, a district judge must rule on whether the case will proceed. --Lawyers representing the Obama administration and the House of Representatives gathered today before U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer for the first hearing in a lawsuit challenging President Obama’s changes to the health care law—namely his delay of the employer mandate and the authorization of payments from the Treasury Department to insurance providers.

“This lawsuit thus raises issues of exceptional importance, not only to plaintiff United States House of Representatives, but also to the entire nation,” said Jonathan Turley, lawyer for the U.S. House of Representatives.

Read more at The Daily Signal Read More......

Trucking Industry Sues Oregon Over Fuel Law

Oregon’s new governor Kate Brown two weeks ago signed into a law a bill requiring distributors to reduce the carbon “intensity” of vehicle fuel by 10 percent over the next decade.  Now the American Trucking Associations has joined with the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers and the Consumer Energy Alliance in suing Oregon to block the fuel standards.  “The Oregon program is set up to give a big boost to Oregon’s small biofuel industry, without reducing net greenhouse gas emissions, and at the expense of higher fuel costs for everyone,” said ATA Vice President for Energy and Environmental Affairs Glen Kedzie.

Read more at Roll Call
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Oregon State University pays $101,000 to settle First Amendment lawsuit over trashed student newspaper

Oregon State University has paid $1,000 plus $100,000 for legal fees to former student William Rogers to settle a First Amendment lawsuit over the university trashing distribution boxes for the conservative students newspaper The Liberty and the newspapers in them.

The university, which had been found at fault by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, did not admit wrongdoing but agreed to the six-figure payout to end the lawsuit. The suit was formally dismissed Wednesday.

Read more at Oregonlive.com Read More......

Capitol Hill Press Conference on Obamacare Lawsuit: Congress Makes the Laws

THE AMERICAN

It was my distinct honor and privilege to stand on Capitol Hill with members of Congress to discuss my Obamacare lawsuit on the employer mandate. The case remains the ONLY one on ANY of the illegal executive actions within Obamacare. Together we hope to end the lawlessness of an imperial presidency. --Dr. Larry Kawa

(Hat tip: Jerry J. Jackson, Sr.) Read More......

California students sue over teacher tenure

Nine California public school students are suing the state over its laws on teacher tenure, seniority and other protections that the plaintiffs say keep bad educators in classrooms.

Read more at The Press Democrat
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Word from Rev. Perryman - feel free to share

(Via email/hat tip: Deborah)
Dear Friends-- My interview and debate on the issue of Race - today on Sean Hannity's radio show. It will air today [9/30/3011] at 5:00 PM Eastern time. The black professor who debated with me agreed that the Democrats owe blacks an apology. It got pretty heated when I defended the Tea Party. --Rev. Wayne Perryman, Seattle, WA

Rev. Perryman's most recent book: Blacks, Whites & Racist Democrats: The Untold History of Race and Politics within the Democratic Party from 1792-2009 Read More......

A fight for liberty in Leavenworth, WA

We The People – Wenatchee;

Today, December 10, 2010, I filed a Notice of Appeal of Judge Bridges’ rulings from the June 29, 2006, August 10, 2006, and November 12, 2010 hearings on my Chelan County Superior Court Case #05-2 00587 9. This is my case against the City of Leavenworth on their 2005 flag code which was enacted in response to me wanting to erect an 80’ H flagpole to display a large American flag (their 2005 flag code actually required a building permit to display any new flag of any size and to erect any new flagpole of any height).

I have also upped the ante and filed a new lawsuit today, again against the City of Leavenworth (Chelan County Superior Court Case #10-2 01364 9), on other code sections of their Flag Code, primarily centered on (excessive) civil fines and criminal penalties for violations of their flag code.

Since the City’s 2009 Flag Code revision, flags no longer directly require a permit (thankfully), and neither (now) do flagpoles under 15’ H any longer require a permit (I count such concessions by the City as partial victory in my 5-year legal battle). Flags, however, are nevertheless still subjected to Leavenworth’s Municipal Code regulations, including LMC 14.17.110, which states that flags of government should be displayed in an approved manner pursuant to the U.S. Flag Code (Title 4 of the United States Code, Chapter 1).

At first glance, this requirement may perhaps even seem laudatory (to show proper respect for an American flag), but, coupled with Leavenworth’s compliance statute (see LMC 14.17.170), exposes even patriotic Americans with every intention of properly honoring the American flag to excessive fines, criminal punishments, liens, and even foreclosure. It should be noted that the U.S. Flag Code has no enforcement provisions, so Americans (at least outside of Leavenworth), are free to ignore its recommendations (within their First Amendment Free Speech rights).

Leavenworth’s civil fine statute (LMC 21.13.090) allows for civil penalties of $250 per day per violation, with each separate day, event, action or occurrence constituting a separate violation. Since each new day is a new violation, and each violation adds $250 per day, on day two there would be $750 fine, day seven $7,000, day fifteen, $30,000 and day thirty, $116,250.00.

Worse, because of Leavenworth’s unique “interpretation” of U.S. Flag Code (4 U.S.C. 8(i)) and its direction that the American flag “should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever”, and because the City has already stated for the record that they thought I intended to display the American flag (objectively, otherwise in full conformance with the U.S. Flag Code) as a “locational device” to advertise my Foundation For Liberty organization, the City can still powerfully and improperly deny free speech.

In other words, even though the First Amendment acknowledges that Americans have the inherent right to speak freely (an objective and observable action, mind you), the City argues, in essence, that they have the power to question even my subjective motives to “speak” (in this case, through the displaying of a flag).

Never mind for the moment that the City confuses the means I intended to use (a flag, and the Foundation) for the end itself (as if the Foundation For Liberty was to exist for its own end, rather than itself and the flag being but vehicles to encourage others to reflect on liberty and limited government under the Constitution), the City behaves as if they have the power to examine someone’s reasons for wanting to speak even before the person spoke! If an official deemed the reason to speak insufficient, then the person would be denied the opportunity! Such power has never been allowed in any government of these United States of America, and scarcely any thuggish government on earth (evidently the idea of a “thought police” has found a way out of the sci-fi novels and into the Bavarian-themed village of Leavenworth, Washington.

The City’s sign code (at LMC 14.10.070(C)) also reflects the “approved manner” of display for government flags (exempting only those flags flown “in an approved manner” from the sign code regulations), so I also am now attacking Leavenworth’s sign code for its restrictions on Free Speech as well. In attacking one part of the sign code, I figured I may as well attack other speech-related aspects of the sign code also.

The interesting thing about Leavenworth’s sign code (Chapter 14.10) is that it is written quite plainly for the express purposes of supporting Leavenworth’s Old World Bavarian Design Theme (with very little thought of protecting free speech).

When the City was working on their drafts of the Flag Code in April of 2005, I wrote the City a nine-page letter outlining some of my problems with their glaring favoritism to Bavarian “festival flags” in relation to much harsher treatment of American flags. This presented the City with their first opportunity to make their new flag code appear less biased against all non-Bavarian flags, by cleaning up the language of their proposed flag code before it was ever enacted (their 2009 flag code revisions were their next opportunity, both of which made it more difficult for me to win my 2005 flag case at the lower court level).

The City’s Sign Code, however, has not been “properly cleaned up” to make it appear less biased against non-Bavarian signs, and it is overtly pro-Bavarian throughout. I should thus have an easier time winning my 2010 flag/sign case at the lower court level (or again, at least Leavenworth will hopefully clean up their old sign code, so it doesn’t at least appear so unconstitutional on its face [and in doing so, Leavenworth citizens will undoubtedly regain at least some of their lost speech]).

Of course, my 2005 flag case, the appeal of my 2005 flag case, and my new 2010 flag/sign case information are all available on the Foundation’s website at www.FoundationForLiberty.org (click on the “Lawsuits” tab and follow the Leavenworth case to the appropriate information) for anyone wanting more information.

I have also requested from the City a formal “Code Interpretation” November 24, 2010 regarding LMC 14.17.130—their “grandfather clause”—I expect to hear back from them by Christmas. Though LMC 14.17.130 specifically allows normal “maintenance and repair” of existing non-conforming structures (of structures which were legally erected prior to the 2005 flag, flagpole and tower code which began regulating such structures, even though such structures do not conform to the new regulations in some fashion), LMC 14.17.130 specifically provides that “no modification, alteration or replacement shall be made to a non-conforming structures unless the structure thereafter conforms to the provisions of this chapter”.

This regulation now puts the City in an interesting position of having to defend the City’s flag, flagpole and tower regulations, while yet protecting their 95’ H Bavarian Maypole, which was, prior to the spring of 2010, a legally-vested, non-conforming structure, but is no longer.

During the spring of 2010, after I pointed out to the City in an Interrogatory that their Maypole leaned off-center (some 4 degrees), the City (or someone at their direction) loosened the bolts which held the Maypole, and “repaired” the Maypole from its 4 degree list off-plumb and re-tightened the bolts after the Maypole was brought back to plumb. This perhaps routine procedure (due to expansion and contraction of wood fibers with the seasonal changes in humidity) was allowed by their grandfather clause.

Then, however, to keep the Maypole from again slipping off-plumb, the Maypole was modified and altered and new lateral support jaws were made and installed, which now likely prevent the Maypole from slipping off-plumb in the future, but nevertheless voided the structure’s legal vesting due to the express prohibition within the City’s grandfather clause from any alteration or modification without conformance.

I maintain that the City now has three choices, since the Maypole has been altered and modified (and thus is no longer is an allowed, non-conforming structure): 1) the City can remove the Maypole; 2) they can cut the Maypole in half so it doesn’t exceed their height limitations, while yet obtaining full engineering studies and obtaining a tower/tower structure permit as required by LMC 14.17; or 3) they can get full engineering studies and a tower/tower structure permit and seek a variance from their height limitation, again as required and allowed by LMC 14.17 (and if their variance is approved, keep it over-height).

Of course, as the City stated in my flag case at the November 12, 2010 hearing, a variance application would have to show “specific undue hardship to (them) or specific unique circumstances that would kind of separate (them) from the general public in terms of getting what (they) want”, to show why their Maypole structure should be allowed to twice the allowed height of neighboring structures, even though it would violate the Bavarian “scale and proportionality” which they stated in my case was so important to their Old World Bavarian Design Theme. It should be an interesting exercise for the city, in that four emergency ordinances were enacted when I sought to display a large American flag atop an 80’H flagpole.

Though I never went looking for a battle with the City of Leavenworth, one came to me nonetheless, and I intend to see this battle to be able to freely display an American flag through to the end. It is perhaps less important that I win, than that I fight for liberty, at least to the best of my ability within my limited means.

God Bless America!

In liberty,

Matt Erickson
Foundation For Liberty
1227 N. Western Ave., Apt. 103
Wenatchee, WA 98801
(509) 387-6235
President@FoundationForLiberty.org
www.FoundationForLiberty.org

(Hat tip: Charles & Jean Nelson) Read More......

AT: ObamaCare's Fatal Flaw?

AMERICAN THINKER, 9/13/2010 by Louis Case -Scott Brown's election could be the most significant turning point in the whole ObamaCare fiasco. And not because it was an "expression of the will of the people" because, as we've learned, that doesn't matter to our Washington overlords. No, Brown's election has trapped Congress in its own sloppy arrogance. ∴ In a September 8th appearance on Greta Van Sustern's On The Record, Virginia's Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, explained the significance of the Brown victory in the context of Virginia's lawsuit to overturn ObamaCare. Read More at American Thinker... Read More......

WND: U.S. Marine fires back over Shariah loans

WORLDNETDAILY, 6/8/2010 by Chelsea Shilling (Hat tip: Stella Guenther) - Christian combat vet suing Fed for promoting Islam with AIG bailout: A U.S. Marine who served in Iraq is suing the federal government for distributing billions of dollars in taxpayer funds to the Shariah-supporting American International Group. ∴ The lawsuit, Murray v. Geithner et al., was brought against the Fed and the Treasury by the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of Kevin Murray, a former Marine who served honorably in Iraq to defend the United States from Islamic terrorists. ∴ Murray argues that he is being forced as a taxpayer to contribute to the propagation of Islamic beliefs and practices predicated upon Shariah law, which he says is hostile to his Christian religion. Read more at WorldNetDaily.com... Read More......

World’s biggest coal company brings U.S. government to court in climate fraud

CLIMATEGATE, 2/17/2010 by John O'Sullivan - The world’s largest private sector coal business, the Peabody Energy Company (PEC) has filed a mammoth 240-page “Petition for Reconsideration,” a full-blown legal challenge against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ∴ The petition must be answered and covers the entire body of leaked emails from ‘Climategate’ as well as those other ‘gate’ revelations including the frauds allegedly perpetrated under such sub-headings as ‘Himalayan Glaciers,’ ‘African Agricultural Production,’ ‘Amazon Rain Forests,’ ‘Melting Mountain Ice,’ ‘Netherlands Below Sea Level’ as well as those much-publicized abuses of the peer-review literature and so called ‘gray literature.’ These powerful litigants also draw attention to the proven criminal conduct by climate scientists in refusing to honor Freedom of Information law (FOIA) requests. ∴ Peabody is, in effect, challenging the right of the current U.S. federal government to introduce cap and trade regulations by the ‘back door.’ In this article we summarize Peabody’s legal writ. Read more at Climategate... Read More......