Attorney fees being awarded under the new statute

May 16th, 2008

As long as your case was not decided before the new statute took effect you can get attorney fees according to a federal district court judge in Montana. Judge Donald Malloy rejected the government’s claim that applying the reforms retroactively would result in “manifest injustice” and that there was a common law “presumption against retroactivity” in FOIA attorney fees cases. The court awarded plaintiff $68,512.50 in attorney fees and $4,189.49 in costs following the release of requested documents.

Malloy cited Bradley v. Richmond School Board, a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court case that said “a court is to apply the law in effect at the time it renders its decision, unless doing so would result in manifest injustice or there is a statutory or legislative history to the contrary.”

From Cornell Supreme Court Bulletin

April 1st, 2008

DIFFERENT PLAINTIFF, SAME RECORDS
I think the Plaintiff should not be barred from his appeal for the same records. He has an independent right to request records produced to another, he should be allowed to fight for the records. His knowledge of the prior lawsuit will help him to formulate a different structure for his legal argument.

LAW OF JUDGMENTS, RES JUDICATA, PRIVITY, CLAIM PRECLUSION,
VIRTUAL REPRESENTATION, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, FEDERAL
AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Taylor v. Sturgell (07-371)
Oral argument: April 16, 2008
Appealed from: U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (June 22, 2007)

Brent Taylor, executive director of the Antique Aircraft
Association (”AAA”) filed a Freedom of Information Act (”FOIA”)
request with the Federal Aviation Administration (”FAA”) to
obtain plans and specifications for a vintage aircraft. After the
FAA denied Taylor’s request on trade-secret grounds, he sued to
compel disclosure of the information. The D.C. Circuit affirmed
the district court’s finding that Taylor’s claim was barred
because he had been “virtually represented” in a prior action by
Greg Herrick, a fellow AAA member whose prior FOIA request for
the same records the Tenth Circuit found to have been properly
denied due to trade-secret protections. Taylor asserts that
preclusion of his claim on the “virtual representation” theory
violated his due process rights because he had no legal
relationship with Herrick and received no notice of the prior
suit. The FAA counters that preclusion was appropriate because
Herrick had adequately represented Taylor’s interests in the
earlier action. The decision in this case will clarify the
circumstances under which courts may bar claims under the
“virtual representation” theory and may influence plaintiffs’
litigation strategies, broaden defendants’ exposure to
duplicative suits, and limit the availability of FOIA requests of
certain members of the public.

Continues: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/07-371.html

Detroit’s mayor loses secret document fight

February 28th, 2008

The Michigan Supreme Court turned down the mayor of Detroit’s efforts to keep documents secret that concern city officials’ efforts to cover up an extramarital affair with the mayor’s chief of staff. The full story, as reported in the New York Times, can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/28detroit.html?ref=us

Wikileaks taken down but the info is still out there

February 19th, 2008

I stumbled on this issue regarding sensitive corporate information on websites today. People are attempting to upload leaked information about many subjects to wikileaks. A bank got the site taken down. A lawyer is trying to defend it. I love it.
Check out this report in Wired:

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/02/cayman-island-b.html

Nevertheless, the web is viral. For links to access Wikileaks. Cryptome has provided the bank documents in a convenient download. You can also view a mirror of the Wikileaks site or download a torrent of the Wikileaks archive. Alternatively, you can still reach the original Wikileaks site by using this direct link to it.

Radio Interview Re: How and election is stolen

February 6th, 2008

Arizona plaintiffs succeeded in getting the electronic election records. Listen to this fascinating interview:

http://www.toginet.net/upload/PODCAST_MASTER/election%20defense%20alliance/ElectionDefenseAllianceLIVE_2008-01-08-19-57.mp3

Thousands of Documents Withheld Regarding Arctic Oil Leasing

February 6th, 2008

I saw this today on the web, it looks like Bush is shaping the data to fit predetermined outcomes in other areas:

Scientists Ignored on Pitfalls of Arctic Oil Leasing
WASHINGTON, DC, February 5, 2008 (ENS) - The Interior Department is hastening to stop the flow of internal e-mails from its own scientists that undermine the legality of its offshore oil and gas lease sales in federal Arctic waters, according to correspondence released Monday by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, PEER. During the past three weeks, PEER has released a series of internal e-mails from current and former Interior scientists raising questions about how badly environmental assessments of Arctic offshore oil development were skewed. The e-mails are contrary to Bush administration claims that environmental risks were adequately considered prior to offering tracts for lease in the Chukchi, Beaufort and Bering Seas for oil exploration.
“Congress should hear directly from the agency scientists whose work was altered or axed altogether,” said Jeff Ruch, executive director of PEER, a national alliance of local, state and federal resource professionals. Ruch said most congressional attention has been focused on the delays in the decision whether to list the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act until after the lease sale in the Chukchi Sea is held on February 6, while the suppression of evidence has not been as closely considered. “The Bush administration oil rush in the Arctic is lubricated by systematic scientific fraud,” accused Ruch. The e-mails released by PEER have fueled two new lawsuits in the past week that threaten to block new lease sales and lend further support to ongoing litigation against earlier lease sales. Lawsuits brought by Native communities and conservation groups contend that Interior failed to honestly reflect oil spill dangers and negative effects on endangered marine life, such as bowhead whales, as well as on polar bear populations struggling to cope with shrinking sea ice due to global warming.

Diebold Machines Win NH for Clinton?

January 15th, 2008

From Drunkard’s Lampost: Diebold and New Hampshire

a bit of interesting information about electronic voting:

Hand Diebold Difference
Clinton 35.17% 40.71% 5.54%
Obama 39.20% 36.24% -2.96%
Edwards 17.71% 16.97% -0.74%
Richardson 5.64% 4.40% -1.24%
Kucinich 1.89% 1.25% -0.64%
Others 0.49% 0.44% -0.05%

In hand counting precincts Obama did well, in machine counted precincts he did poorly. Is it due to the machines or is it due to the machine precincts being in more populated areas? These are interesting questions. Only a comparison of the electronic tally v. the paper ballots can give us an answer as to whether there is a problem like what we experienced here in Ohio in 2004. Speaking of 2004, several boards of elections around the state defied the federal judge’s order to preserve the ballots. They destroyed the evidence of election fraud. Ohio law provides that the vote count be observable. It simply cannot be observable when it is an electronic impulse. Accuracy and verifiability trump counting speed in my book.

Ohio: The fifth most corrupt state in the Union according to DOJ

January 7th, 2008

The Department of Justice has released a study of public corruption in the United States. Our state came in fifth with 538 convictions over the past decade. Tom Noe’s case was highlighted.
The following is a link to the story:

DOJ Public Integrity Section Report to Congress

Privacy International Report on Surveillance Societies: The right to be left alone.

January 6th, 2008

The United States, sadly and surprisingly, leads the world in violation of citizens’ privacy. We share that honor with Communist China, Singapore, England, and Russia among others. The following is a link to the story:

Privacy International

England is no longer free. Thousands of cameras track its citizenry. In one example from England, related to a case I am pursuing here,
England has over 4,000 traffic cameras with no reduction in vehicle accidents. One of England’s strangest intrusions on civil rights is the Anti-Social Behavior Order legislation approved by parliament. Type ASBO and England into your search engine if you haven’t heard of this travesty.

In the United States we have some privacy protections but they are waning. The right to privacy is not spelled out in the Constitution but it is implicitly there. For example, the 9th Amendment says that even though the Constitution clearly sets forth certain rights, the people have other rights not listed in the Constitution. I believe one of those rights not specifically listed is the right to be left alone by our government.

Supreme Court Justice Justice Brandeis’s dissent in Olmstead v. U. S. (1928) points us in the right direction:
“The makers of our Constitution understood the need to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness, and the protections guaranteed by this are much broader in scope, and include the right to life and an inviolate personality — the right to be left alone — the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. The principle underlying the Fourth and Fifth Amendments is protection against invasions of the sanctities of a man’s home and privacies of life. This is a recognition of the significance of man’s spiritual nature, his feelings, and his intellect.”

Cases that deal with privacy include:
Meyer v Nebraska (1923)
Griswold v Connecticut (1965)
Stanley v Georgia (1969)
Ravin v State (1975)
Kelley v Johnson (1976)
Cruzan v. Missouri Dep’t. of Health (1990)
Lawrence v Texas (2003)

The Bill of Rights (and 14th Amendment) Provisions Relating to the Right of Privacy
First Amendment: privacy of beliefs:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Third Amendment: privacy within the home:
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Fourth Amendment: privacy of the individual and his or her possessions:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Ninth Amendment leaves rights intact even though they are not named in the Constitution:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees us Liberty:
No State shall… deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

We could also look to another founding document for guidance: The Declaration of Independence that states: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Of all the presidential candidates running Republican Ron Paul is the most concerned with personal liberty. Of course that may be why he was denied a spot at the Des Moines, Iowa debate. I pray that his message gets out there. I have never donated to a Republican presidential candidate but I intend to donate to Ron Paul’s campaign this year. Our “Land of Liberty” is becoming a land without privacy.

Bloggers covered by new FOIA?

January 4th, 2008

The following language in the new law arguably puts bloggers into the definition of “news media” thereby allowing us to ask for fee waivers on our records requests:

The term ‘a representative of the news media’ means any person or entity that gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw materials into a distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience. In this clause, the term ‘news’ means information that is about current events or that would be of current interest to the public.

Examples of news-media entities are television or radio stations broadcasting to the public at large and publishers of periodicals (but only if such entities qualify as disseminators of ‘news’) who make their products available for purchase by or subscription by or free distribution to the general public.

These examples are not all-inclusive. Moreover, as methods of news delivery evolve (for example, the adoption of the electronic dissemination of newspapers through telecommunications services), such alternative media shall be considered to be news-media entities.