tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-89169179973601111652024-02-20T21:06:50.235-05:00Nota BibliothecaeThe Zimmerman Law LibraryPaul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.comBlogger293125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-17860332980065849892013-09-19T09:54:00.002-04:002013-09-19T09:55:09.953-04:00Facebook "Likes" Ruled to be Constitutionally Protected Free Speech<div class="MsoNormal">
Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia
issued its decision regarding First Amendment protection of Facebook “likes” of
candidates’ Facebook pages. In ruling
that liking these Facebook pages is protected by the First Amendment, the Court
held found that these likes are “the Internet equivalent of displaying a
political sign in one’s front yard, which the Supreme Court has held is
substantive speech.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The case emanated from an issue regarding employees of a
sheriff’s office who were terminated for supporting their supervisor’s
opponents. The support in issue was
evidenced by these employees endorsing their supervisor’s opponent’s Facebook
page. One of the employees also chose to
post pictures of the opposing candidate on his own Facebook page. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At issue was not merely the speech of the terminated
employees, but the fact that their support was evidenced by simply clicking an
icon and not necessarily their traditionally defined speech. Previously, two Federal Courts had held that
actual statements posted on a page are protected by the First Amendment. It was not until this most recent ruling that
the use of the “like” button was considered to be protected speech.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
U.S. Circuit Judge William Traxler stated that, “On the most
basic level, clicking on the ‘like’ button literally causes to be published the
statement that the User ‘likes’ something, which is itself a substantive
statement”. He continued by saying that, “the meaning that the user approves of
the candidacy whose page is being liked is unmistakable”.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Liking” something on Facebook is widely known to be an
expression of support for the original post or page that the person “likes”. While it is certainly not “speech” in the
traditional sense, so much can now be expressed with one click of the
mouse. While commenting on a page or
post further espouses one’s opinion, many people choose to express their
support not in words but in a more simple way that Facebook allows. To not protect these “likes” while extending
First Amendment protection to actual comments is unequal and unjust, and the
U.S. Court of Appeals (in this author’s opinion) has made the correct decision
in treating the two methods of support equally.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More information can be found by reading this <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-18/facebook-like-is-protected-speech-appeals-court-says.html">Bloomberg
article</a>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
More information on the case can be found by reading the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit <a href="http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/121671.P.pdf">appellate
decision</a>; the case is Bland v. Roberts, 12-1671.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-75979308627420984052013-03-21T08:49:00.001-04:002013-03-21T08:49:29.374-04:00Drones v. Privacy<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
The use of drones by the military has become increasingly prevalent
in the United States’ conflicts in the Middle East.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, with the cost of these “unmanned
aerial systems”, there is now talk about potential use for these drones on U.S.
soil.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These drones have already been used by law enforcement in
finding missing persons, and by county planners in measuring the growth of
landfills.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Drones have also been used to
investigate suspected arson, using thermal cameras to identify hot spots and
investigate the path the fire traveled.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Other potential beneficial uses include reading license plates and face
recognition.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, the cost of drones is dropping to the point that
private individuals and companies may have access to their use.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some fear that criminals such as drug dealers
and pedophiles could take advantage of the technology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On a less sinister level, nosy neighbors may
use these devices to monitor their neighbors.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With this technology, issues regarding citizens’ privacy
must be addressed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“Surveillance by
government is limited by the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable
searches and seizures, and snooping by corporations and individuals is covered
by privacy law and common law. But these were not written with drones in mind.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As such, states have already considered
legislation specifically aimed at the issue of drones and privacy, with
Congress lagging behind in the process.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While drones serve invaluable functions in the military, and
provide great benefits to law enforcement and other governmental agencies, the
potential use by private citizens and corporations raises great concern.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Even the use by law enforcement and
governmental agencies raises concerns about overreaching use of this
technology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Without added legislation,
citizens’ rights to privacy will be compromised, and this right of privacy is
not and cannot be usurped simply by using technology not originally
contemplated or in existence when these laws were originally enacted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It should be the spirit of the law (the right
to privacy) that is protected, no matter the words used to convey this intent.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More information can be found at the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/21/us/politics/senate-panel-weighs-privacy-concerns-over-use-of-drones.html?hpw&_r=0" target="_blank">Wall Street Journal</a>. </div>
Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-22678127131976155072013-01-17T11:22:00.003-05:002013-01-17T11:22:54.308-05:00Potential Challenges to New Gun Control Agenda<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Yesterday, President Obama announced, in response to the
school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, his plans to curb gun violence. In setting forth his agenda, the President is
asking Congress to renew a ban on the sale of assault weapons, ensure the
performance of background checks on all guns sold and pass new gun-trafficking
laws. The President himself is taking
steps to improve the background check process, reinstating funding for federal
research on gun violence, ensuring more counselors are available at schools and
providing greater access to mental health services.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Senate is planning to begin discussing the President’s
agenda starting next week; the House of Representatives is expected to wait and
see what the Democrat-Senate passes before they act. Once discussions begin, it is expected that there
will much opposition to the ban on the sale of assault weapons, as well as a
proposed prohibition on high-capacity magazines. On the other hand, there appears to be much
stronger support for universal background checks on gun sales and stricter gun trafficking
laws. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is much support for stricter gun control, and there
are many arguments as to why the President’s proposal is overreaching. Whether for or against the President’s
recently stated objectives, there are some obvious issues that the government
will have to deal with before crafting any further gun control laws.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The first most obvious concern will be whether these laws
violate the 2<sup>nd</sup> Amendment to the United States Constitution. The true import of the 2<sup>nd</sup>
Amendment has been debated whenever gun control laws are proposed. The question becomes, does a citizen’s right
to bear arms (and what type of arms?) trump the safety and welfare of other
citizens? Will these proposed measures
even provide for the greater safety they propose to create? In the Sandyhook Elementary School shooting,
the shooter obtained the gun from his mother; increased and improved background
checks cannot determine whether a gun obtained by one person, who is able to
pass the background check, will be used by another.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A second issue is the failure to create a sufficient
database to ensure background checks are thorough. In order to create a federal database of
people prohibited from purchasing firearms, states must provide the necessary
data. Without complete records, some
people who should not be permitted to purchase a gun will slip through the
crack. Even though a gun seller does all
they are required to do under the law, without proper notification guns may
still be sold when they should not be.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Finally, and perhaps most difficult will be to define what
constitutes an “assault rifle”. On one
side, people advocate that any semi-automatic weapon with detachable magazines
and “military” features like pistol grips, flash suppressors and collapsible or
folding stocks should be deemed an assault rifle. However, gun advocates state that the term “assault
rifle” should be used to describe only fully automatic weapons; they believe
that many of the features used to designate “assault rifles”, other than being
fully automatic, are merely cosmetic.
With such debate over what does and does not constitute an assault
rifle, manufacturers may be able to side-step restrictions with minor
alterations, much as they did under the 1994 ban.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Whether one sides with the President’s agenda or feels it is
overreaching, the above issues will have to be dealt with in order to ensure
any legislation that is written fulfills its intended purpose: help to prevent
further gun violence while maintaining the rights of United States’
citizens. The legislation will have to
be drafted to be very specific, and cooperation by all states will be
required. The government cannot prevent
all acts of gun violence as no system will be perfect, but the government must
also exercise caution in creating a law which has no real effect or overly
violates citizens’ rights.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For more information, below are articles with additional
information:<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/obama-unveil-gun-control-plan-one-month-school-120251358--finance.html;_ylt=Asq7Q28MPi4.MxbV0gdUxfptzwcF;_ylu=X3oDMTNvbmRiMDc1BG1pdANUb3BTdG9yeSBVU1NGBHBrZwNlYTRlMDE1ZC1jNDEwLTM4NmItODFiNi1jOTgyMzRiYjhmODIEcG9zAzE0BHNlYwN0b3Bfc3RvcnkEdmVyA2I5ZDc2ZWUxLTYwMmItMTFlMi1iYmVmLWY4MDRmY2JlNzI0Zg--;_ylg=X3oDMTFoaTA0amh2BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdAN1LXMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank">Obama Makes Biggest Gun-Control Push in Decades</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-unveils-gun-control-proposals/2013/01/16/58cd70ce-5fed-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story_1.html" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank">Obama’s Far Reaching Gun-Proposals Face Uncertain Fate in Divided Congress</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-challenge-for-obamas-anti-gun-violence-reforms-the-states-mental-health-records/2013/01/16/23bc61c0-5f7e-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank">A Challenge for Obama’s Anti-gun-violence Reforms: Mental-health dataProve Elusive</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/us/even-defining-assault-weapons-is-complicated.html?hp" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank">Even Defining ‘Assault Rifles’ is Complicated</a></li>
</ul>
Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-17239254296694809022012-12-13T10:09:00.001-05:002012-12-13T10:11:39.694-05:00Sexual Orientation Questions on College Application QuestionnairesIn a move that many may find controversial, the University
of Iowa is beginning to ask students about their sexual orientation and gender
identity; the University of Iowa is the first public U.S. university to begin
asking such questions. At least one
private university, Elmhurst College in Illinois, has previously asked such
questions of their students.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“The university's decision places it in the middle of a
debate in higher education over whether to put such questions to students in a
bid to become more inclusive, or to avoid doing so because it could be too
intrusive.” The University’s goals in obtaining such data is to: 1) provide
better services to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students; 2) track
retention of these students; and, 3) gauge interest in support services offered
by the University. In order to respect
students’ privacy, the questions related to sexual orientation and gender
identity are optional on the University’s application questionnaire. <br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Campus Pride, a gay and lesbian advocacy organization, has
previously attempted to (and continues to push for) questions such as those put
forth by the University of Iowa to be included in other university’s
application questionnaires. Campus Pride
sees such questions sees such questions being needed to meet the growing need
of support services to actively involve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender
students.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Had the University of Iowa implemented these questions in
furtherance of a policy of exclusion or other type of discrimination, then said
questions most certainly should be disallowed.
Had the University of Iowa required that prospective students answer
these questions to be considered for admittance, then any outcry over the
inclusion of the relevant questions would also be justified. However, the University of Iowa is asking
these questions on a purely voluntary basis (respecting privacy and allowing
potential students a choice in answering said questions) and will purportedly
be used for the benefit of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender
students. As long as answering these
questions remains voluntary, and results are used solely for the basis of
tailoring programs and services that benefit students, it is hard to see an
issue with what the University of Iowa is doing. With the continued push of Campus Pride,
perhaps the University of Iowa will be the first of many public universities to
use such questions to attempt to meet the needs of the growing population of
gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
You can read <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/university-iowa-becomes-one-first-ask-sexual-orientation-022631581.html;_ylt=Apyv3Wpw6Ub5ohxzKBUAsaJtzwcF;_ylu=X3oDMTNuYm5nMTgwBG1pdANUb3BTdG9yeSBVU1NGBHBrZwMyZDdiOGY4MC04NGExLTMwYzktYTYwNy01ODdmZDUyYzc1NWEEcG9zAzgEc2VjA3RvcF9zdG9yeQR2ZXIDYmFjM2Q2YjAtNDRjYy0xMWUyLWJiZGYtZGE2ZjdiYzk3MzM0;_ylg=X3oDMTFoaTA0amh2BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdAN1LXMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3" target="_blank">more on this story</a> from Reuters.</div>
Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-51783745618733508102012-11-29T10:04:00.002-05:002012-11-29T10:06:33.991-05:00University Guidelines Clash with Marijuana Legalization in Colorado and WashingtonIn this past November election, two states, Colorado and Washington, passed measures that legalize the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana by any person over the age of twenty-one. Prior to the law taking effect, the states are attempting to create rules for the distribution of marijuana. Once the law does go into effect, these two states are expected to take in “tens or hundreds of millions of dollars a year, financial analysts say”, based on taxes and licensing regulations.<br />
<br />
However, even without these regulations, it is already certain that college students in these states will not be able to benefit from the law many of them supported and helped pass. Even with the state laws in place, colleges and universities will continue to enforce their policies banning the use of drugs deemed illegal under federal law; in fact, many universities rely on federal funding they receive for complying with this policy. Dormitory contracts also tend to include provisions banning the use of illegal (under federal law) substances. Finally, college athletes will still have to comply with NCAA regulations. Among these regulations is the prohibition of the use of any substance deemed illegal under federal law.<br />
<br />
Washington dealt with a similar issue in 1998 when the state approved the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Although the use of the marijuana, even for medicinal purposes, was banned on campus, Washington State “waived its requirement that all freshmen had to live in dorms to accommodate them”.
Although these two states have legalized the (limited) use of marijuana, college students must still ensure they are aware of their campus’ policies or potentially face punishment and the possibility of expulsion. The interaction of the state law with the obligations of the universities based on federal funding creates uncertainty and confusion in what can and cannot be done, and where and where it cannot be done.<br />
<br />
As Washington and Colorado are the first two states to deal with such issues, it is certain that even more issues and confusion will have to be dealt with and information will need to be communicated to the states’ citizens to ensure proper compliance and enforcement.<br />
<br />
More information can be found at the <a href="http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/ap/crime/pot-still-not-allowed-at-colleges-in-wash-colo/nTHcB/">Dayton Daily News Website</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-3651577930827787832012-10-11T09:16:00.004-04:002012-10-11T09:24:10.152-04:00Affirmative Action in School Admissions Challenged<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 2003, the United States Supreme
Court ruled, in a 5-4 vote, that “universities could consider an applicant's race alongside a host of other factors to improve diversity.” Yesterday, the Court
heard challenges to the administration of affirmative action as applied by the
University of Texas. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Abigail
Fisher, a white student, sued the University of Texas in 2008.</span> She claimed that, although she had more
qualified credentials, she was denied admission in favor of racial
minorities. In bringing her lawsuit, she
claimed that she was denied equal protection as guaranteed under the United
States Constitution. On the other side,
the University of Texas is arguing that affirmative action programs in
admissions are still required in order to ensure underrepresented minorities
are sufficiently represented at their school.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The conservative judges questioned the school’s attorneys regarding the goals of
affirmative action, whether a time would come when affirmative action in
admissions was no longer necessary and how universities would know when this
time had come without court intervention.
The more liberal judges seemed to side with the fact that there was no
need to overturn their prior rulings on this matter.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is unsure exactly how the vote will lie; as such, it is unsure how strong a ruling
against the use of affirmative action in admissions would be should that be the
decision of the majority. The current feeling is that enough judges are disenchanted with the University of Texas’use of affirmative action, but not disenchanted enough with affirmative action
as a whole to make sweeping changes outside the University of Texas at the
moment.<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> <o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 18px;">You can find <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-justices-challenge-texas-university-race-policy-175106683.html" target="_blank">more information on the hearing in this article</a>.</span></div>Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-8347634858366780772012-09-27T11:10:00.005-04:002012-09-27T11:11:25.768-04:00Constitutional Challenges to DOMA<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the past several years, six states have legalized gay
marriage within their jurisdiction.
However, the Defense Against Marriage Act (DOMA), a federal law, is
preventing many of these same sex couples from benefitting from the rights of
these state passed laws. The Second U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals however is ready to hear arguments that portions of
DOMA are unconstitutional and discriminate against gay couples.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This case was brought by Edith Windsor who married her
partner in Toronto, Canada in 2007.
Shortly thereafter, Ms. Windsor’s partner died leaving her entire estate
to Ms. Windsor. As federal law did not
recognize their marriage as valid, Ms. Windsor was assessed with estate taxes
of $363,000.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, Ms. Windsor’s attorneys state that this federal law
is unconstitutional as it violates the 14<sup>th</sup> Amendment, which
guarantees equal protection under the law.
Previously in June, a federal district court agreed with Ms. Windsor’s
attorneys and found a central provision of DOMA to be unconstitutional. President Obama’s administration has also
stated that they believe DOMA to be unconstitutional would no longer defend the
law. However, “<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">a group appointed by the Republican majority in the U.S.
House of Representatives is defending the law in courts across the country.</span>” The Court of Appeals has expedited review of
this case due to Ms. Windsor’s health; Ms. Windsor has also asked the United
States Supreme Court to review the case before the Court of Appeals hears it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Previously, only one other federal appeals court has ruled on the
issue; the First Circuit Court in Boston found in May that “found a central
provision of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional for denying federal
benefits to same-sex couples married in states where such unions are legal.” In
California and Connecticut, federal district courts have also ruled against the
law. Four other cases are currently
pending before the Supreme Court of the United States; “[t]he Justice
Department has filed petitions in all four cases, asking the high court to
review the constitutionality of the law's definition of marriage.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is understood that where state and federal law both speak to
the same issue, federal law preempts the state law. However, in this case at least three courts
have held provisions of DOMA to be unconstitutional and the current
administration has no interest in defending the law. Six states have battled to legalize same sex
marriage in their jurisdictions; these battles will be for nothing if DOMA is
allowed to preempt state provisions.
Until the Supreme Court hears one of the cases on this issue, and as
such rules on the constitutionality of DOMA, same sex couples will never be
sure as to what their state given rights really guarantee them.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More information on this case can be found in <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/court-hear-appeal-over-federal-gay-marriage-law-183803312.html;_ylt=Av_ABekYjZyidzIZJ7CmEF5tzwcF;_ylu=X3oDMTNuNWlpOGl2BG1pdANUb3BTdG9yeSBVU1NGBHBrZwMzMDAzMzM1ZC1mMjYzLTNlNWItODFmYi1kZTE3Y2FjZDBlOGMEcG9zAzIEc2VjA3RvcF9zdG9yeQR2ZXIDMThmNTg4MjAtMDgyNi0xMWUyLWJmZmYtZjEyNDI3OGJlODBl;_ylg=X3oDMTFoaTA0amh2BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdAN1LXMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3" target="_blank">this article</a>.</div>
Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-16784058539446272512012-08-30T09:27:00.000-04:002012-08-30T09:33:24.926-04:00California Bans Sexual Orientation Therapy for Minors<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
On Tuesday, California became the first state to pass
legislation intended to ban reparative
therapy intended to change sexual orientation in minors.The Bill passed the California State Assembly by
a vote of 51-21.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
One of the purposes of this Bill is to educate parents and
adults that many of these therapies actually do more harm than good to the
minors whose behavior they are attempting to alter. While attempting to protect minors from these
harmful practices, it is also necessary to educate adults so that they
(hopefully) discontinue attempts to “curing” minors from their homosexual
tendencies. Many of these therapies
cause detrimental effects to the patient’s physical and mental health, which
then often leads to substance abuse and/or suicide.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
Supporters of the Bill state that homosexuality is not a
disease that can be cured through therapy, and as such minors should not be
subjected to such treatment. Furthermore,
to allow such therapy, the patient must give informed consent before commencing
such treatment; however, it has been stated that minors cannot give informed
consent, and therefore cannot be subjected to this therapy no matter their
parents’ or guardians’ wishes.<br />
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hopefully, other states will follow the lead of California in
this area. Homosexuality is not a
disease, no matter what others may contend.
Homosexuality was removed from the DSM (<i>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders</i>) in 1973. This diagnosis was then
replaced with a condition termed ego-dystonic homosexuality; however, under
great pressure this was removed from the DSM in 1986, with only remnants of the
condition being described in the section titled <i>Sexual Disorders Not
Otherwise Specified</i>. (<a href="http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_mental_health.html">This
article provides more information about mental health and homosexuality</a>.)
Even though homosexuality was at one time deemed a disease, it is no longer
and, as such, nobody should be forced against their will to be treated.<br />
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
With
the passage of laws such as these, hopefully others will become aware of the negatives
associated with such therapies, and no longer use such treatments whether they
are allowed by law or not. By forcing
minors into such treatment, there is a chance the minors can be faced with
serious harm to their physical and mental well-being. Parents wishing to “cure” their children may
end up unknowingly pushing them towards substance abuse or suicide. With proper education and awareness,
hopefully parents would choose the health of their child over their disapproval
of their child’s sexual preferences. Fortunately,
for those parents that would still chose potentially harmful therapies, laws
such as the one passed in California will protect the safety of the minors.<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
You
can find the <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_1151-1200/sb_1172_bill_20120416_amended_sen_v97.html" target="_blank">text of Bill 1172</a> here.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
You
can find <a href="http://jurist.org/paperchase/2012/08/california-lawmakers-approve-ban-therapy-to-reverse-homosexuality-for-minors.php" target="_blank">the article from Jurist explaining the Bill </a>here.<br />
<br /></div>
</div>
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
You can find <a href="http://sd28.senate.ca.gov/sites/sd28.senate.ca.gov/files/SB%201172%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf" target="_blank">the Sexual Orientation Change 'Therapy' Fact Sheet</a> here.</div>
</div>
Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-81259227842998460392012-08-02T09:30:00.003-04:002012-08-02T09:31:01.239-04:00Chicken Sandwiches and Morality<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to recent news, it is now apparent that one’s
choice in fast food restaurants is a declaration of one’s political, moral
and/or religious views.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As has been
widely covered in the news lately, Chick-fil-a has made a public stance against
same sex marriage, basing their view on their interpretation of the Bible.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One should not be shocked that Chick-fil-a is
expressing a viewpoint based on religious viewpoints, as Chick-fil-a has never
hidden the fact that the company believed in and observed Christian teachings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What is more surprising is that this fast
food chain has recently been declared as the line for whether or not one
supports same sex rights.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Yesterday in furtherance of this opinion, many Chick-fil-a’s
were packed with a large contingent of “conservative Christians” in celebration
of Chick-fil-a appreciation day.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Those
that chose to patronize the restaurant yesterday were met with full parking
lots and longer than usual waits for food.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The outpouring was said by many to be sign of support for Chick-fil-a’s
values and stance against gay marriage.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Some were quoted as saying that they were merely supporting Chick-fil-a’s
right to freedom of speech.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Still, many are now boycotting Chick-fil-a based entirely on
their stance on same sex marriage.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some
restaurants are beginning to sell “Chick-fil-a alternatives” and there is a
kiss-in planned for tomorrow at Chick-fil-a’s in many states.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One blogger has gone as far as
reverse-engineering the Chick-fil-a sandwich in order to allow people to “get
[their] fried chicken sandwich fix and keep [their] moral principles intact.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the end, Chick-fil-a is a fast food restaurant that many
visit for their chicken sandwiches.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They
are a privately owned business that has the same right to freedom of speech as
the individuals who are complaining about the restaurant’s religious
viewpoint.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Chick-fil-a’s religious
beliefs have never been questioned as seriously as this, nor has any other fast
food restaurant’s beliefs been questioned to this extent (at least to this author’s
understanding).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is understandable that same sex marriage is a hot topic,
especially in this day and age (and as such has been written about here on a
number of occasions).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But, doing a
simple Google news search for “Chick-fil-a” results in a surprising number of
news items.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>After all, this is a fast
food restaurant, not a politician, court or religious entity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To this author’s knowledge, one does not go
to Chick-fil-a for a chicken sandwich and side of religious/moral
teaching.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Many businesses in many
industries surely have viewpoints that conflict with those of their customers;
would these customers be so willing to boycott those businesses should they
express their opinion?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The real issue
here is not that Chick-fil-a has a conflicting opinion; it is that they had the
conviction to express that viewpoint as was their right under the First
Amendment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Individuals certainly have
the right to choose which businesses they patronize based on any criteria they
see fit, but to place such high standards upon and affect the business of a simple
fast food restaurant in such ways seems to be an overreaction.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For more on this issues, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/02/us/a-day-for-chicken-sandwiches-as-proxy-in-a-cultural-debate.html?_r=1&ref=us" target="_blank">here is a link to an article from the New York Times</a>. </div>Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-85789177397341711482012-06-28T11:41:00.001-04:002012-06-28T11:41:23.742-04:00Supreme Court Upholds "Obamacare"<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Earlier today, the United States Supreme Court upheld the
majority of the provisions contained in President Obama’s healthcare
legislation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Twenty-six states had
challenged this legislation that would require citizens to purchase health
insurance that met government mandated minimum standards; those who do not purchase
said insurance will be fined.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Many have
termed this case “the most significant before the court since at least the 2000
Bush v. Gore ruling”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Relying on Congress’ power to levy taxes, the Court voted
5-4 to uphold this provision.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
primary restriction that this ruling placed on the health care legislation
related to the expansion of Medicaid by states; with the ruling, states will be
given the flexibility to expand their Medicaid programs less than originally legislated
without fear of being fined.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Republicans have vowed to continue fighting this
legislation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Presumptive Republican
candidate for President, Mitt Romney, has stated he will reverse this
legislation if he is elected.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While the
goal of the legislation was to resolve the issue of the large number of
uninsured citizens many are claiming that this legislation now opens the door
for the government to require its citizens to purchase anything the government
feels is a necessity, “with broccoli becoming the central example in court
arguments.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of the major issues with this legislation is that many
are not please that the government is requiring them to make a purchase that
used to be their personal decision.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Most citizens are now required to purchase
insurance whether they wish to or not, and whether they have the means to
afford it or not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The legislation does
provide support for “poor and nearly poor households”, but there are others out
there who do not qualify for this support that still may have issues affording
this government mandated insurance.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The other main concern is determining where the government’s
powers end with this type of legislation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Surely the government cannot require its citizens to buy broccoli, but
there are certainly other items the government may deem necessary for citizens’
well-being that are unnecessary and/or unaffordable to some.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Should the government try to expand these
powers into other areas, the Supreme Court will be required to create clearer
guidelines on what the government can and cannot require its citizens to
purchase.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More information can be found in this<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/29/us/supreme-court-lets-health-law-largely-stand.html?_r=1&hp" target="_blank"> article from the New York Times</a>. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span>Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-30802600567718106392012-05-17T09:45:00.002-04:002012-05-17T09:45:59.502-04:00House Reduces Protections Under the Violence Against Women Act<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
On September 13, 1994, then-President Bill Clinton signed
into law the Violence Against Women Act (<a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c103:1:./temp/%7Ec103OX3tIl:e344455:" target="_blank">Title IV, §§40001-40703 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994</a>; Public Law
103-322). The aim of the Act was to fund investigations and prosecutions of
violent crimes against women, to impose automatic and mandatory restitution on
those convicted, and allow civil redress in cases prosecutors chose to leave
unprosecuted. The Act also provided “anonymity
to victims of domestic abuse who are applying for residency visas so that their
applications cannot be sabotaged by their alleged abusers.” Also, to encourage
cooperation with law enforcement officials, witnesses are provided with an
opportunity to apply for special residency, and eventually permanent
residence. The Act has already been
renewed twice, with bipartisan support.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, the last Bill authorizing the continuation of the Act
expired in 2011. The Senate has approved a Bill expanded protections for lesbians,
immigrants and Native Americans and passed with bipartisan support with a vote
of 68-31. However, on Wednesday the House
of Representatives passed their version of the Bill, stripping away the
protections for immigrants who are subjected to such violence or who witness
such acts of violence. Some feel the
House Bill will discourage immigrant women from reporting abuse for fear of
being deported. At the same time, the
House Bill also makes it more difficult for Native American women to seek
justice against their abusers; the House version also provides no protection
for the LGBT community.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As for the elimination of protections for immigrant women, it
is argued that this may be the only way to prevent fraud and abuse of the
system by women seeking citizenship in the United States. However, it is countered that all visa
applications from immigrant victims already go through extensive review and
require extensive documentation. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With such limitations put in place by the House of
Representatives, the Violence Against Women Act will cease to protect women
from abuse as the original Act intended.
The House ignores the needs of immigrant women, Native Americans and the
LGBT community, classes of women that need at least the same protection as all
other female citizens. And the
justification of preventing fraud by immigrant women seems unfounded; this Act
has already been renewed twice without previous Congresses feeling the need to
add such limitations, and safeguards are already in place in the visa process
to reduce the risk of fraud. It is
believed that the House version of this Bill will be vetoed without removing
the restrictions, restoring the Act to its original intentions. Whether through veto or other manner,
hopefully the House and Senate can reach agreement on renewing the Act in a way
that will ensure protection for all.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Further information can be found at these articles from the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/house-passes-violence-against-women-act_n_1522524.html" target="_blank">Huffington Post</a> and <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-immigration-abuse-20120517,0,5891400.story" target="_blank">Los Angeles Times</a>. </div>Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-58818322060835175952012-05-10T09:23:00.001-04:002012-05-10T09:30:00.181-04:00President Obama Supports Gay MarriageIn the wake of North Carolina’s vote on a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage in the state, some positive news arose for same sex couples and gay right activists on Wednesday. Previously, Vice President Joe Biden had expressed his opinion that same sex couples should be allowed to marry, and yesterday President Barack Obama (finally) expressed his support of same sex marriage.<br />
<br />
The President stated that “he had weighed the teachings of his Christian faith against a growing pro-marriage consensus among younger Americans — a key target group for his reelection campaign.” Administration officials also stated that Obama planned to make his express support of gay marriage known prior to the Democratic National Convention, but the announcement was moved up due to Vice President Biden’s Sunday comments on “Meet the Press”.<br />
<br />
President Obama had previously stated that his views on same sex marriage were “evolving”, and many had believed that he was a supporter of same sex marriage. The President has previously shown he was pro-gay with action such as repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell”; however, the President also has come under criticism from gay rights activists when he stated he did not plan to sign legislation that would ban discrimination by federal contractors based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Until yesterday, the failure of the President to express his viewpoint on the topic was beginning to create tension amongst gay right activists.<br />
<br />
Some view this statement as a possible election strategy: hoping that an express support of gay marriage will bring in the votes to ensure the President’s re-election. However, there are many that say this statement may actually chase away supporters, and believe that, due to this possible alienation of voters, this statement must be the President’s true opinion.<br />
<br />
The Washington Post, along with <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-endorses-same-sex-marriage/2012/05/09/gIQAivsWDU_story_1.html" target="_blank">this article</a> on the President’s statement, has <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-decision-on-gay-marriage-divides-local-residents/2012/05/09/gIQARtsJEU_story.html" target="_blank">this article</a><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-decision-on-gay-marriage-divides-local-residents/2012/05/09/gIQARtsJEU_story.html" target="_blank"> </a>discussing the divide in the community this statement has made. Some who supported the President during his first election and were proud to support an African American President now say that they “don’t believe in skin color more than [they] believe in God’s word.” Some believe that the statement will not outweigh his other acts as President, and some believe that the President may change his mind on the subject before the election. And some people believe that, no matter the motivation behind the statement, this was the right thing to do.<br />
<br />
No matter the motivation, this will most certainly open voters’ eyes and give them something additional to consider when casting their ballots in November. Until then, it is impossible to know the full effect of the President’s statement. And even then, it will be impossible to tell whether this statement was a deciding factor in how people voted, or if it is merely one additional action that people feel added to the President’s accomplishments or was just another negative aspect of his Presidency.<br />
<br />
No matter the outcome of this November’s election, it is my opinion that it is definitely a positive to finally have somebody in such an authority position take a stand in support of gay rights; while this may not affect how I vote in November, it gives me hope that the country and its politicians may finally be open to taking measures to protect gay rights.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-62301451525547818262012-04-12T09:46:00.001-04:002012-04-12T09:48:47.938-04:00Employment Discrimination and Gay RightsWith the recent victories in a variety of states regarding same sex marriage, and the apparent support of the current administration, the push towards more expansive rights for homosexuals seemed promising. While much work remains to be done in establishing equal rights and protects for homosexuals, the necessary support for progress seemed in place. However, the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/12/us/politics/obama-wont-order-ban-on-gay-bias-by-employers.html?_r=1&ref=us#">New York Times</a> yesterday published an article stating that President Obama has decided not to sign an Executive Order protecting homosexuals from discrimination by employers with federal contracts.<br /><br />“Current law does not protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, and legislation to do so, which Mr. Obama endorses, lacks sufficient votes in Congress.” Previously, President Obama has issued Executive Orders regarding several issues which he asserted that “we can’t wait” for passage by the Republican-dominated Congress. Supporters of gay rights assert that gay, bisexual and transgender people, to whom such an Executive Order would apply, have a right to be protected from employment discrimination based on their sexual orientation and believe that the “we can’t wait” for Congress to ensure protection of this right. Instead, the article reports that an administration official has stated that, “We support legislation that has been introduced and we will continue to work with Congressional sponsors to build support for it.”<br /><br />President Obama has not yet publicly endorsed same sex marriage, but he has been a proponent of initiatives such as repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. The President also continues to advocate for “an inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would prohibit employers across the country from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.” However, it is unlikely that the current Republican-led Congress will pass any such Bills which would add gender identification or sexual orientation to the list of classes protected from employment discrimination. It surely seems that this is exactly the type of policy that falls under President Obama’s “we can’t wait” drive, and yet the President is taking the wait-and-see approach.<br /><br />Admittedly there may be many other legitimate reasons for not issuing the Executive Order at this time. All that is certain is that gay, bisexual and transgendered people should not be subject to employment discrimination based on their gender identity or sexual orientation and it is unlikely that such protections will be afforded to these groups as promptly as they should be.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-92116984926542800012012-03-29T09:57:00.001-04:002012-03-29T09:58:34.997-04:00The Supreme Court Considers "Obamacare"The big news this past week has been the Supreme Court’s three day hearing on the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care bill (“Obamacare”). While the final ruling on this matter is not expected until later this summer, many are already predicting what the Court will do and how this will affect medical care for U.S. citizens.<br /><br />It is thought that the more conservative judges, those on the right, are ready to rule the program unconstitutional and void the entire law. However, some hope that between now and the ruling Justices will come more “center” and approach the law in a more moderate sense.<br /><br />Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. has already pleaded with the Justices to exercise judicial restraint, aiming his plea at Justice Kennedy, who many expect to be a key vote, perhaps siding more with his liberal colleagues even though he is often grouped with the conservative Justices. According to Verilli, “The Congress struggled with the issue of how to deal with this profound problem of 40 million people without health care for many years, and it made a judgment.” He feels it is not the place of the Supreme Court to overturn this decision, but instead it is the duty of the voters to change the plan if in fact they feel it needs changing. He has asked the Court not to become a part of this partisan battle.<br /><br />Verilli’s plea is interesting, as it appears he is asking the Court to refrain acting in a manner which is inherent in their existence: to ensure that the government does not violate the constitutional rights of its citizens. It is the duty of the United States Supreme Court to hear challenges on the constitutionality of laws and determine whether they are proper or not. To ask the Court then to shirk this duty is to negate the system of checks and balances instituted to protect U.S. citizens. It does not matter how long the government has wrestled with the issue; if the law violates constitutional rights, then it should be struck down.<br /><br />Verilli is correct in that this should not be a partisan issue for the Court. It is their responsibility to analyze the law and rule on its constitutionality without regard to whether it was Democrats or Republicans who instituted it. The Court needs to analyze the law and decide only one issue: is this health care law constitutional? <br /><br />We all have our opinions on whether Obamacare is right or wrong for the country. This is not an expression of either my support or opposition to the law; this is merely an expression of my belief that the Supreme Court’s duty is to protect citizens from having their constitutional rights infringed upon. It is Congress’ duty to create laws that pass constitutional muster (no matter the subject matter) and the Supreme Court’s duty to keep Congress in check. This is the basis of the United States government; it has been the basis for hundreds of years and it should not change now.<br /><br />For more information, click <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/on-last-day-of-health-care-hearing-supreme-court-considers-severability-medicaid-expansion/2012/03/27/gIQAv2zkfS_story.htmlhttp://">here</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-3643274829837399822012-03-15T09:23:00.001-04:002012-03-15T09:24:27.820-04:00Pennsyvania Voter ID LawWith the 2012 election season in full swing, it seems only proper that new voter issues arise to potentially complicate the voting process. On that note, Pennsylvania enacted a new law Wednesday requiring all voters to show identification at the polls prior to voting. This is by far not a unique requirement, but it is a reminder of what types of issues such legislation can bring.<br /><br />The intent of this legislation, as put forth by Pennsylvania governor Tom Corbett, is to protect the principle of “one person, one vote.” Pennsylvania, and other states before them, believes that voter identification requirements are needed to guard against voter fraud. “Supporters say the laws are no different from needing identification to board an airplane or obtain a library card.”<br /><br />However those opposing laws such as these claim that voter identification laws serve only to prevent access to the polls, especially to the poor and minorities. Advocates against this legislation claim that requiring voter identification discriminates against those who cannot afford such identification nor have no access to locations where such identification can be obtained. “Democrats say voter identification measures are aimed at squeezing out university students and senior citizens who tend to vote for Democrats.” <br /><br />In response to those opposed, Governor Corbett offers the statistic that he claims ninety-nine per cent (99%) of Pennsylvania citizens already have valid identification. He also offers that the Department of Transportation driver license centers would provide free identifications for those who cannot afford to purchase one themselves.<br /><br />As said, this is by far a new issue. States have been dealing with this issue for several years, and the arguments against such legislation have changed very little. The issue of protecting against voter fraud is an important matter. The principle of “one person, one vote” is what our election system runs on, and any violation of that principle needs to be prevented. Requiring voter identification at the polls is certainly one way to protect against any such violation.<br /><br />However, the question becomes whether the interest in protecting against voter fraud outweighs the potential that some voters may not be able to exercise their right to vote, another essential principle of our electoral system. Even in cases such as Pennsylvania, where they are offering to provide free identification to those who cannot afford one, many argue that this legislation places a greater and unnecessary burden on people requiring them to travel to license centers that may be in inconvenient locations or open at inconvenient times.<br /><br />Perhaps the solution is to require identifications at polling places, but also allow some other type of identification system for those who do not have the required identification. While it is unlikely the state would want poll workers asking voters for their social security numbers, a system could be put in place where they only have to verify the last four digits of their social security, their birthday, address and telephone number. While no system is fool proof, at least a system such as this would add some level of protection against voter fraud. <br /><br />For more on this story, click <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/voter-id-becomes-law-pennsylvania-opponents-vow-legal-011144844.html;_ylt=AhMdPDCc8wzHBQBHPzOOJKcVscB_;_ylu=X3oDMTNuODRsOGQ2BG1pdANUb3BTdG9yeSBVU1NGBHBrZwNjNDFiM2YwYS1hYTA5LTM0Y2UtOGE2Yi02NzEyYmM4NGNhYzMEcG9zAzMEc2VjA3RvcF9zdG9yeQR2ZXIDMjdlNTJmOTAtNmUzYy0xMWUxLTllZmQtMzgwOTlmZjdiYTBh;_ylg=X3oDMTFrM25vcXFyBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdAMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnMEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3">here</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-77118901800895077272012-03-01T08:52:00.002-05:002012-03-01T08:55:51.658-05:00Judge Strikes Down Cigarette Labeling RequirementsOn Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon ruled that new regulations regarding labeling on cigarettes were unconstitutional. According to these new regulations, originally scheduled to be implemented this year but delayed due to a preliminary injunction issued in 2011, cigarette labels were to have “images of rotting teeth, diseased lungs and other images intended to illustrate the dangers of smoking.”<br /><br />According to the judge, “The government has failed to carry both its burden of demonstrating a compelling interest and its burden of demonstrating that the rule is narrowly tailored to achieve a constitutionally permissible form of compelled commercial speech." While Judge Leon agreed that educating consumers on the dangers of a product was a compelling interest, he ruled that these regulations served more to convince consumers not to purchase a product, an interest which he stated was not compelling at all.<br /><br />It was also ruled that the government has other tools at its disposal to achieve the same purported goal. Other options suggested by the judge include raising cigarette taxes (assuming that higher prices will in fact discourage consumption) and factual statements on cigarette packaging (more than just the current Surgeon General Warnings).<br /><br />If the labeling requirements do go into effect (the government is expected to appeal this ruling), the required images would cover the top half of the front and back of a cigarette package. These images would also be required to cover the top twenty percent of any cigarette advertising in print. In considering these requirements, Judge Leon stated that “the warning labels were too big to pass constitutional muster.”<br /><br />Even as a non-smoker, these regulations certainly appear to be overreaching and simply improper. The government must respect First Amendment rights for commercial speech just as they do for individual speech. And, as is the case in regulating individual speech, the government must be wary and not overreach when regulating commercial speech. Adopting regulations that can be seen as nothing more than an attempt to scare consumers from purchasing cigarettes does not in any way fall under proper regulation of free speech.<br /><br />Judge Leon is absolutely correct in that the government has other, less overreaching, ways to achieve the same goals. For years, cigarette packaging has been required to carry Surgeon General Warnings. Smokers have been exposed to education through government and non-government outlets warning them, sometimes in the graphic detail proposed by these regulations. <br /><br />The government does have a responsibility to warn the public of potential side effects of drugs, drugs including tobacco. However, once this warning is provided, it is up to the consumer to make a conscious decision as to whether they wish to assume the risks. It is not the government’s duty to use scare tactics to affect the consumption of these products.<br /><br />For further information, click <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/tobacco-health-labels-unconstitutional-judge-000858847.html;_ylt=AqZwzGImGvJbhArMMx637jFvzwcF;_ylu=X3oDMTNuZWpkaG1kBG1pdANUb3BTdG9yeSBVU1NGBHBrZwM1NDZmNzQwZS05MWFhLTNkM2YtODI5Ny0xZDIxNWVlZGZhNjYEcG9zAzQEc2VjA3RvcF9zdG9yeQR2ZXIDMTg2NjQ0ODAtNjNhMy0xMWUxLWJlZmUtYzc2NjU0MTBmMzhl;_ylg=X3oDMTFtdTQ1b3RjBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdAN1cwRwdANzZWN0aW9ucwR0ZXN0Aw--;_ylv=3">here</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-34305360551593135082012-02-23T08:38:00.005-05:002012-02-23T08:43:06.114-05:00Unconstitutional Warrants and Officers' LiabilityOn Wednesday, the United States Supreme Court issued three decisions. One of these decisions, <span style="font-style:italic;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-704.pdf">Messerschmidt v. Millender</a></span>, dealt with an officer’s liability for seizing property based on allegedly unconstitutional warrant. In this case, the Supreme Court held that the officers could not be sued for seizing property under such a warrant.<br /><br />This case arose from a 2003 search of Augusta Millender’s home; the officers were searching for Ms. Millender’s foster son and/or a shotgun used in a domestic assault. Police did seize a handgun owned by Ms. Millender, which she claimed was hers and was used strictly for personal defense. Later, a court ruled the search warrant unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment as “the warrant improperly allowed the police to search for ‘all handguns, shotguns and rifles’ and “evidence showing street gang membership.” <br /><br />However, on Wednesday, the Court ruled that Ms. Millender could not hold the officers liable for the search, even under a warrant later found to be unconstitutional, by relying on the 1986 Supreme Court ruling in <span style="font-style:italic;"><a href="http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/475/335/case.html">Malley v. Briggs</a></span>; in this case, the Court held that officers in these situations should not be granted immunity from lawsuits such as this “only where the warrant application is so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence unreasonable.” In the most recent case, Justice Roberts held that Ms. Millender’s case did not fall under this exception.<br /><br />Justices Kagan, Sotomayor and Ginsberg dissented. Justice Kagan wrote that she felt the search for guns was proper, but felt that the search for gang-related evidence (per the search warrant in question) was not connected to the initial incident that gave rise to the warrant. Justice Sotomayor strongly disagreed that the officers’ actions were objectively reasonable. She wrote, “It bears repeating that the founders adopted the Fourth Amendment to protect against searches for evidence of unspecified crimes, and merely possessing other firearms is not a crime at all.” The fact that the officer’s superiors and a judge approved a warrant did not sway her opinion in the least. <br /><br />The need to protect officers from liability is understandable. If officers are constantly worried about what they will and won’t be held liable for seizing under an apparently valid warrant, then they may easily overlook crucial evidence or fail to seize it “just in case”. Officers must be protected so that they can go about doing their job efficiently and effectively. The officers executing the warrant should be able to rely on their superiors and the judge issuing the warrant.<br /><br />Perhaps the real issue in this case is determining how this warrant was issued with the questionable language to begin with. “Evidence showing street gang membership” without further explanation is overly broad and can lead to many items being seized by police. Also, this warrant was issued base on a domestic assault complaint; the warrant in question should have been limited to searching for evidence based on that complaint. Not only did this language cause the warrant to fail under Fourth Amendment scrutiny, but it also required the officers to execute judgment calls and seize items they should not have.<br /><br />For the article from the New York Times, click <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/us/officers-who-searched-home-cant-be-sued-court-says.html?_r=1&ref=us">here</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-47415230606403671762012-02-16T09:08:00.002-05:002012-02-16T09:10:25.909-05:00More States Debating Same Sex MarriageAnother week and three more states appear to be on the verge of approving the ability of same-sex couples to marry within their jurisdictions. Legislation was signed on Monday in Washington which will take effect no earlier than June that will allow same-sex marriage in the state. Both New Jersey and Maryland have bills before their governments today which would legalize gay marriage. Many expect the measure to pass in New Jersey, while questions remain in Maryland. However, even with passage of the bill in New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is expected to veto the bill.<br /><br />“In Maryland, the House of Delegates will begin debate on the "Civil Marriage Protection Act" sponsored by Gov. Martin O'Malley, a Democrat.” The bill has already been passed by two House Committees, but there remains doubt as to if there are enough supporters to get through the House vote. Last year Maryland was unsuccessful in passing similar legislation. <br /><br />In New Jersey, “the state Senate approved the proposed Marriage Equality and Religious Exemption Act on Monday.” It is expected the measure will pass the House later today. Once passage occurs, it is almost certain that the legislation will be vetoed. However, I have a hard time fully disagreeing with the governor’s reasoning for promising a veto: he is fully expected to back a referendum in November where he feels it will be up to the voters, and not the legislature, to allow same-sex marriage. Unlike some other jurisdictions where voters have had a voice, a recent poll indicates “that a majority of New Jersey voters support the right of same-sex couples to marry.” As such, supporters of the bill feel that it is only a matter of time before same-sex marriage will be legalized in New Jersey. And, when such legislation passed, it will be the true desire of the voters who cared enough to voice their opinion on the subject. <br /><br />For further information, you can find relevant articles <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/16/us-usa-gaymarriage-idUSTRE81F01520120216">here</a> and <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2012/02/new-jersey-expected-to-approve-gay-marriage-christie-vows-veto.html">here</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-38357826929296652982012-02-02T09:35:00.001-05:002012-02-02T09:36:55.675-05:00Same-sex Marriage in Washington StateThe state of Washington appears to be on track to join six previous states that have passed laws legalizing same-sex marriage. The Washington Senate approved the Bill and now it is to be sent to the House where it is expected to pass without issue. However, opponents of the Bill are already prepared to challenge the law with a referendum.<br /><br />The Bill in question dealt with several issues regarding same-sex marriage; issues regarding legal protection for religious groups and organizations and businesses that object to gay marriage. An amendment allowing for a referendum clause was refused, but opponents still promise to use a referendum to attempt to overturn the pending law. However, no action can be taken until the Bill is passed by the House and becomes law.<br /><br />Depending on the outcome of the referendum, the law could allow same-sex couples to begin wedding in Washington as early as June. However, if enough signatures are obtained for a referendum the outcome will not be final and same-sex marriages will be postponed until after the November election.<br /><br />I have written about same-sex marriage on several occasions on this blog, and my opinion as to whether they should be legalized or not remain the same. However, in this case one of the more interesting items are some quotes by the Bill’s sponsor stating that lawmakers who vote against gay marriage “are not, nor should they be accused of bigotry.” He continues on by saying that, “Those of us who support this legislation are not, and we should not be accused of, undermining family life or religious freedom,” and “[m]arriage is how society says you are a family.”<br /><br />Senator Ed Murray, the Bill sponsor, does not want unwarranted personal attacks at other legislators due to their vote; whether their vote is due to their personal prejudices or feelings or because they feel they are best serving their constituents, it is wrong to automatically assume and label them as something they are not. The Senator also attempts to head off the major opposition at the pass by stating that this is not an attack on religion or “traditional” families; it is merely allowing same-sex couple to be a family in the eyes of society. Same-sex couples already live as and are viewed by many as families, and allowing them to marry only makes this status “official”.<br /><br />For the article from the Washington Post, click <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/wash-senate-passes-bill-legalizing-same-sex-marriage-final-vote-will-come-in-house/2012/02/02/gIQADBsqjQ_story.html">here</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-67861992824510788532012-01-19T10:08:00.002-05:002012-01-19T10:11:00.845-05:00SOPA and PIPAPeople who visited Google, Wikipedia or a number of other sites yesterday were greeted with severe changes to their usual Web browsing experience. These pages advertised their opposition to new proposed Internet piracy bills <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_IP_Act">PIPA (Protect IP Act)</a> and http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act">SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act)</a> and encouraged their users to learn more about these proposed bills.<br /><br />For those that did not take this advice and opportunity, the primary argument, in http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifa nutshell, is that these bills will defeat the original purpose of the Internet. Their goal is to attempt to stop the pirating of images, movies and other original works created by other people. While this is a laudable goal, which even the protesting sites respect, they feel these bills are overbroad and compare them to “taking a sledgehammer to something when you need a scalpel.”<br /><br />An interesting example of this alleged overreach is provided <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/sopa-and-pipa-the-wrong-tools-to-combat-online-piracy/2012/01/18/gIQA1yxR9P_story.html?hpid=z3">here</a>. To sum it up, an ISP can shut down a site based on a complaint that the site has “pirated” materials. According to the example, it does not matter how rough or dissimilar the work is, if it in any way simulates the work created by another, the site may be banned.<br /><br />And, the alleged offending site has no recourse. United States Internet service providers are granted immunity for what they decide to pull from their service. Extending the example given above, a person’s personal family Web site could be pulled based on the fact that they have videos of their children singing copyrighted songs, no matter how bad their singing may be. And once pulled, the person cannot then seek recourse.<br /><br />Like many actions, the intentions behind these bills are justifiable. But the wrong tools are being used. This “sledgehammer” has the potential to violate the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech and devalue the Internet entirely. There are ways to reach these goals without blowing up the whole infrastructure of the Internet.; SOPA and PIPA are not the right tools to do this.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-31097367290266078262012-01-12T09:10:00.002-05:002012-01-12T09:12:51.170-05:00The Supreme Court Authorizes a "Ministerial Exception"This week, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision recognizing a “ministerial exception” in relation to employment discrimination laws. Some believe that this is the Supreme Court’s “most significant religious liberty decision in two decades.” This ruling allows churches and religious groups the right to hire and fire their religious leaders without any type of government intervention.<br /><br />Chief Justice Roberts conceded that employment discrimination is a very serious matter; however, this issue is apparently outweighed by the “interest of religious groups in choosing who will preach their beliefs, teach their faith and carry out their mission.” While the ruling created the “ministerial exception”, limited guidance was provided in how to apply this exception. Also, while this exception protects religious organizations from employment discrimination claims, it does not negate the possibility of criminal prosecution and does not affect any other protections put in place for employees of these organizations.<br /><br />In his concurring opinion, Justice Thomas suggested that it is not the court’s place to determine who qualifies for this new exception, and instead it should be the religious organization’s responsibility to make such a decision. In another concurring opinion, Justice Alito stated that concentrating on the title of “minister” was too stringent as this is a term primarily used only in Protestant denominations; he suggested that this exception instead be extended to “any ‘employee’ who leads a religious organization, conducts worship services or important religious ceremonies or rituals, or serves as a messenger or teacher of its faith.” <br /><br />While other protections remain in place for employees of religious organizations, this ruling, without any type of true guidance on its application, is problematic. For those that truly work as “ministers”, no matter their religious affiliation or actual title, the application of this exception is straightforward – people who lead their religious organization and/or performs what one would consider typical religious duties cannot bring claims of employment discrimination if they are terminated.http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif<br /><br />However, this ruling has the ability to be overextended in cases where employees of religious institutions minimally serve as “ministers”. In fact, the case that http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifbrought about this ruling involved an individual who only served forty-five minutes per day serving in a religious capacity; the rest of her work day was performed teaching secular subjects. While there were other factors the court considered before extending this “ministerial exception” in this case, it remains uncertain what type of minimal service is required before a religious organization can be exempt from employment discrimination under this exception. <br /><br />For the complete article from the New York Times, click <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/12/us/supreme-court-recognizes-religious-exception-to-job-discrimination-laws.html?ref=us">here</a>.<br /><br />For the Supreme Court decision, click <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/12/us/12scotus-text.html">here</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-27671075318534849402011-12-29T08:58:00.005-05:002011-12-29T09:17:25.260-05:00Church v. State: Relgious Beliefs v. Government ContractsYesterday, the New York Times published <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/us/for-bishops-a-battle-over-whose-rights-prevail.html?_r=1&ref=us">this interesting article</a> regarding Catholic Charities being closed due to their unwillingness to consider same sex couples as potential foster care and adoptive parents. In order to receive government funding, the state is requiring that such couples be considered. According to the article, this is not the only ongoing battle between the church and state regarding their charities.<br /><br />Catholic Charities are also fighting the requirement that “religiously affiliated hospitals, universities and charity groups cover contraception in their employees’ health plans.” Additionally, Catholic bishops are asking that their denial of a federal contract to provide aid to victims of sex trafficking be overturned; this program was denied based on the fact that the proposal did not provide referrals for abortion doctors or contraceptives for the survivors of sex trafficking.<br /><br />Church officials claim that the adoption requirements are an “escalating campaign by the government to trample on their religious freedom while expanding the rights of gay people.” At the same time, same sex couples are being discriminated against by organizations their tax dollars support. The Church also acknowledges that they do not have a First Amendment right to government contracts, but they also feel that they have “a First Amendment right not to be excluded from a contract based on its religious beliefs.”<br /><br />This issue is a difficult one, and can be easily argued from either side. To start with the government’s side, it seems fair and logical that their provision of federal funds to any organization can be conditioned upon meeting certain requirements. As in other non-religious cases, failure to meet these standards means the organization receives no or limited funds. Especially if those standards are applied to both non-religious and religious organizations, it is difficult to claim discrimination. <br /><br />As for the Church, each of their battles brings up unique issues, some of which are easier to defend than others. To begin with, their choice to not provide medical coverage to employees working in "Catholic and other religiously affiliated hospitals, universities and charity groups" regarding contraception seems to be an interference with their employment policies. Most employers are given the option of what type of medical coverage they provide for their employees. However, the fact that these employees work for an organization funded by government grants does muddy up the issue. <br /><br />Regarding the aid to victims of sex trafficking, the Church is providing a valuable service to these people. The issue regarding requiring referrals for abortions and/or contraceptives become s more convoluted however since the Church is asking for federal aid. On one hand, it seems that the government should support these programs, with or without the questionable referrals; on the other hand, as stated above, it is not unfair or unusual for the government to require certain conditions prior to granting aid. While the Church may feel that they have “a First Amendment right not to be excluded from a contract based on its religious beliefs”, if the government is requiring this condition of all organizations seeking to aid sex trafficking victims, then any claim of discrimination seems less likely.<br /><br />Finally, the issue of the same sex adoption appears to be least difficult of these issues: the government is requiring Catholic Charities to consider same sex couples as foster/adoptive parents; Catholic Charities has decided they do not wish to consider these candidates; and, as a result, many of the Catholic Charities falling under this requirement are being closed. It appears in this instance that Catholic Charities realizes that their work in this area is taxpayer driven and as a result must adhere to government requirements. The government has given them the option to accept funds and consider same sex couples as potential parents, or go it alone; in this instance, the Catholic Charities appear to be resolved that they do not want to follow the government regulations and cannot carry on alone. While the government may not have expected this result, the government cannot require Catholic Charities to remain operational.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-52539258242739677602011-12-15T12:03:00.005-05:002011-12-15T12:13:10.967-05:00The 2012 National Defense Authorization ActYesterday, it was reported that President Obama was prepared to sign legislation that would allow indefinite detention without trial for terrorism suspects. Previously, President Obama had indicated he would veto the <a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867pcs/pdf/BILLS-112s1867pcs.pdf"http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif>2012 National Defense Authorization Act</a>, section 1031, but has reportedly changed his position on the law. <br /><br />If this legislation is enacted, this will be the first time since 1950 that such indefinite detention would be authorized in the United States. In addition to authorizing such detention, this legislation also prohibits the transfer of any detainees being currently held at Guantanamo onto United States soil for any reason, and would limit the ability to transfer these detainees to other countries, even if they have been cleared for release. <br /><br />At the start of Obama’s administration, he had stated that one of his goals was to permanently close Guantanamo as a prison for terrorist suspects, going as far as to signing an Executive Order as to this plan. However, the signing of this legislation will further extend the operation of Guantanamo where currently 171 detainees are being held.<br /><br />Additionally, this legislation will require the United States military to take custody of some terrorism suspects. Some of these suspects may already be detained within the borders and being handled by federal, state, and/or local law enforcement. In debating this legislation, “several senior administration officials, including the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the FBI, and the Director of the CIA, all raised objections that this provision interfered with the administration’s ability to effectively fight terrorism.” Recent statistics seem to support this argument: in the last 10 years over 400 people have been prosecuted in U.S. Federal Courts for terrorism related offenses, while, during that same period, only six cases have been prosecuted in the military commissions. <br /><br />Human Rights organizations have issues with this legislation, and their concerns appear to be valid. To start with, and most obvious, is that people can be detained for suspicion of terrorism without ever having a chance to stand trial. Without trial, it is plausible that many innocent people will be held improperly; no fact finding will be required and potentially no direct evidence will be required to hold these suspects.<br /><br />Secondly, the enactment of this law contradicts what President Obama had promised at the beginning of his term. The closing of Guantanamo became a priority due to several issues with the site; there were allegations of torture, improper conditions and the fact that many detainees had be at the location, without trial or other investigation, for longer than what many thought was proper. This legislation specifically authorizes this indefinite detention, an issue which President Obama stated he would resolve.<br /><br />Terrorism is an important issue that the United States must address. However, there are proven methods to do so without this legislation. Specifically, it is unnecessary for the military to take custody of suspects from agencies that are already set up and seemingly acting more effectively in handling these terrorism cases. The added cases the military would have to handle would only serve to make them less effective. <br /><br />For the article and position of the Human Rights Watch, click <a href="http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/12/14/us-refusal-veto-detainee-bill-historic-tragedy-rights">here</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-16564398614791065232011-12-08T09:26:00.003-05:002011-12-08T09:42:48.236-05:00Obama Administration Takes Stand to Protect Gay Rights AbroadThe United States government appears to be getting more serious about gay rights. On Tuesday, President Obama’s administration “bluntly warned the world against gay and lesbian discrimination.” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made it clear to those in attendance, which included diplomats from Arab, African and other nations where homosexuality is considered a crime, that the United States “will use foreign assistance as well as diplomacy to back its insistence that gay rights are fully equal to other basic human rights. “<br /><br />Mrs. Clinton likened the struggle for gay equality to that of women’s and racial equality. She specifically negated religious and cultural traditions do not excuse the type of discrimination homosexuals face, especially in countries “where brutality and discrimination against gay people is tolerated or encouraged.” Ms. Clinton went on to say that "gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights," and "It should never be a crime to be gay." Apparently, many in the audience were not exactly pleased with Mrs. Clinton’s speech and left the room immediately after her speech was completed.<br /><br />While President Obama’s administration is taking a stronger stance on this issue, no specific consequences were spelled out for countries violating these rights. And while President Obama is attempting to curb discrimination overseas, he has yet to back gay marriage. Many gay supporters find his failure to support gay marriage and the delay in repealing “Don’t ask, don’t tell” as disheartening; as such, some see this latest advocacy as an outreach to homosexuals, “a core Democratic constituency at home”, in order to garner their support in the 2012 Presidential election.<br /><br />The protection of all human rights is of primary importance; as Mrs. Clinton states, it does not matter if one is gay or not, as human rights apply to all persons. It is admirable that the Obama administration is attempting to protect these rights in areas where homosexuals are considered criminals and are subject to government approved violence.<br /><br />However, there is still much to address in the United States regarding gay rights. Homosexuals are much more than an important constituency that must be placated to earn their votes. Also, as Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney suggest, gay rights should not necessarily be the deciding factor for whether to provide aid to or interact with foreign countries; although specific consequences have not been enumerated, the reduction in aid and/or trade seem like likely candidates. It is hoped that this policy is much more than just a play for more support from homosexuals as the election draws nearer, but without further support for gay rights in the U.S. by the President and a lack of more specifics on this new policy, it is hard to see it as much else. <br /><br />The entire AP article can be viewed <a href="http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2011/12/obama_orders_agencies_overseas.html">here</a>.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916917997360111165.post-17160881631622859002011-12-01T09:53:00.001-05:002011-12-01T09:55:00.002-05:00Technology Outpacing the Law?On Monday, the Associated Press published an interesting <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/inmates-harass-victims-via-facebook-081733468.html">article</a> describing how advancing technology (specifically Facebook and smartphones) have developed faster than the law can keep up with. Thttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifhe specific issue in question is the ability of inmates to use said technology to harass and intimidate their victims.<br /><br />Previously, for an inmate to intimidate potential witnesses or harass their former victims they would have to obtain the services from somebody on “the outside”. Now, with the increase in the number of smuggled phones coming into prisons, inmates can use these devices to harass and intimidate on their own. Since 2008, the number of telephones confiscated by the Federal Bureau of Prisons has doubled to 3,684.<br />Unfortunately, in many of these cases it is difficult to determine who is actually sending the messages. Even in the rare occasion where they are able to determine the inmate is the one sending the harassing messages, they often face no serious consequences. <br /><br />Another issue is that these inmates have seemingly found gaps in existing laws. For example, in some states, “no contact” orders do not apply to persons once they are in custody. However, due to the increasing awareness of this issue some states are now starting to take action in an attempt to prevent this type of harassment. Oregon legislators passed a law preventing inmates from contacting their domestic violence victims from behind bars; California officials are beginning to work closely with Facebook to identify and delete inmate accounts. California legislators have also enacted a law which punishes corrections employees or visitors up to six (6) months in jail for smuggling in smartphone devices; inmates in California caught with smartphones can lose up to 180 days of early-release credit, although no additional time is added to their sentences.<br /><br />This harassment and intimidation makes it harder for the legal system in that many witnesses may choose not to testify due to the fear of being harmed. Victims of inmates are in fear of what will happen to them when the inmate is released. Victims are also fearful that these inmates now have access to their victims’ information, including pictures and names of family members.<br /><br />For some, the easy solution for the victims is to: 1) delete their Facebook account; 2) block the inmate from viewing their page and sending messages; and/or, 3) setting their Facebook page to the highest privacy settings. There is no doubt merit to these suggestions (for anybody wishing not to have their life made public via Facebook), although these suggestions are not 100% effective. Many of the more tech-savvy inmates will find ways around these safeguards, and there are still other ways for inmates to use their access to technology to harass and intimidate outside of Facebook. While all individuals need to take steps to protect their privacy to a level they see fit, states must also take steps to close loopholes in their laws and create more suitable consequences to deal with developing technology and its possible misuse.Paul Venardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08867346618248230176noreply@blogger.com0