Happy New Year!

We’re taking some time off to ring in the New Year, and we hope you do, too. We’ll see you back here on the 4th of January 2016. 

Happy New Year!

Are Unaccompanied ‘Border Kids’ Now The ‘New Normal’?

In a story over the Christmas weekend, the Dallas Morning News cited the increase in unaccompanied minors showing up at the United State’s southern border. Along with statistics indicating that the influx has doubled compared to recent years, the story quoted  U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner R. Gil Kerlikowske saying “… the concerning part is, are we seeing the new normal?”
 
The situation has already prompted new shelters, a response from local charities trying to assist families and other efforts.
 

Happy Holidays!

The Courts Monitor staff and contributors wish you and yours the best of holidays and will return to providing your curated dose of civil justice rationing on Monday, Dec. 28.

Alabama Joins California In Civil Court Cuts, Delays

In a situation similar to what California faced in 2012 and 2013, Alabama is the latest state to face dramatic court system budget cuts. The now-familiar refrain is that criminal courts, with their constitutional guarantees, will remain a priority while civil cases will really feel most of the impact.  The Birmingham Business Journal has a good report and notes that “.. one overlooked aspect of cutting the court budget is how it will affect businesses. Already, short-staffed civil cases with businesses can take up to two years to resolve, but with the proposed budget cuts [a court source] said he sees these cases taking up to five years.
 
That would, in turn, change the local business landscape, the report argues.
 

First Court-Sanctioned Case of Interstate Medical Cannabis Commerce

A potentially precedent-setting cannabis case comes out of the Northeast this week. Linda Horan, a lifelong Labor activist, said her last fight would be to pave the way for medical cannabis to be used in New Hampshire. While the Legislature there authorized medical cannabis more than two years ago, the State itself was slow to implement the policy leaving legal medical patients in limbo. Until dispensaries opened, NH was refusing to authorize patient cards to qualifying residents.

Enter Horan. With Stage IV lung cancer, she argued that by the time the dispensaries would be open, she would be dead. While wasting syndrome took more than twenty pounds from her in just a few short months, her tenacity never failed her, or her team of supporters. She sued the State for the right to have her medical card, arguing that she could travel to the neighboring State of Maine where she could procure her medication under its reciprocity laws.

Maine has allowed medical marijuana since 1999, and authorized medical dispensaries in 2009. Both were passed at the ballot box while the NH law was passed through the Legislature. Unlike Maine, NH does not allow for so-called “home grow” where patients can grow a limited number of plants for themselves, leaving the only legal means for patients to procure medical cannabis through dispensaries.

Judge Richard McNamara, a broadly respected judge whose rulings are rarely overturned ruled in favor of Horan, directing the NH Department of Health and Human Services to issue Horan a patient card. The decision hinged upon the fact that medical cannabis was, in fact, available to Horan, albeit in a nearby State.

What sets this civil case apart from all others is McNamara’s explicit insistence that Horan could bring medical cannabis over the border, essentially ruling that NH would authorize interstate commerce. According to the Portland Press Herald, “In his ruling, McNamara rejected the state’s argument that allowing Horan to possess marijuana from Maine would destroy the tight distribution controls lawmakers envisioned in passing the law. He noted that the law allows visitors from other states to obtain marijuana in New Hampshire, suggesting that lawmakers knew other states would have similar provisions.”

At 4:30 PM the day before Horan was scheduled to drive to Maine, the NH Attorney General advised DHHS to authorize patient cards for all qualifying NH residents.

While McNamara is not a federal judge, it will be interesting to see what kind of a precedent this may set for future cases, particularly as Oregon’s adult use market comes online, immediately next to Washington State. While all eyes have been watching whether interstate commerce would be allowed there under the Cole Memo which requires legal states prevent diversion to non-legal states, a dying woman’s last wish for non-opiate palliative care may have just cleared the path for interstate commerce between legal, neighboring states.

For Horan’s part, she says, “I’m over the moon.”

Read more about Horan’s story at the Concord Monitor.

Lawsuits Defining Marijuana Policy In California And ‘Legal’ States

While the Golden State is not among the “legal” states like Colorado and Washington, it continues to stumble toward a more permissive marijuana policy via civil litigation. An example is the recent Fresno-based case where a state appeals court ruled that growing medical marijuana is not a crime, but more of a civil infraction if it violates zoning laws. The Oakland-based East Bay Express reported that the case is precedent-setting for the rest of the state.
 
The report explains that “…. Fresno enacted one the state’s worst bans in 2014, prohibiting nearly all medical cannabis activity as nuisances or misdemeanors.” The resulting lawsuit, the report notes, “… went to the Fifth District Court of Appeal, which ruled that Fresno’s bans are valid under zoning powers, but medical pot growing isn’t a crime. It’s more like having a barking dog or playing loud music late at night”
 
The report also notes that public lands managers predict some 40,000 marijuana farms will be created in California and also checks in with marijuana policy in the “legal” states.
 

National Radio Program Offers View Of Former Immigration Judge

Marketplace, the national radio program produced by American Public Media in association with the University of Southern California, is distributing a report about the backlog in America’s immigration courts. It introduces the report by noting that “… hundreds of thousands of immigration-related cases are in the courts now, meaning it can take years to be granted asylum, or get deported. Currently, there are nearly 500,000 cases pending in court. And on average, according to research done at Syracuse University, those pending cases have been open for more than 600 days… for some judges, the backlog has more than doubled their yearly caseload.”
 
The on-air report actually omits some of those facts and leaves the impression that the “courts” are the normal kind, not the civil hearings held by a division of the Justice Department. Actually, the audio amounts to a powerful statement by an immigration judge (again, note that immigration judges are hired by, and work for, the Justice Department although some are arguing for independence) who retired early after 20 years. She says she didn’t want to be part of the system and now works to represent the kinds of cases she used to decide. For a “ground-level view,” listen to the story here:
 

New SoCal ‘Stealth Charter Schools’ Bring Confusion, Prompt Litigation

They are calling them “stealth charters” and the San Diego Union-Tribune newspaper reports that “… San Diego County has seen a rise in ‘out-of-district’ charters in recent years — mostly independent-study programs authorized by small districts in the eastern reaches of the region. The arrangements can be appealing because the authorizing districts don’t stand to lose students, and they receive a percentage of the charter’s revenue in exchange for varying degrees of oversight and often administrative support services… regardless of what’s driving this trend, it has sparked bitter turf wars that have pitted districts against one another and stirred costly litigation.”
 
The challenge is that charters that are authorized in one district can set up shop in another. It’s a whole new front in the Golden State’s school wars.
 

Pearl Harbor Survivor, CA Judge, Dies on Eve of Pearl Harbor Anniversary

The Davis Enterprise reports (12/15/15): U.S. Navy when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941. He remembers vividly the horrors of that day, when he and his shipmates on the USS Sumner shot down a Japanese torpedo plane. After his Navy service ended in 1944, Taylor went to law school and later served as a Yolo Superior Court judge.

The Davis Enterprise reports (12/15/15): U.S. Navy when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941. He remembers vividly the horrors of that day, when he and his shipmates on the USS Sumner shot down a Japanese torpedo plane. After his Navy service ended in 1944, Taylor went to law school and later served as a Yolo Superior Court judge.

At 95, most of us would be able to report some interesting stories. The Davis Enterprise reports that retired CA Judge Warren Taylor passed away on the eve of the 74th anniversary of the Pearl Harbor invasion. Taylor, serving in the US Navy, was just 21 on December 7, 1941 when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, where he was stationed on the USS Sumner. 

In 2011, he wrote, “I was terrified, and in retrospect still find it hard to believe that I am alive at the age of 91. May it never happen again,”

Following his service in the war, Taylor went on to law school and then onto a distinguished legal career where he would serve as Yolo Superior Court judge from 1963 to 1984. 

It’s not usual for us to report on the passing of individuals, even California judges, but we would be remiss not to honor and recognize the deep public service of Judge Taylor. 

Read more of the incredible life of Judge Warren Taylor. 

L.A. School Group Offers List Of ‘Best Practices’ Facilities

The LA Times 12/17/15 article reports, "Sarah Angel, a regional director for the California Charter Schools Assn., praises charters at a recent forum on the future of Los Angeles public education. A new group is trying to launch more of these schools. (Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)"

The LA Times 12/17/15 article reports, “Sarah Angel, a regional director for the California Charter Schools Assn., praises charters at a recent forum on the future of Los Angeles public education. A new group is trying to launch more of these schools. (Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)”

The educational reform group “Great Public Schools Now” has issued a list of possible model schools for Los Angeles County, and the L.A. Times reports that the full list includes 23 magnet programs, 19 charter schools and seven traditional neighborhood schools. The Times says that “… each has a low-income enrollment of at least 75% and more than 60% of students met state targets in English.”
 
Charter schools, especially those crated by teh “parent trigger” that allows parents to take over private schools, have been a civil litigation magnet in recent years. The Times report includes defining terms: “Charters are independently managed and exempt from some rules that govern traditional schools. Most are nonunion. Magnets are district operated and typically offer a special academic program. They were set up initially to encourage voluntary integration.”
 
And the paper repeats that “… questions still surround Great Public Schools Now, including the names of the financial backers and how much money they hope to raise. A confidential draft proposal, obtained by The Times, called for raising $490 million. Critics have questioned whether the underlying goal of the original draft plan — which called for more than doubling the number of charter schools — has changed. That draft was apparently intended for supporters and potential donors.”