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.”
 

In L.A., Student Tickets Give Way To Counseling, Other Intervention

According to a 11/3/15 LA Times Report, "L.A. Unified sees success in counseling rather than arresting truants and kids who fight."

According to a 11/3/15 LA Times Report, “L.A. Unified sees success in counseling rather than arresting truants and kids who fight.”

The Los Angeles Times is following up on measures taken last year to reform an out-of-control truancy system. The shift actually began under pressure from civil rights groups and was approved back in 2012 when the LAT reported that: “Under the old policy, a student who received a truancy ticket had to appear in court with a parent. A judge would issue a fine and order the student to be on time for the next 60 days or face more legal trouble. Both the parent and student had to return two months later for a follow-up, causing the student to miss school time and the parent to lose wages.”

The update offered this background that the shift involves: “… 405 sworn L.A. Unified police officers who, along with more than 125 safety officers, make up the nation’s largest independent school police force. Across the nation, campus officers are facing criticism that they’re pushing children into a “school-to-prison pipeline” with citations, arrests and excessive force for issues that could be resolved by other means. National studies show that one arrest doubles a student’s odds of dropping out.”

The student truancy policies were also seen as a path to criminal records. While the initial “tickets” were treated as civil cases, failing to comply with the results, like paying fines or doing community work, led to criminal arrests.

Read the excellent Times coverage here.

WSJ Report Outlines Delays For Federal Civil Court Dockets

Detailing the case of a man awaiting his day in court since 2007, the Wall Street Journal notes that the example is only one of “… more than 330,000 such cases” and that “… thee number of cases awaiting resolution for three years or more exceeded 30,000 for the fifth time in the past decade.”
 
The report gives reasons, and makes the case that the civil justice system slows when the criminal justice system gets busy: “… the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to a jury trial in civil cases. But the Sixth Amendment gives people in criminal cases the right to a “speedy” trial. The upshot: Criminal cases often displace and delay civil disputes, creating a backlog.”
 
It also says that “… federal court for California’s Eastern District [where the example case is located] has a particularly deep backlog. The number of cases filed per judge, 974 last year, is almost twice the national average. More than 14% of civil cases in that district have been pending for three years or more.” The report outlines the political challenges to fixing the tardy system. Read the WSJ story here: In Federal Courts, the Civil Cases Pile Up

IVP Conference: CA Courts Filling With Out-of-State Cases

A recent conference hosted by the Independent Voter Project in California hit upon an issue we’ve been reporting on repeatedly here at CCM. California courts are filling with a backlog of out-of-state cases, as class action lawsuits fill the courts. This, in turn, is buckling the limited resources of the court system, leaving California residents either without nearby courts, or pushing their cases to the back of the line. 

The conference focused on business interests, specifically, but a recent blog they posted noted that businesses are being impacted, alongside residents:

“The fairly recent development of mass-action lawsuits conglomerate residents of multiple states into one lawsuit. Usually it is filed in California due to plaintiff-friendly court policies. Consequently, California courts are filling up with lawsuits where many plaintiffs are not CA residents and don’t receive adequate legal representation.”

Read more here.

California Columnist: Lawsuit Likely If Parent-Trigger School Index Nixed

Since its passage in 2010, California’s “parent trigger” charter school movement has been the subject of litigation, perhaps most notably in the landmark “Palm Lane Elementary School” case in Anaheim. The “trigger” laws allow parents to demand reform at failing schools, including converting the school to a charter school. The California move triggered a handful of other states to take up similar provisions.
 
Now, says Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Walters, Golden State lawmakers are considering dropping one part of that parent trigger legislation, the so-called Academic Performance Index, or “API.” The standardized testing program was passed before the parent trigger, but was eventually linked to the controversial charter school efforts. Walters says removing the API will likely mean yet another lawsuit.

 

He writes that “… Gloria Romero, the former Democratic state senator who wrote the parent trigger law, says that if the API disappears, the Legislature should be duty-bound to provide a new performance measure for parents. However, the staff recommendation before the state school board is to eliminate the API and “identify the obsolete and outdated references to the API that need to be removed” as part of its repeal, implying that the parent trigger law should also die.”
 
If the API is repealed without a replacement measure for parent trigger, Romero tells Walters, a lawsuit would be the next step, which would not be unusual. He notes that “… school reform and civil rights groups have often sued, usually successfully, in their battles with the establishment over accountability and other flashpoint issues.”
 
 
 

Obama Immigration Case Has Implications For Presidential Race

The Christian Science Monitor, or a we call it around here “the other Monitor,” has an excellent analysis of how President Obama’s executive action case might influence the 2016 presidential race. You may have noted that a federal court sided with a lower court that the president over-reached in his actions that effected about 5 million of the estimated 11 million undocumented folks in the United States.
 
The CSM notes the timing: “If the Supreme Court opts to hear the case, it would likely issue a decision next June – just as the 2016 presidential race is heading into the home stretch. And the implications for the Latino vote could be big, not only for the top of the ticket but also in key Senate races in states with large Latino populations, such as Nevada, Florida, Colorado, and Illinois.”
 

President’s Immigration Action Headed To Supreme Court?

As reported by Reuters on 11/10/15: "U.S. President Barack Obama delivers remarks at an Organizing for Action event in Washington November 9, 2015. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas"

As reported by Reuters on 11/10/15: “U.S. President Barack Obama delivers remarks at an Organizing for Action event in Washington November 9, 2015. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas”

In a move that seems likely to bring the U.S. Supreme Court into the legal fray over President Obama’s executive actions on immigration, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans decided 2-1 to uphold a May injunction against the measure. Reuters notes that the decision “… deals a blow to Obama’s plan, opposed by Republicans and challenged by 26 states. The states, all led by Republican governors, said the federal government exceeded its authority in demanding whole categories of immigrants be protected.”
 
Millions of immigrants are effected by the court decision but “discretion” in law enforcement is expected pending further legal appeals, most likely to the Supreme Court.
 

Read more at Reuters.

Court Tells Feds To Lay Off Medical Pot Providers

A federal judge seems to have settled an issue between federal law enforcement and local marijuana operations in states with laws allowing legal pot. At issue was an amendment to a federal spending bill saying that law enforcement cannot use federal funds to go after marijuana operations or users in states that have laws governing such things. As Washington Post blogger Christopher Ingraham explains, “… when the legislation was passed, advocates and lawmakers on both sides of the issue agreed that the bill basically prevented the DEA from going after medical marijuana dispensaries, provided that such dispensaries were acting in compliance with state law. The DEA, however, didn’t see it that way. In a leaked memo, the Justice Department contended that the amendment only prevents actions against actual states — not against the individuals or businesses that actually carry out marijuana laws”
 
The judge did not find that argument at all amusing. Read the results here: Federal court tells the DEA to stop harassing medical marijuana providers

By the Playbook: Power, Greed & Corruption.

As reported in the NYT 4/4/15, "Sheldon Silver, the former New York State Assembly speaker, arrived at federal court in Manhattan on Tuesday. Credit Seth Wenig/Associated Press."

As reported in the NYT 4/4/15, “Sheldon Silver, the former New York State Assembly speaker, arrived at federal court in Manhattan on Tuesday. Credit Seth Wenig/Associated Press.”

When it comes to the Sheldon Silver corruption trial this week, you certainly can follow Politico’s “Playbook” advice and “pick your news.” The NY Post and Times are illustrating that the GOP/Dem. divide certainly makes for contrasting coverage. But Politico’s NY Playbook is doing a solid job linking to various sources, reporting this week in a curtain-raiser story that Silver “… has maintained his innocence and said he was looking forward to this day. On this mild autumn Tuesday, the man who led the State Assembly for over two decades wrapped himself in the system of Albany. What prosecutors cast as misdeeds — collecting referral fees from a real estate law firm employed by major developers and a firm that represented asbestos patients treated by a medical researcher that Silver gave state funding — were presented as the inevitable conflicts of a part-time Legislature where lawmakers have side jobs.”
 
(This is, of course, a criminal trial. The civil court implications come from allegations that Speaker Silver is charged with a kickback scheme involving referrals for mesothelioma victims, gaining millions of dollars in referral fees while funneling state funding to the clinic making the referrals.)
 
And we’re off…