On August 26, 1920, the 19th Amendment took effect and women had the legal right to vote.
When the United States was established, voting rights were not as restricted as they would be a hundred years later. In New Jersey, women with property could vote. In other states, freemen could vote. However, by the time of the Civil War, these rights had all been stripped.
Many progressive women had banded together to work for civil rights as abolitionists. When women met at Seneca Falls in July 1848, Frederick Douglass was in attendance as well. It quite naturally occurred to several of these women that they were fighting for rights they did not themselves have. This was not universal; some women's societies felt that minorities should not be voting.
At the time of Seneca Falls, women were at the mercy of their husbands; they could not own property, enter into contracts, or serve on juries. One exception to this was the recent Married Women Property Act, which allowed women to keep property they had brought in into the marriage. During the marriage the property was under the husband's control, although it could no longer be seized for debts of the husband.
Another cause that fed into the Suffragettes was the temperance movements; alcohol was an even more dangerous bane to families when women could not control family finances nor count on law enforcement for protection.
The Seneca Falls Convention was the first major meeting of leaders in the new women's movement. Many of the attendees would not vote in their lifetime. One exception was Susan B. Anthony, who voted illegally in 1872. She was arrested, and went to court. She argued the Fourteenth Amendment applied to women; she was fined $100 which she refused to pay and in fact did not.
Voting was starting to undergo a shift. With the settlement of the West, voting was opening up for groups previously disenfranchised. Immigrants, for example, were allowed to vote in some frontier states. Wyoming enfranchised women in 1869. Many western states allowed women to vote long before the Amendment was passed. Montana elected Jeannette Rankin to the Senate in 1914. In the East, poll taxes and reading tests were being implemented.
The Amendment, after several abortive attempts between 1915-1919, finally passed on May 21, 1919 with the strong support of President Wilson. Soon ratified by the states, women could officially vote as of August 26, 1920.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
August 27
On August 27, 1908, President Lyndon Baines Johnson was born in Texas. He attended a teacher's college before his life in politics. He taught the children of Mexican immigrants. In later life, he would champion early education and the fight against poverty, having witnessed firsthand the effects.
Johnson ran for the House of Representatives in 1937, and moved to the Senate six years later. In 1953 he became House Minority Leader, the youngest to do so. A year later, he was Majority leader. Johnson was very effective in the Senate, and managed to pass a lot of legislation.
In 1960, Johnson became the running mate of John F. Kennedy. Johnson was not impressed with the Vice-Presidency. Upon the death of Kennedy, Johnson became President.
As President, he pushed Kennedy's civil rights legislation and the Great Society. The Great Society was a number of programs that attacked poverty and supported education, Medicare, urban renewal, and voting rights. Johnson also presided over the space program that would go on to put man on the moon.
Johnson also got enmeshed in the conflict in Vietnam. This made him tremendously unpopular. As a result, Johnson declined to run for re-election in 1968. He died of a heart attack in 1973.
Johnson did more for the poor than any president before or since. He championed civil rights and improved the lives of the elderly. He oversaw the creation of programs like Head Start. His legacy lives today.
Johnson ran for the House of Representatives in 1937, and moved to the Senate six years later. In 1953 he became House Minority Leader, the youngest to do so. A year later, he was Majority leader. Johnson was very effective in the Senate, and managed to pass a lot of legislation.
In 1960, Johnson became the running mate of John F. Kennedy. Johnson was not impressed with the Vice-Presidency. Upon the death of Kennedy, Johnson became President.
As President, he pushed Kennedy's civil rights legislation and the Great Society. The Great Society was a number of programs that attacked poverty and supported education, Medicare, urban renewal, and voting rights. Johnson also presided over the space program that would go on to put man on the moon.
Johnson also got enmeshed in the conflict in Vietnam. This made him tremendously unpopular. As a result, Johnson declined to run for re-election in 1968. He died of a heart attack in 1973.
Johnson did more for the poor than any president before or since. He championed civil rights and improved the lives of the elderly. He oversaw the creation of programs like Head Start. His legacy lives today.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
August 25
On August 25, 1950, President Harry Truman seized control of the railroads, specifically putting them under the control of the US Army.
The railroad unions were poised to strike, and the Korean Conflict was still ongoing. Truman justified intervening on the grounds on military need and economic necessity. The Korean Conflict was never a declared war, it was a police action. The railroads continue to be a vital link in interstate commerce, making it a federal concern, but interstate commerce is the purview of Congress.
Truman said it was a matter of "national defense and security". It was a expansive view of executive power, the trend of the 20th Century.
Truman intervened in several strikes during his term, including steel plants.
The strike did go on, and lasted for 21 months.
The railroad unions were poised to strike, and the Korean Conflict was still ongoing. Truman justified intervening on the grounds on military need and economic necessity. The Korean Conflict was never a declared war, it was a police action. The railroads continue to be a vital link in interstate commerce, making it a federal concern, but interstate commerce is the purview of Congress.
Truman said it was a matter of "national defense and security". It was a expansive view of executive power, the trend of the 20th Century.
Truman intervened in several strikes during his term, including steel plants.
The strike did go on, and lasted for 21 months.
Monday, August 24, 2009
August 24
On August 24, 1993, police starting investigating allegations of child abuse involving Michael Jackson.
Child abuse cases are very complicated to prosecute. Child abuse cases require all kinds of exemptions from the rules of evidence, and an exemption to the Constitutional right to confront one's accuser.
Children are allowed to testify at any trial as long as they understand the truth, are able to communicate, and have first hand knowledge. This can be problematic for very young children.
If the child is traumatized by the experience, the child may be excused from testifying and a transcript used instead. The courts generally prefer an available witness to testify because of the right to confront an accuser, but under certain circumstances (not specific to molestation cases) this can be exempted under hearsay rules.
In general, evidence of similar crimes is excluded in trial, unless it is a specific element of the crime in question. In molestation cases, there is a lot more leeway over what may be introduced into the record, and it doesn't need to be a particularly close match.
The biggest obstacle in prosecuting child molestation cases is probably the court system itself. The law is slow and deliberate, and a child may have to relive the experience multiple times. While the court system tries to minimize the impact on victims, the rights of the accused still need to be answered as well, and the accused is entitled to a defense.
Settlement may seem the best answer for everyone, regardless of what really occurred, which was the final result of the Jackson investigations.
Child abuse cases are very complicated to prosecute. Child abuse cases require all kinds of exemptions from the rules of evidence, and an exemption to the Constitutional right to confront one's accuser.
Children are allowed to testify at any trial as long as they understand the truth, are able to communicate, and have first hand knowledge. This can be problematic for very young children.
If the child is traumatized by the experience, the child may be excused from testifying and a transcript used instead. The courts generally prefer an available witness to testify because of the right to confront an accuser, but under certain circumstances (not specific to molestation cases) this can be exempted under hearsay rules.
In general, evidence of similar crimes is excluded in trial, unless it is a specific element of the crime in question. In molestation cases, there is a lot more leeway over what may be introduced into the record, and it doesn't need to be a particularly close match.
The biggest obstacle in prosecuting child molestation cases is probably the court system itself. The law is slow and deliberate, and a child may have to relive the experience multiple times. While the court system tries to minimize the impact on victims, the rights of the accused still need to be answered as well, and the accused is entitled to a defense.
Settlement may seem the best answer for everyone, regardless of what really occurred, which was the final result of the Jackson investigations.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
August 23
On August 23, 1927, Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were executed by execution.
Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were two Italian immigrants accused of taking part in a robbery gone wrong. A payroll robbery that ended with killings. The perpetrators were described as Italian.
Sacco and Vanzetti were anarchists, not uncommon at the time. They had distributed some literature and attended meetings. There were a lot of procedural irregularities in the police work, the the judge in the proceedings was openly hostile to the defendants. Unfortunately for Sacco and Vanzetti, the same judge presided over his appeal.
The case was sensational and attracted a lot of press. Another man confessed he had participated, but not action was taken. Worldwide protests were held, but the Supreme Court declined to reopen the case.
In 1961, the gun used was tested using science not available at the time of the killings. The evidence strongly indicated Sacco's gun was used. The chain of evidence was not unbroken however. The general belief is that Vanzetti was not involved, in fact there was evidence he was elsewhere when the robbery was committed.
Governor Dukakis issued a pardon in 1977.
Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were two Italian immigrants accused of taking part in a robbery gone wrong. A payroll robbery that ended with killings. The perpetrators were described as Italian.
Sacco and Vanzetti were anarchists, not uncommon at the time. They had distributed some literature and attended meetings. There were a lot of procedural irregularities in the police work, the the judge in the proceedings was openly hostile to the defendants. Unfortunately for Sacco and Vanzetti, the same judge presided over his appeal.
The case was sensational and attracted a lot of press. Another man confessed he had participated, but not action was taken. Worldwide protests were held, but the Supreme Court declined to reopen the case.
In 1961, the gun used was tested using science not available at the time of the killings. The evidence strongly indicated Sacco's gun was used. The chain of evidence was not unbroken however. The general belief is that Vanzetti was not involved, in fact there was evidence he was elsewhere when the robbery was committed.
Governor Dukakis issued a pardon in 1977.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
August 22
On August 22, 1864. the Red Cross was formed, as well as twelve nations signing the first Geneva Convention.
The International Committee of the Red Cross has a very interesting special status in international law. It is charged with protecting the life and dignity of victims of wars, including soldiers. The Red Cross is prohibited in taking sides in conflicts. In return, Red Cross workers are supposed to be respected in conflicts.
The Red Cross has an analogue in the Red Crescent. The Red Crescent operates by the same rules, among which are the societies have to be recognized as relief societies by their own government, and the governments in question have to be signatories to the Geneva Convention. Most countries are. There are other afflilated organizations, but not recognized in the same way.
The UN has given the Red Cross official observer status, the first organization to be so recognized. The Red Cross today traces the dead, oversees prisoners of war, and arbitrates in international conflicts.
The International Committee of the Red Cross has a very interesting special status in international law. It is charged with protecting the life and dignity of victims of wars, including soldiers. The Red Cross is prohibited in taking sides in conflicts. In return, Red Cross workers are supposed to be respected in conflicts.
The Red Cross has an analogue in the Red Crescent. The Red Crescent operates by the same rules, among which are the societies have to be recognized as relief societies by their own government, and the governments in question have to be signatories to the Geneva Convention. Most countries are. There are other afflilated organizations, but not recognized in the same way.
The UN has given the Red Cross official observer status, the first organization to be so recognized. The Red Cross today traces the dead, oversees prisoners of war, and arbitrates in international conflicts.
Friday, August 21, 2009
August 21
On August 21, 1959, Hawaii becomes the 50th state.
Hawaii has an interesting history. First settled by Polynesians, it was discovered by James Cook in 1778. He named the islands the Sandwich Islands for European purposes. Cook died there in a dispute with the local people.
In 1810, the various tribes were united under Kamehameha the Great. Europeans were settling on the islands, and in 1887 pushed the signing of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Hawaii. This was a document that limited the king's power, disenfranchised Asian voters, and restricted voting to wealthy European landowners. In 1893, a group of landowners staged a coup and created a provisional government. This coup had the aid of a group of marines that were there to "protect" the American residents.
Despite this, a lot of American government officials had qualms about what to do with Hawaii. Grover Cleveland's government declared the coup illegal and demanded Queen Liliʻuokalani be returned to power. The provisional government refused. Congress on the other hand looked more favorably upon the landowner's actions.
In 1898, Hawaii was formally annexed to the United States. While many residents wanted statehood, the landowners that ran Hawaii preferred territorial status. Statehood would confer voting rights on all legal citizens, not just the wealthy. When voting on statehood at long last, Hawaiians voted 17-1 in favor.
Hawaii has an interesting history. First settled by Polynesians, it was discovered by James Cook in 1778. He named the islands the Sandwich Islands for European purposes. Cook died there in a dispute with the local people.
In 1810, the various tribes were united under Kamehameha the Great. Europeans were settling on the islands, and in 1887 pushed the signing of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Hawaii. This was a document that limited the king's power, disenfranchised Asian voters, and restricted voting to wealthy European landowners. In 1893, a group of landowners staged a coup and created a provisional government. This coup had the aid of a group of marines that were there to "protect" the American residents.
Despite this, a lot of American government officials had qualms about what to do with Hawaii. Grover Cleveland's government declared the coup illegal and demanded Queen Liliʻuokalani be returned to power. The provisional government refused. Congress on the other hand looked more favorably upon the landowner's actions.
In 1898, Hawaii was formally annexed to the United States. While many residents wanted statehood, the landowners that ran Hawaii preferred territorial status. Statehood would confer voting rights on all legal citizens, not just the wealthy. When voting on statehood at long last, Hawaiians voted 17-1 in favor.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
August 20
On August 20, 1988, Peru becomes a signatory to the Berne Convention (for copyrights).
Copyright has a long and interesting history. Copyright is one of the few rights enumerated in the Constitution proper (alongside patents). However, the US did not particularly respect the copyright of other countries until the 1909 Berne Convention. A large part of the reason for this was United States intellectual property was becoming increasingly valuable. Berne was good for domestic copyright as well, as it removed several complex formalities from having a defensible copyright.
Berne was initially a treaty between Western nations. Copyright is a mixed blessing for emerging nations, because copyright does up the cost of intellectual property. A pirated copy of a book does not have to pay the author, for example. This is a contributory factor towards the popularity of English works in the US in the 18th century; English works were frequently pirated and consequently cheaper.
Additionally, in emerging nations, there is frequently much more intellectual property coming in than going out. Corporations, more familiar with copyright and patents, will also take credit (and the royalties) for traditional works.
Nonetheless, these nations end up joining Berne for other diplomatic reasons. They are pressured to do so in order to enjoy other benefits.
Copyright has a long and interesting history. Copyright is one of the few rights enumerated in the Constitution proper (alongside patents). However, the US did not particularly respect the copyright of other countries until the 1909 Berne Convention. A large part of the reason for this was United States intellectual property was becoming increasingly valuable. Berne was good for domestic copyright as well, as it removed several complex formalities from having a defensible copyright.
Berne was initially a treaty between Western nations. Copyright is a mixed blessing for emerging nations, because copyright does up the cost of intellectual property. A pirated copy of a book does not have to pay the author, for example. This is a contributory factor towards the popularity of English works in the US in the 18th century; English works were frequently pirated and consequently cheaper.
Additionally, in emerging nations, there is frequently much more intellectual property coming in than going out. Corporations, more familiar with copyright and patents, will also take credit (and the royalties) for traditional works.
Nonetheless, these nations end up joining Berne for other diplomatic reasons. They are pressured to do so in order to enjoy other benefits.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
August 19
On August 19, 1960, the Soviet Union sentenced Francis Gary Powers to 10 years for espionage.
Powers had been shot down over Soviet airspace, at an altitude of 68,000 ft in a U2 spy plane. He was equipped with supplies, gold, even a suicide pin, and employed by the CIA. He had been recording film of various points of military interest.
Occupied land in the US does not merely contain the dirt on the surface. Unless rights are sold, or subject to an easement, the land above and below a piece of property belong to the owner. Mineral rights are frequently stripped from residential property, and easements are common for sewers, power and telephone lines. Commercial and military aircraft also have an easement. These means that commercial planes have to fly within certain zones. At the dawn of flight, several lawsuits were filed for trespass with airplanes. The courts did not want to shut down the burgeoning technology, so easements were granted.
International law is even blurrier. Airspace starts at the international waters line, which is 12 nautical miles from the coastline. It extends vertically until "outer space" which does not have an agreed upon boundary. An international body has established the Karman line, which is 100 km, but this boundary has no legal status. The US considers anyone who has been 80 km away from the surface an astronaut.
Powers was flying at roughly 20 km. Powers was exchanged for a Soviet spy in 1962. The US continued to send U2 planes on spy missions, and continues to. Powers died in 1977 in a helicopter crash.
Powers had been shot down over Soviet airspace, at an altitude of 68,000 ft in a U2 spy plane. He was equipped with supplies, gold, even a suicide pin, and employed by the CIA. He had been recording film of various points of military interest.
Occupied land in the US does not merely contain the dirt on the surface. Unless rights are sold, or subject to an easement, the land above and below a piece of property belong to the owner. Mineral rights are frequently stripped from residential property, and easements are common for sewers, power and telephone lines. Commercial and military aircraft also have an easement. These means that commercial planes have to fly within certain zones. At the dawn of flight, several lawsuits were filed for trespass with airplanes. The courts did not want to shut down the burgeoning technology, so easements were granted.
International law is even blurrier. Airspace starts at the international waters line, which is 12 nautical miles from the coastline. It extends vertically until "outer space" which does not have an agreed upon boundary. An international body has established the Karman line, which is 100 km, but this boundary has no legal status. The US considers anyone who has been 80 km away from the surface an astronaut.
Powers was flying at roughly 20 km. Powers was exchanged for a Soviet spy in 1962. The US continued to send U2 planes on spy missions, and continues to. Powers died in 1977 in a helicopter crash.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
August 18
On August 18, 1963, James Meredith graduated from the University of Mississippi with a degree in political science.
It was a long road getting there. As an African-American, he had been denied admission twice. He had served in the Air Force for nine years previous to entering college. He had to sue the school to be admitted, making it to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Having been admitted over the objections of the school, riots erupted when Meredith first arrived on campus, accompanied by federal marshals. Army units were called in to quell the riots. Meredith was escorted by a military guard the next day when he started attending classes.
After two semesters of harassment, Meredith graduated (he had attended another college prior to his tranfer to Ol' Miss). He went on to earn an LLB from Columbia Law School. Some of Meredith's occupations included stockbroker and aide to Senator Jesse Helms.
It was a long road getting there. As an African-American, he had been denied admission twice. He had served in the Air Force for nine years previous to entering college. He had to sue the school to be admitted, making it to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Having been admitted over the objections of the school, riots erupted when Meredith first arrived on campus, accompanied by federal marshals. Army units were called in to quell the riots. Meredith was escorted by a military guard the next day when he started attending classes.
After two semesters of harassment, Meredith graduated (he had attended another college prior to his tranfer to Ol' Miss). He went on to earn an LLB from Columbia Law School. Some of Meredith's occupations included stockbroker and aide to Senator Jesse Helms.
Monday, August 17, 2009
August 17
On August 17, 1998, President Bill Clinton admitted to having an affair with Monica Lewinsky as he testified in front of the grand jury. Clinton was the first president to sit for a grand jury.
Prosecutor Kenneth Starr then used Clinton's earlier denials to charge Clinton with perjury and obstruction of justice, the same charges leveled against Richard Nixon. Clinton denied any cover up or destruction of evidence.
The Lewinsky affair was the culmination of a long investigation started to look into questionable real estate transactions. The charges of perjury and obstruction of justice were grounds for impeachment. The House voted on Articles of Impeachment, but the House found Clinton innocent in the Senate.
Prosecutor Kenneth Starr then used Clinton's earlier denials to charge Clinton with perjury and obstruction of justice, the same charges leveled against Richard Nixon. Clinton denied any cover up or destruction of evidence.
The Lewinsky affair was the culmination of a long investigation started to look into questionable real estate transactions. The charges of perjury and obstruction of justice were grounds for impeachment. The House voted on Articles of Impeachment, but the House found Clinton innocent in the Senate.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
August 16
On August 16, 1964, President Johnson's interpretation of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution was attacked in the Senate by Sen. Fulbright, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee.
The Gulf of Tonkin resolution was voted on in the immediate aftermath of the Gulf of Tonkin incident. On August 2nd, 1964, there had been some naval skirmishes off the coast of Vietnam. The joint resolution gave President Johnson the authority to use whatever means necessary to aid any state in the South Asia Collective Defense Treaty. Famously, only two senators voted against it; Wayne Morse and Ernest Gruening. The resolution was voted on very quickly.
President Johnson then used the resolution to justify escalation of the Vietnam War. No formal declaration of war by Congress was ever made, as required by the Constitution. The resolution was invalidated during the Nixon administration, but by then the damage was done.
The Gulf of Tonkin resolution was voted on in the immediate aftermath of the Gulf of Tonkin incident. On August 2nd, 1964, there had been some naval skirmishes off the coast of Vietnam. The joint resolution gave President Johnson the authority to use whatever means necessary to aid any state in the South Asia Collective Defense Treaty. Famously, only two senators voted against it; Wayne Morse and Ernest Gruening. The resolution was voted on very quickly.
President Johnson then used the resolution to justify escalation of the Vietnam War. No formal declaration of war by Congress was ever made, as required by the Constitution. The resolution was invalidated during the Nixon administration, but by then the damage was done.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
August 15
On August 15, 1995, Shannon Faulkner becomes the first female to become a student at the Citadel.
Over a three year legal battle, Faulker had argued that as a publicly supported school, she should be entitled to attend. The college wanted her to attend a "separate but equal" facility. The court did not accept this argument.
Today, women comprise 7.4% of the entering class.
Over a three year legal battle, Faulker had argued that as a publicly supported school, she should be entitled to attend. The college wanted her to attend a "separate but equal" facility. The court did not accept this argument.
Today, women comprise 7.4% of the entering class.
Friday, August 14, 2009
August 14
On August 14, 1848, the Oregon Territory was organized.
The Oregon Territory was a massive area including Washington state, Oregon, Idaho, and parts of Wyoming and Montana. The southern border was the 42nd Parallel, the north the 49th Parallel (as the US-Canada border in this region is today). In 1853 the Washington Territory split off.
The 49th Parallel as a boundary was not random. The US had been in disputes with the British over who owned what. The 49th Parallel was the original offer by the US, but upon being rejected by the British, calls for 54-40 or Fight! became popular. 54 degrees 40 was the edge of the Russian territory. However, a compromise was finally reached in the Oregon Treaty.
There was one oddity to emerge out of these negotiations. Had the 49th Parallel been followed all the way to the coast, Vancouver Island would have been divided. This was given to what would become Canada. However, there was a 4.5 sq mile piece of land jutting out from the mainland; this became Point Roberts, Washington. This is one of a handful of US lands only accessible through Canada, and but continues to have a strong American presence today.
The Oregon Territory was a massive area including Washington state, Oregon, Idaho, and parts of Wyoming and Montana. The southern border was the 42nd Parallel, the north the 49th Parallel (as the US-Canada border in this region is today). In 1853 the Washington Territory split off.
The 49th Parallel as a boundary was not random. The US had been in disputes with the British over who owned what. The 49th Parallel was the original offer by the US, but upon being rejected by the British, calls for 54-40 or Fight! became popular. 54 degrees 40 was the edge of the Russian territory. However, a compromise was finally reached in the Oregon Treaty.
There was one oddity to emerge out of these negotiations. Had the 49th Parallel been followed all the way to the coast, Vancouver Island would have been divided. This was given to what would become Canada. However, there was a 4.5 sq mile piece of land jutting out from the mainland; this became Point Roberts, Washington. This is one of a handful of US lands only accessible through Canada, and but continues to have a strong American presence today.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
August 13
On August 13, 1961, East Germany closes the border in Berlin.
Berlin had been divided with the fall of Germany at the end of WWII. East Berlin was run by the Soviet Union, the West between the US, the UK and France. Berlin was deep inside the Soviet sector of Germany, but was divided into the four parts nonetheless.
Now, nothing about this wall was particularly illegal, but did break up families, made many East Germans lose their livelihood, and killed many would-be escapees.
On June 13, 1990, the official dismantling of the wall began, although people had been breaking it down for months by that time.
Berlin had been divided with the fall of Germany at the end of WWII. East Berlin was run by the Soviet Union, the West between the US, the UK and France. Berlin was deep inside the Soviet sector of Germany, but was divided into the four parts nonetheless.
Now, nothing about this wall was particularly illegal, but did break up families, made many East Germans lose their livelihood, and killed many would-be escapees.
On June 13, 1990, the official dismantling of the wall began, although people had been breaking it down for months by that time.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
August 12
On August 12, 2004, the California Supreme Court voided prior same-sex marriages performed in the state of California.
On February 12, 2004, the City Clerk's office of San Francisco, at the direction of mayor Gavin Newsom, started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The position of the mayor and the city was that denying marriage licenses denied Equal Protection under the California Constitution. The Clerk's office was immediately swamped with couples wanting to get married.
The courts were quickly called in. Marriage is a state-by-state issue, so marriage issues are handled by state courts. At the federal level, Congress can only control how marriage is treated between states. Under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution, judicial acts such as marriage are to get equal treatment in every state; marriages performed in one state must be respected by other states. Domestic partnerships are not required to be recognized by other states, although some states will recognize them.
However, Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, which decreed that a marriage was only between one man and one woman, and any other arrangement did not have to be respected by any other state.
While to many, Equal Protection should make outlawing gay marriages unconstitutional, justification comes on three fronts.
Judges who have upheld bans on gay marriages say that homosexuals are not banned from getting married. They have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as heterosexuals do. Hence, no discrimination.
The next issue is level of scrutiny. In racial discrimination, a standard of strict scrutiny is applied. Strict scrutiny means that the government must have a compelling state interest in discriminating against a protected class. However, homosexuals are not a protected class. In their case, only rational basis applies. That means the government may discriminate, as long as they have a defensible reason.
Finally, judges have been hesitant to interfere with the actions of a legally elected body; Anderson v King County, for example, respected the state legislature passing a state version of DOMA. The Washington Supreme court was sympathetic, but told the petitioners to make their case to the voters.
At this time, same-sex marriages are available in Massachussets, Connecticut, and Iowa. Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont have laws on the books that have not yet come into effect.
On February 12, 2004, the City Clerk's office of San Francisco, at the direction of mayor Gavin Newsom, started issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The position of the mayor and the city was that denying marriage licenses denied Equal Protection under the California Constitution. The Clerk's office was immediately swamped with couples wanting to get married.
The courts were quickly called in. Marriage is a state-by-state issue, so marriage issues are handled by state courts. At the federal level, Congress can only control how marriage is treated between states. Under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution, judicial acts such as marriage are to get equal treatment in every state; marriages performed in one state must be respected by other states. Domestic partnerships are not required to be recognized by other states, although some states will recognize them.
However, Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, which decreed that a marriage was only between one man and one woman, and any other arrangement did not have to be respected by any other state.
While to many, Equal Protection should make outlawing gay marriages unconstitutional, justification comes on three fronts.
Judges who have upheld bans on gay marriages say that homosexuals are not banned from getting married. They have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as heterosexuals do. Hence, no discrimination.
The next issue is level of scrutiny. In racial discrimination, a standard of strict scrutiny is applied. Strict scrutiny means that the government must have a compelling state interest in discriminating against a protected class. However, homosexuals are not a protected class. In their case, only rational basis applies. That means the government may discriminate, as long as they have a defensible reason.
Finally, judges have been hesitant to interfere with the actions of a legally elected body; Anderson v King County, for example, respected the state legislature passing a state version of DOMA. The Washington Supreme court was sympathetic, but told the petitioners to make their case to the voters.
At this time, same-sex marriages are available in Massachussets, Connecticut, and Iowa. Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont have laws on the books that have not yet come into effect.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
August 11
On August 11, 1934, the first civilian prisoners are introduced to Alcatraz prison.
Alcatraz is located outside San Francisco. Prior to this time, Alcatraz had been used as a military prison. The island is a good location for a penitentiary as it is cut off by the mainland by the very strong, rough currents of San Francisco Bay. Many escapees died trying to swim to shore.
Some of Alcatraz' more famous residents included Al Capone and George "Machine Gun" Kelly. The Birdman of Alcatraz was also known as Robert Franklin Stroud. Staff and their families lived there as well.
Alcatraz was also occupied by Indian tribes from 1969-1971, to protest federal Indian policies.
What kind of crimes would land someone in Alcatraz? It was a federal prison, so only federal crimes would apply. Al Capone served for tax evasion. Murder of a federal employee, such as a US Marshall or postal worker is a federal crime. Kidnapping is a federal crime.
Because of the way the US government is structured, authority over crime belongs to the states unless the Federal government passes specific legislation (police power). And Congress has to justify any legislation by its enumerated powers of the Constitution. So federal crimes usually apply to crimes against the federal government, or crimes involving multiple states.
The prison was closed in 1963, by order of Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy. Today, Alcatraz is a tourist attraction, part of the National Park Service.
Alcatraz is located outside San Francisco. Prior to this time, Alcatraz had been used as a military prison. The island is a good location for a penitentiary as it is cut off by the mainland by the very strong, rough currents of San Francisco Bay. Many escapees died trying to swim to shore.
Some of Alcatraz' more famous residents included Al Capone and George "Machine Gun" Kelly. The Birdman of Alcatraz was also known as Robert Franklin Stroud. Staff and their families lived there as well.
Alcatraz was also occupied by Indian tribes from 1969-1971, to protest federal Indian policies.
What kind of crimes would land someone in Alcatraz? It was a federal prison, so only federal crimes would apply. Al Capone served for tax evasion. Murder of a federal employee, such as a US Marshall or postal worker is a federal crime. Kidnapping is a federal crime.
Because of the way the US government is structured, authority over crime belongs to the states unless the Federal government passes specific legislation (police power). And Congress has to justify any legislation by its enumerated powers of the Constitution. So federal crimes usually apply to crimes against the federal government, or crimes involving multiple states.
The prison was closed in 1963, by order of Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy. Today, Alcatraz is a tourist attraction, part of the National Park Service.
Monday, August 10, 2009
August 10
On August 10, 1988, Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act. This Act gave reparations to Japanese Americans who had been interned or relocated during World War II.
Internment camps were located in California, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, and Washington State. The Justice Department and the Army also had camps that housed Italian-Americans and German-Americans as well as Nissei. It was not isolated parts of the government involved with the internment; responsibility was scattered throughout the government.
Several of these camps were located on Indian land, for which the Indians were not compensated. This action was typical of how the federal government controlled Indian lands at that time.
The internments were based on executive orders that restricted people of certain ancestries from living in designated areas. Of course, these areas were large population centers, eventually encompassing most of the West Coast. The legality of applying this to natural born US citizens is dubious at best, under the Constitution and the 14th Amendment. A substantial number of the internees were natural citizens. Some have justified the internment under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, but natural citizens are required to show a specific threat for the Acts to apply.
This came to the Supreme Court in Korematsu v United States. Korematsu challenged the legality of Order 9066, which allowed the exclusion zones. The Supreme Court upheld the internment, citing necessity. However, Korematsu is also notable for inventing the strict scrutiny standard, which is used in civil rights cases to this day.
Strict scrutiny means that the government needs to have a very good justification for discriminating against a given group. Rational basis review, on the other hand, just means that the government must have a reasonable justification for what they are doing. Strict scrutiny is very difficult to meet, and Korematsu was rare in meeting that standard.
Korematsu has never been explicitly overturned.
After WWII, some attempts at reparations for property were made, but based on theft, forced sales and destroyed IRS records, few were successful in collecting. The 1988 Act gave each internee $20,000.
Internment camps were located in California, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, and Washington State. The Justice Department and the Army also had camps that housed Italian-Americans and German-Americans as well as Nissei. It was not isolated parts of the government involved with the internment; responsibility was scattered throughout the government.
Several of these camps were located on Indian land, for which the Indians were not compensated. This action was typical of how the federal government controlled Indian lands at that time.
The internments were based on executive orders that restricted people of certain ancestries from living in designated areas. Of course, these areas were large population centers, eventually encompassing most of the West Coast. The legality of applying this to natural born US citizens is dubious at best, under the Constitution and the 14th Amendment. A substantial number of the internees were natural citizens. Some have justified the internment under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, but natural citizens are required to show a specific threat for the Acts to apply.
This came to the Supreme Court in Korematsu v United States. Korematsu challenged the legality of Order 9066, which allowed the exclusion zones. The Supreme Court upheld the internment, citing necessity. However, Korematsu is also notable for inventing the strict scrutiny standard, which is used in civil rights cases to this day.
Strict scrutiny means that the government needs to have a very good justification for discriminating against a given group. Rational basis review, on the other hand, just means that the government must have a reasonable justification for what they are doing. Strict scrutiny is very difficult to meet, and Korematsu was rare in meeting that standard.
Korematsu has never been explicitly overturned.
After WWII, some attempts at reparations for property were made, but based on theft, forced sales and destroyed IRS records, few were successful in collecting. The 1988 Act gave each internee $20,000.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
August 9
On August 9, 1969, the Manson family committed the Sharon Tate murders.
Charles Manson initially wanted to act as his own lawyer; in legal terms, he was a pro se applicant. This is legal but strongly discouraged by those in the judicial system. There are very good reasons for this. The law is complicated and involves a lot of complicated procedure. Legal terminology is also very specific, and does not always have the same meaning to a layman.
Nonetheless, the US legal code allows it, as does the state Constitution of California. The defendant has to "knowingly and intelligently" forgo the right to counsel. (Faretta)
There are limits to what a pro se litigant can do, however. If a court determines a pro se is not compentent, the judge may impose counsel. This is partly to protect the defendant, but also to protect the court. The right to due process must still be met. Still, an applicant that insists on defending himself is assuming the risk.
Some courts provide a middle ground, where the applicant defends herself but is provided an attorney as a consultant.
Manson was appointed counsel before trial after being disruptive and submitting nonsensical mostions.
Many landmark cases have been won by pro se applicants. However, they are much more likely to lose.
Charles Manson initially wanted to act as his own lawyer; in legal terms, he was a pro se applicant. This is legal but strongly discouraged by those in the judicial system. There are very good reasons for this. The law is complicated and involves a lot of complicated procedure. Legal terminology is also very specific, and does not always have the same meaning to a layman.
Nonetheless, the US legal code allows it, as does the state Constitution of California. The defendant has to "knowingly and intelligently" forgo the right to counsel. (Faretta)
There are limits to what a pro se litigant can do, however. If a court determines a pro se is not compentent, the judge may impose counsel. This is partly to protect the defendant, but also to protect the court. The right to due process must still be met. Still, an applicant that insists on defending himself is assuming the risk.
Some courts provide a middle ground, where the applicant defends herself but is provided an attorney as a consultant.
Manson was appointed counsel before trial after being disruptive and submitting nonsensical mostions.
Many landmark cases have been won by pro se applicants. However, they are much more likely to lose.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
August 8
On August 8, 1974, Richard Nixon announced his resignation, effective August 9, 1974.
Nixon was facing impeachment hearings in the Senate, based on various charges from the Watergate break in and related incidents. According to the Constitution, a President may be removed for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors". "High" in this context means against the state. Since the Watergate scandal was about manipulating elections, his crimes qualified.
The process of impeachment is complex. It begins in the House of Representatives, with a petition by a Member. It may also be asked for by a special prosecutor, by petition, or by other parties qualified to do so. This request then goes to (typically) the House Judiciary Committee. In the case of President Nixon, the Articles of Impeachment did come out of the Judiciary Committee. The charges were obstruction of justice, later followed by abuse of power and contempt of Congress. This occurred on July 27, 29 and 30th of 1974.
The next step is the charges are recommended to the full House and are voted on whether to proceed further. The charges are voted on individually and may be modified before passed on to the Senate. In Richard Nixon's case, he resigned before this process.
"Managers", elected by the House, present the case to the Senate. The Senate then votes on the Articles of Impeachment. Conviction requires a 2/3 majority. If the Senate decides guilty, the official is immediately removed from office. A President may not pardon an impeached individual. If the impeachment proceedings are of a President, the Chief Justice presides.
While Nixon resigned before the House vote, Bill Clinton did not. The House voted on Articles of Impeachment, only to have Clinton acquitted by the Senate. Likewise Andrew Jackson was impeached by the House, only to be acquitted by the Senate.
Nixon was facing impeachment hearings in the Senate, based on various charges from the Watergate break in and related incidents. According to the Constitution, a President may be removed for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors". "High" in this context means against the state. Since the Watergate scandal was about manipulating elections, his crimes qualified.
The process of impeachment is complex. It begins in the House of Representatives, with a petition by a Member. It may also be asked for by a special prosecutor, by petition, or by other parties qualified to do so. This request then goes to (typically) the House Judiciary Committee. In the case of President Nixon, the Articles of Impeachment did come out of the Judiciary Committee. The charges were obstruction of justice, later followed by abuse of power and contempt of Congress. This occurred on July 27, 29 and 30th of 1974.
The next step is the charges are recommended to the full House and are voted on whether to proceed further. The charges are voted on individually and may be modified before passed on to the Senate. In Richard Nixon's case, he resigned before this process.
"Managers", elected by the House, present the case to the Senate. The Senate then votes on the Articles of Impeachment. Conviction requires a 2/3 majority. If the Senate decides guilty, the official is immediately removed from office. A President may not pardon an impeached individual. If the impeachment proceedings are of a President, the Chief Justice presides.
While Nixon resigned before the House vote, Bill Clinton did not. The House voted on Articles of Impeachment, only to have Clinton acquitted by the Senate. Likewise Andrew Jackson was impeached by the House, only to be acquitted by the Senate.
Friday, August 7, 2009
August 7
On August 7, 1958, Arthur Miller was cleared of contempt charges from the House Un-American Activities Committee hearings.
Starting in 1938, the House Un-American Activies Committee had been investigating Communists in America. Alger Hiss was investigated by HUAC. The HUAC hearings, run by the House, were independent of the Senator McCarthy hearings.
In 1947, HUAC starting investigating Hollywood figures, most notably the Hollywood Ten, who were screenwriters. Their number included Dalton Trumbo and Ring Lardner Jr. The Ten refused to testify, based on their Fifth Amendment rights. All were cited for contempt, and most of the Ten were unable to get work under their own names for decades.
A blacklist formed. Among the blacklisted was Paul Robeson and Lillian Hellman. A publication named Red Channels listed persons who were either Communist or sympathetic; Arthur Miller appeared. This blacklist was very effective. Many careers were ruined by supposed Communist sympathies. Almost all of the people on the list had not had any involvement with Communism in years, and at the time it had been legal.
People who wanted to work frequently were put into a position of having to inform on their friends, or at the very least make a public declaration disclaiming any Communist tendencies. Many Hollywood figures did, some more willingly than others.
Arthur Miller had cooperated with the Committee but refused to name names. He fought the contempt charges for two years, until the Court of Appeals squashed the charges. According to the Court, Miller had asked not to name names and the Committee had agreed to defer the question. This led Miller to believe the question settled so there was no contempt.
Miller's career was not one of the casualties of HUAC, although his friendship with Elia Kazan ended for ten years. Miller was one of the lucky ones. Many of those investigated died early or from alcoholism. Miller's play The Crucible was based upon the HUAC investigations.
Starting in 1938, the House Un-American Activies Committee had been investigating Communists in America. Alger Hiss was investigated by HUAC. The HUAC hearings, run by the House, were independent of the Senator McCarthy hearings.
In 1947, HUAC starting investigating Hollywood figures, most notably the Hollywood Ten, who were screenwriters. Their number included Dalton Trumbo and Ring Lardner Jr. The Ten refused to testify, based on their Fifth Amendment rights. All were cited for contempt, and most of the Ten were unable to get work under their own names for decades.
A blacklist formed. Among the blacklisted was Paul Robeson and Lillian Hellman. A publication named Red Channels listed persons who were either Communist or sympathetic; Arthur Miller appeared. This blacklist was very effective. Many careers were ruined by supposed Communist sympathies. Almost all of the people on the list had not had any involvement with Communism in years, and at the time it had been legal.
People who wanted to work frequently were put into a position of having to inform on their friends, or at the very least make a public declaration disclaiming any Communist tendencies. Many Hollywood figures did, some more willingly than others.
Arthur Miller had cooperated with the Committee but refused to name names. He fought the contempt charges for two years, until the Court of Appeals squashed the charges. According to the Court, Miller had asked not to name names and the Committee had agreed to defer the question. This led Miller to believe the question settled so there was no contempt.
Miller's career was not one of the casualties of HUAC, although his friendship with Elia Kazan ended for ten years. Miller was one of the lucky ones. Many of those investigated died early or from alcoholism. Miller's play The Crucible was based upon the HUAC investigations.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
August 6
On August 6, 1945, a nuclear bomb was detonated in Hiroshima. It was the first time a nuclear weapon had been used offensively.
Hiroshima had been targeted partly because it was a military center that had suffered little damage during the war and the number of rivers running through it made it a bad candidate for incendiary bombs.
As post-war US continued creating new and more effective bombs, the Soviet Union caught up in the arms race. The first nuclear treaty, the Partial Test Ban Treaty, was ratified by the US Senate in 1963. The difference between a treaty and an executive agreement is that the Senate ratifies a treaty. The effect on US law is the same, which is to say it becomes part of US law in accordance with the Constitution.
The Partial Test Ban Treaty in 1963 forbid all nuclear testing that was not underground. China, France and North Korea are the only known countries with known capability that have not signed the treaty.
This was followed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968, also ratified by the US Senate. India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea are not parties. North Korea had been, but withdrew in 2003.
This treaty allows development of nuclear power, but does not allow the development or manufacture of nuclear weapons.
As of 2009, the US has signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, but not yet ratified it. This treaty would ban all nuclear testing, and create norms that would force non-signatories to comply with other nuclear treaties.
The damage done in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was considerable. It is estimated 30% of Hiroshima's population died on detonation. Deaths from radiation-caused cancers continued for decades. Japan does not have a nuclear weapons program and does not intend to.
Hiroshima had been targeted partly because it was a military center that had suffered little damage during the war and the number of rivers running through it made it a bad candidate for incendiary bombs.
As post-war US continued creating new and more effective bombs, the Soviet Union caught up in the arms race. The first nuclear treaty, the Partial Test Ban Treaty, was ratified by the US Senate in 1963. The difference between a treaty and an executive agreement is that the Senate ratifies a treaty. The effect on US law is the same, which is to say it becomes part of US law in accordance with the Constitution.
The Partial Test Ban Treaty in 1963 forbid all nuclear testing that was not underground. China, France and North Korea are the only known countries with known capability that have not signed the treaty.
This was followed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968, also ratified by the US Senate. India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea are not parties. North Korea had been, but withdrew in 2003.
This treaty allows development of nuclear power, but does not allow the development or manufacture of nuclear weapons.
As of 2009, the US has signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, but not yet ratified it. This treaty would ban all nuclear testing, and create norms that would force non-signatories to comply with other nuclear treaties.
The damage done in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was considerable. It is estimated 30% of Hiroshima's population died on detonation. Deaths from radiation-caused cancers continued for decades. Japan does not have a nuclear weapons program and does not intend to.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
August 5
On August 5, 1735, John Peter Zenger of the New York Weekly Journal was acquitted of seditious libel on the basis that the item was true.
Truth is still one of the most effective defenses for a libel suit. To be libel, a charge must be intentionally false, believable by the intended audience, a statement of fact (not opinion) and must cause actual harm. Slander is the same. The amount of intent required will depend on how famous the libelee is; a private citizen has the most protection. A public figure requires a showing of malice, and a politician has the least protection. It is almost impossible for a politician to win a libel suit.
The other major defense against libel is privilege. One version of this is satire, another is public good.
Zenger was targeted by the Governor of New York, who was tired of criticism. At the time, newspapers were by definition partisan. Remarkably, Zenger won his suit despite the fact the governor had handpicked the judges.
Truth is still one of the most effective defenses for a libel suit. To be libel, a charge must be intentionally false, believable by the intended audience, a statement of fact (not opinion) and must cause actual harm. Slander is the same. The amount of intent required will depend on how famous the libelee is; a private citizen has the most protection. A public figure requires a showing of malice, and a politician has the least protection. It is almost impossible for a politician to win a libel suit.
The other major defense against libel is privilege. One version of this is satire, another is public good.
Zenger was targeted by the Governor of New York, who was tired of criticism. At the time, newspapers were by definition partisan. Remarkably, Zenger won his suit despite the fact the governor had handpicked the judges.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
August 4
On August 4, 1961, current US president Barack H. Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawai'i.
There are three requirements to become president, as set forth in the Constitution (Art II, Clause 5). An individual must be 35 years of age, a natural-born citizen of the US, and have lived 14 years in the US. A natural born citizen is one who was either born on US soil OR have two parents who are US citizens. The exact wording of the residency requirement is "been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." As this section has not been challenged, it is uncertain whether the time need be consecutive or not.
Of course, an aspiring President would still need to meet the requirements of getting on the ballot of enough states to win the electoral college, but that is a different story.
Also on this date, the author of this blog was born.
There are three requirements to become president, as set forth in the Constitution (Art II, Clause 5). An individual must be 35 years of age, a natural-born citizen of the US, and have lived 14 years in the US. A natural born citizen is one who was either born on US soil OR have two parents who are US citizens. The exact wording of the residency requirement is "been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." As this section has not been challenged, it is uncertain whether the time need be consecutive or not.
Of course, an aspiring President would still need to meet the requirements of getting on the ballot of enough states to win the electoral college, but that is a different story.
Also on this date, the author of this blog was born.
Monday, August 3, 2009
August 3
On August 3rd, 1948, Whittaker Chambers accused Alger Hiss of being a spy.
Alger Hiss had been employed by the Department of State. He had been a delegate at the Yalta Conference, involved with some foundations for the United Nations.
Whittaker Chambers was a former Communist and editor at Time Magazine. On August 3rd, he was testifying for the HUAC hearings. He claimed that Alger Hiss was also a communist, and they had worked together spying for the Soviet Union. Congressman Richard Nixon pressed for more investigation on the allegations, and was one of the committee that questioned Hess.
The FBI had suspicions about Hiss prior to this time, based on testimony from defectors.
Chambers later produced documents that Hiss had given to him that were passed on to the Soviet Union; the Baltimore Documents and then the Pumpkin Papers. Chambers admitted to perjury, which complicated the case. But the documents included notes in Hiss' handwriting. Despite this, Hiss had an impressive array of character witnesses, including a sitting Supreme Court judge.
Because of the statute of limitations, Hiss was only convicted of perjury, serving three years, eight months. His government career was over, his legal license revoked.
In 1996, the Verona Documents were released. These papers refer to a spy codenamed Ales, who many believe was Hiss.
While the Alger Hiss case remains in dispute for some, the majority opinion is that Alger Hiss was indeed spying for the Soviet Union.
Alger Hiss had been employed by the Department of State. He had been a delegate at the Yalta Conference, involved with some foundations for the United Nations.
Whittaker Chambers was a former Communist and editor at Time Magazine. On August 3rd, he was testifying for the HUAC hearings. He claimed that Alger Hiss was also a communist, and they had worked together spying for the Soviet Union. Congressman Richard Nixon pressed for more investigation on the allegations, and was one of the committee that questioned Hess.
The FBI had suspicions about Hiss prior to this time, based on testimony from defectors.
Chambers later produced documents that Hiss had given to him that were passed on to the Soviet Union; the Baltimore Documents and then the Pumpkin Papers. Chambers admitted to perjury, which complicated the case. But the documents included notes in Hiss' handwriting. Despite this, Hiss had an impressive array of character witnesses, including a sitting Supreme Court judge.
Because of the statute of limitations, Hiss was only convicted of perjury, serving three years, eight months. His government career was over, his legal license revoked.
In 1996, the Verona Documents were released. These papers refer to a spy codenamed Ales, who many believe was Hiss.
While the Alger Hiss case remains in dispute for some, the majority opinion is that Alger Hiss was indeed spying for the Soviet Union.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
August 2
On August 2nd, 1937, the Marihuana Tax Act was passed.
Taxing marijuana is not a new idea. In 1937, federal legislation did just that. The Act taxed cannabis and hemp sold commercially, at a rate of between $1-$24 per year, depending on how and why it was used. Vets paid a dollar, importers $24. It also imposed complicated regulations on handlers, subject to heavy fines. Very detailed records were to be kept, for example.
During WWII, farmers were encouraged to grow hemp as part of the war effort. Hemp would be largely replaced by nylon in later years.
The Act was repealed in 1970, since by then cannabis was a controlled substance and trying to pay taxes would only lead to jail time.
Taxing marijuana is not a new idea. In 1937, federal legislation did just that. The Act taxed cannabis and hemp sold commercially, at a rate of between $1-$24 per year, depending on how and why it was used. Vets paid a dollar, importers $24. It also imposed complicated regulations on handlers, subject to heavy fines. Very detailed records were to be kept, for example.
During WWII, farmers were encouraged to grow hemp as part of the war effort. Hemp would be largely replaced by nylon in later years.
The Act was repealed in 1970, since by then cannabis was a controlled substance and trying to pay taxes would only lead to jail time.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
August 1
On August 1, 2001, Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore installs a Ten Commandments plaque in the Alabama judiciary building.
In the 1990's, Justice Moore had put a wooden plaque with the Ten Commandments in his courtroom. He was also known to have the chaplain lead the court in prayer at the beginning of sessions (not atypical in Alabama). The ACLU asked for the plaque to come down, and the prayers to cease. The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights says that
The establishment part of the First Amendment has been a source of difficulty since the Bill of Rights was passed. Many people believe that the United States is at its base a Christian nation, and that the establishment of a religion is more about which branch of Christianity more than which deity. Others feel the First Amendment should be read on its face, that the government should not be in the business of promoting religion of any kind. There is also dispute on where no establishment of religion interferes with free exercise.
Courtrooms are problematic. Courts are a function of the government. Petitioners have a right to impartial treatment, and judgment based on the law, not religious beliefs. On the other hand, many courts still retain old traditions based on belief, such as swearing on a Bible and in some jurisdictions, prayers before court sessions.
Judge Moore's first case was thrown out on technical grounds. The next display, a plaque of over 5000 lbs of granite, was put up on August 1, 2001. Again, the ACLU sued on the Establishment Clause. There was testimony that many lawyers actively avoided the monument by avoiding the court building and that the monument had become a place for prayer.
The monument was removed by order of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals for failing the Lemon test. The Lemon test is three pronged: the contested item or practice must have a legitimate secular purpose; the effect must not inhibit or advance religion; and must not excessively entangle the government with religion. This test has not been uniformly used or applied, but is the most commonly cited.
After resisting following the order to remove the monument, Justice Moore was removed by his state's Court of the Judiciary.
There was a Supreme Court case about a similar monument in Texas, Van Orden v Perry. In this Supreme Court case, the monument was held to be a legitimate tribute to Texas history, along with statues honoring the Alamo and Texas Women. The Court held the monument had a secular purpose in combating juvenile deliquency.
However, the same day, the Court also handed down McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, which said courthouse displays of the Ten Commandments did violate the Establishment Clause. McCreary County had a display of "Foundational Documents" such as the Constitution. In this case, the Ten Commandments was considered to have no secular purpose.
The lines on the Establishment Clause are far from clear, even to the Supreme Court. The most common result in these circumstances is the case being thrown out on technical grounds, as in the case of Justice Moore.
In the 1990's, Justice Moore had put a wooden plaque with the Ten Commandments in his courtroom. He was also known to have the chaplain lead the court in prayer at the beginning of sessions (not atypical in Alabama). The ACLU asked for the plaque to come down, and the prayers to cease. The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights says that
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The establishment part of the First Amendment has been a source of difficulty since the Bill of Rights was passed. Many people believe that the United States is at its base a Christian nation, and that the establishment of a religion is more about which branch of Christianity more than which deity. Others feel the First Amendment should be read on its face, that the government should not be in the business of promoting religion of any kind. There is also dispute on where no establishment of religion interferes with free exercise.
Courtrooms are problematic. Courts are a function of the government. Petitioners have a right to impartial treatment, and judgment based on the law, not religious beliefs. On the other hand, many courts still retain old traditions based on belief, such as swearing on a Bible and in some jurisdictions, prayers before court sessions.
Judge Moore's first case was thrown out on technical grounds. The next display, a plaque of over 5000 lbs of granite, was put up on August 1, 2001. Again, the ACLU sued on the Establishment Clause. There was testimony that many lawyers actively avoided the monument by avoiding the court building and that the monument had become a place for prayer.
The monument was removed by order of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals for failing the Lemon test. The Lemon test is three pronged: the contested item or practice must have a legitimate secular purpose; the effect must not inhibit or advance religion; and must not excessively entangle the government with religion. This test has not been uniformly used or applied, but is the most commonly cited.
After resisting following the order to remove the monument, Justice Moore was removed by his state's Court of the Judiciary.
There was a Supreme Court case about a similar monument in Texas, Van Orden v Perry. In this Supreme Court case, the monument was held to be a legitimate tribute to Texas history, along with statues honoring the Alamo and Texas Women. The Court held the monument had a secular purpose in combating juvenile deliquency.
However, the same day, the Court also handed down McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, which said courthouse displays of the Ten Commandments did violate the Establishment Clause. McCreary County had a display of "Foundational Documents" such as the Constitution. In this case, the Ten Commandments was considered to have no secular purpose.
The lines on the Establishment Clause are far from clear, even to the Supreme Court. The most common result in these circumstances is the case being thrown out on technical grounds, as in the case of Justice Moore.
Friday, July 31, 2009
July 31
On July 31st, 1981, a 42-day baseball strike ended.
In 1922, the Supreme Court decided that baseball was exempt from anti-trust legislation. This means, among other things, that price-fixing and practices to restrict employee wages are legal.
The Curt Flood case (Flood v Kuhn) in 1972 set the stage for free agency for players. Free agency gave players a chance to negotiate salaries as different clubs bid on their services. Prior to that time, players were stuck with the team they had originally signed with, even after their contract was completed, the reserve clause. The Supreme Court sided with Major League Baseball and the anti-trust exemption, but subsequent pressure from the players union created free agency via arbitration.
The issue in 1981 was still free agency. Teams wanted compensation for losing players to free agency; players wanted free agency to cost the teams to enhance its value. This compensation would be that the team the free agent went to would supply the former team with a player (not a "protected" player). In the end, the players agreed to restrict free agency to players who had spent six years in the majors. The owners would pull the compensation from any team in the league. The new rules would only apply to "premium" players.
While the owners could claim to "win", strikes hurt both sides. Owners lost millions in revenues, players lost salaries, and both lost goodwill from baseball fans.
In 1922, the Supreme Court decided that baseball was exempt from anti-trust legislation. This means, among other things, that price-fixing and practices to restrict employee wages are legal.
The Curt Flood case (Flood v Kuhn) in 1972 set the stage for free agency for players. Free agency gave players a chance to negotiate salaries as different clubs bid on their services. Prior to that time, players were stuck with the team they had originally signed with, even after their contract was completed, the reserve clause. The Supreme Court sided with Major League Baseball and the anti-trust exemption, but subsequent pressure from the players union created free agency via arbitration.
The issue in 1981 was still free agency. Teams wanted compensation for losing players to free agency; players wanted free agency to cost the teams to enhance its value. This compensation would be that the team the free agent went to would supply the former team with a player (not a "protected" player). In the end, the players agreed to restrict free agency to players who had spent six years in the majors. The owners would pull the compensation from any team in the league. The new rules would only apply to "premium" players.
While the owners could claim to "win", strikes hurt both sides. Owners lost millions in revenues, players lost salaries, and both lost goodwill from baseball fans.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
July 30
July 30, 1419, was the date of the First Defenestration of Prague.
To defenestrate is to throw someone out a window, a rather extreme type of political dissent. The first defenestration was about a release of prisoners; a priest had led a march, an annoyed town official threw a rock, and the next thing you know the local judge, burgomaster, and several of the town council were ejected out the window. They died from the fall. This incident led to the Hussite Wars.
There was a Second Defenestration of Prague; this one was over Protestant/Catholic differences. This time the victims survived, either from angels or landing in horse manure depending on who you asked.
Other defenestrations of Prague occurred but were not assigned numbers.
Defenenstrations are not unique to Prague, although they get most of the notoriety. Lisbon had a few, there was one of a De'Medici, and even Chopin's piano. Deng Xioping's son was defenestrated in 1968 as part of the Cultural revolution.
To defenestrate is to throw someone out a window, a rather extreme type of political dissent. The first defenestration was about a release of prisoners; a priest had led a march, an annoyed town official threw a rock, and the next thing you know the local judge, burgomaster, and several of the town council were ejected out the window. They died from the fall. This incident led to the Hussite Wars.
There was a Second Defenestration of Prague; this one was over Protestant/Catholic differences. This time the victims survived, either from angels or landing in horse manure depending on who you asked.
Other defenestrations of Prague occurred but were not assigned numbers.
Defenenstrations are not unique to Prague, although they get most of the notoriety. Lisbon had a few, there was one of a De'Medici, and even Chopin's piano. Deng Xioping's son was defenestrated in 1968 as part of the Cultural revolution.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
July 29
Only July 29th, 1899, the first Hague Convention was signed.
The Hague Conventions were, along with the Geneva Conventions, an attempt to make warfare more "civilized". The first Hague Convention banned bombings via balloons, hollow point bullets, and chemical warfare. The second Hague Convention followed up in 1907, with more agreements on how warfare was to be committed, especially at sea.
The Geneva Protocol also followed up the Hague Convention, banning in more detail chemical warfare.
Despite the names, these are treaties, and the United States is a signatory.
The Hague Conventions were, along with the Geneva Conventions, an attempt to make warfare more "civilized". The first Hague Convention banned bombings via balloons, hollow point bullets, and chemical warfare. The second Hague Convention followed up in 1907, with more agreements on how warfare was to be committed, especially at sea.
The Geneva Protocol also followed up the Hague Convention, banning in more detail chemical warfare.
Despite the names, these are treaties, and the United States is a signatory.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
July 28
On July 28th, 1996, Kennewick Man was discovered.
Kennewick Man is the skeletal remains of a prehistoric man found by the Columbia River in Washington State.
These remains quickly became the subject of dispute. Archeologists wanted to examine the remains, while local Indian tribes wanted to put the remains to rest with appropriate ceremony. As the case involved Indian law, it was automatically heard in federal court, using NAGPRA (the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act). The tribe lost as the remains could not be directly linked to any current tribe culturally, largely as a consequence of the remains being so old and tribal records being largely oral.
In July 2005, scientific tests and measurements were performed. The remains are the legal property of the US Army Corps of Engineers, housed at the Burke Museum in Seattle.
Kennewick Man is the skeletal remains of a prehistoric man found by the Columbia River in Washington State.
These remains quickly became the subject of dispute. Archeologists wanted to examine the remains, while local Indian tribes wanted to put the remains to rest with appropriate ceremony. As the case involved Indian law, it was automatically heard in federal court, using NAGPRA (the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act). The tribe lost as the remains could not be directly linked to any current tribe culturally, largely as a consequence of the remains being so old and tribal records being largely oral.
In July 2005, scientific tests and measurements were performed. The remains are the legal property of the US Army Corps of Engineers, housed at the Burke Museum in Seattle.
Monday, July 27, 2009
July 27
On July 27, 1987, salvage operations began on the Titanic.
Law of salvage is ancient. Recovery of items lost at sea has been considered a public service, but sometimes there have been issues about what is "lost" at sea. Under the law, salvage for gain is acceptable, but legal duty to aid still applies.
Unless the vessel is "derelict" or clearly abandoned, or no owner can be tracked down, the owner of the vessel has rights to the salvage. If an insurance company that paid out a claim is still in business, they have the rights to the salvage.
A salvor does not get the complete amount of the find. What he will get is dependent on the difficulty of the operation, time and energy expended, the value of the recovery, and how much danger was involved. A salvor assumes the risk when they undertake the operation; in no case will a salvor be awarded more than the vessel is worth. 10-25% is more typical.
Some have tried to argue salvage as abandoned property, in which case the finder would recover the whole, and take possession, but courts have been largely unsympathetic. A vessel needs to be intentionally abandoned, and that is a difficult standard to meet.
Salvage can be very profitable, but risks can be high as well.
Law of salvage is ancient. Recovery of items lost at sea has been considered a public service, but sometimes there have been issues about what is "lost" at sea. Under the law, salvage for gain is acceptable, but legal duty to aid still applies.
Unless the vessel is "derelict" or clearly abandoned, or no owner can be tracked down, the owner of the vessel has rights to the salvage. If an insurance company that paid out a claim is still in business, they have the rights to the salvage.
A salvor does not get the complete amount of the find. What he will get is dependent on the difficulty of the operation, time and energy expended, the value of the recovery, and how much danger was involved. A salvor assumes the risk when they undertake the operation; in no case will a salvor be awarded more than the vessel is worth. 10-25% is more typical.
Some have tried to argue salvage as abandoned property, in which case the finder would recover the whole, and take possession, but courts have been largely unsympathetic. A vessel needs to be intentionally abandoned, and that is a difficult standard to meet.
Salvage can be very profitable, but risks can be high as well.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
July 26
On July 26th, 1948, President Harry S. Truman signed Executive Order 9981. This Order declared that all servicemen were equal, regardless of color, and and established a committee to make what changes would be necessary to make that a reality.
As this Executive Order was in regards to the military, Truman was not subject to Congressional approval. One of the Presidential enumerated powers is to control the US military. Executive orders can be declared unconstitutional (although in this case unlikely because this Order supports the 14th Amendment - and on a federal level no less).
Harry Truman had previously signed Executive Order 9808, which was to investigate civil rights, and 9980, which desegregated the Civil Service. He also had plans to institute a Voting Rights commission, abolish poll taxes, and create federal protection from lynching. However, these recommendations were left to Congress as Truman started his second term, with predictable results.
The lasting contribution Truman made to civil rights may have been in his Supreme Court appointees; Burton, Clark and Minton all voted in favor of Brown v Board of Education and other landmark civil rights cases. Vinson, the Chief Justice, also frequently sided on the side of civil rights.
As this Executive Order was in regards to the military, Truman was not subject to Congressional approval. One of the Presidential enumerated powers is to control the US military. Executive orders can be declared unconstitutional (although in this case unlikely because this Order supports the 14th Amendment - and on a federal level no less).
Harry Truman had previously signed Executive Order 9808, which was to investigate civil rights, and 9980, which desegregated the Civil Service. He also had plans to institute a Voting Rights commission, abolish poll taxes, and create federal protection from lynching. However, these recommendations were left to Congress as Truman started his second term, with predictable results.
The lasting contribution Truman made to civil rights may have been in his Supreme Court appointees; Burton, Clark and Minton all voted in favor of Brown v Board of Education and other landmark civil rights cases. Vinson, the Chief Justice, also frequently sided on the side of civil rights.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
July 25
On July 25th, 1952, Puerto Rico became a self-governing commonwealth of the United States.
Puerto Rico has the United States President as the head of state, but they also have an elected governor, a House of Representatives and a Senate. The US Congress has the same enumerated powers over Puerto Rico that it has over the states: maritime law, currency, citizenship, interstate commerce, foreign affairs, etc.
Puerto Rico differs from US states in that is exempt from certain federal taxes, and consequently does not get some kinds of funds states get. Puerto Ricans also do not vote in Presidential elections, and are not represented in either the Senate or House.
Puerto Rico has the United States President as the head of state, but they also have an elected governor, a House of Representatives and a Senate. The US Congress has the same enumerated powers over Puerto Rico that it has over the states: maritime law, currency, citizenship, interstate commerce, foreign affairs, etc.
Puerto Rico differs from US states in that is exempt from certain federal taxes, and consequently does not get some kinds of funds states get. Puerto Ricans also do not vote in Presidential elections, and are not represented in either the Senate or House.
Friday, July 24, 2009
July 24th
Only July 24th, 1974, the Supreme Court found that Richard Nixon did not have authority to withhold tapes that had been subpoenaed for the special prosecutor, but upheld and formalized the broad scope of executive privilege. The case in question is United States v. Nixon.
Executive privilege has a long and dubious history. It is not spelled out in the Constitution or its amendments, and has been largely created by the bench and by declaration of the Executive Branch. The founding fathers did not particularly like the idea, based as it is on "crown privilege", and in fact, early cases asserting privilege frequently lost.
Most presidents, when they lose on an executive privilege, will comply but insist their cooperation was voluntary.
However, it has been generally agreed that the President does require some safe zone in which to make decisions. If the President has to perpetually answer to Congress about how every decision is made, he will not be willing to get open and honest advice. When upheld by the Supreme Court, that has usually been the justification, using the separation of powers doctrine.
Richard Nixon, on the other hand, was actively trying to interfere with a judicial proceeding. Which is the point where the Supreme Court tends to lose sympathy. The official stance is that need, or the absolute importance of the requested materials, will override the executive need for secrecy.
Executive privilege has a long and dubious history. It is not spelled out in the Constitution or its amendments, and has been largely created by the bench and by declaration of the Executive Branch. The founding fathers did not particularly like the idea, based as it is on "crown privilege", and in fact, early cases asserting privilege frequently lost.
Most presidents, when they lose on an executive privilege, will comply but insist their cooperation was voluntary.
However, it has been generally agreed that the President does require some safe zone in which to make decisions. If the President has to perpetually answer to Congress about how every decision is made, he will not be willing to get open and honest advice. When upheld by the Supreme Court, that has usually been the justification, using the separation of powers doctrine.
Richard Nixon, on the other hand, was actively trying to interfere with a judicial proceeding. Which is the point where the Supreme Court tends to lose sympathy. The official stance is that need, or the absolute importance of the requested materials, will override the executive need for secrecy.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
July 23rd
On July 23rd, 1942, the concentration camp Treblinka began operations. It operated until October 1943 and slaughtered 850,000 people, largely Jews and some Romani.
International law has traditionally had difficulty with massacres of populations within a country's boundaries. International law, for the most part, does not interfere with the workings inside a country, until WWII it was primarily about relationships between governments. International law is unusual in that it requires the consent of the governments it affects, so it can be difficult to get agreement on something a government may want to do itself later.
Additionally, the word genocide did not exist until 1944. It is hard to prosecute something you don't even have a good definition for.
The Nuremberg Trials was the first large-scale attempt to prosecute for genocide. The Nuremberg Trials was actually more than one series of hearings; there was a set dedicated to doctors such as Mengele, another for judges of the Nazi regime. But the first was for the generals and leaders of the movement.
The Nuremberg Trials were important for many reasons, but few tribunals have had to create law after the crimes occurred. In fact, the prosecution worked very hard to try to apply existing law to the charges against the war criminals. This meant that the largely feel-good treaty the Kellogg-Briand pact was presented as being binding. The law of conspiracy was brought in as well, as war crimes were traditionally committed on the battlefield, not at headquarters.
Still, the Allied forces went to great lengths to try to make the trials legitimate, giving the defense translated documents, access to lawyers, and time to prepare. Normally the victor would try the crimes, according to their own laws. In the case of Germany, the country was now being occupied by four separate nations. The Nuremberg Tribunals tried to accommodate the several nations involved by using its own rules of procedure. These rules of procedure were based on common law, not a civil law system like the Germans were used to.
The French and the Soviets called victims of the camps as witnesses; neither the US nor the British had. It was the eyewitness accounts of camps such as Treblinka that made genocide real to the general public. Without the painstaking research for the trials, it is unlikely historians today would have nearly as much information about the actual experiences of Nazi concentration camps.
Quite possibly the greatest legacy of the Nuremberg trials was the development of international law, and creating tools to deal with massacres. The formation of the United Nations was heavily impacted by the Nazi trials. The Rwanda tribunals today owe a great debt to the failures and successes of the Nuremberg Tribunals.
International law has traditionally had difficulty with massacres of populations within a country's boundaries. International law, for the most part, does not interfere with the workings inside a country, until WWII it was primarily about relationships between governments. International law is unusual in that it requires the consent of the governments it affects, so it can be difficult to get agreement on something a government may want to do itself later.
Additionally, the word genocide did not exist until 1944. It is hard to prosecute something you don't even have a good definition for.
The Nuremberg Trials was the first large-scale attempt to prosecute for genocide. The Nuremberg Trials was actually more than one series of hearings; there was a set dedicated to doctors such as Mengele, another for judges of the Nazi regime. But the first was for the generals and leaders of the movement.
The Nuremberg Trials were important for many reasons, but few tribunals have had to create law after the crimes occurred. In fact, the prosecution worked very hard to try to apply existing law to the charges against the war criminals. This meant that the largely feel-good treaty the Kellogg-Briand pact was presented as being binding. The law of conspiracy was brought in as well, as war crimes were traditionally committed on the battlefield, not at headquarters.
Still, the Allied forces went to great lengths to try to make the trials legitimate, giving the defense translated documents, access to lawyers, and time to prepare. Normally the victor would try the crimes, according to their own laws. In the case of Germany, the country was now being occupied by four separate nations. The Nuremberg Tribunals tried to accommodate the several nations involved by using its own rules of procedure. These rules of procedure were based on common law, not a civil law system like the Germans were used to.
The French and the Soviets called victims of the camps as witnesses; neither the US nor the British had. It was the eyewitness accounts of camps such as Treblinka that made genocide real to the general public. Without the painstaking research for the trials, it is unlikely historians today would have nearly as much information about the actual experiences of Nazi concentration camps.
Quite possibly the greatest legacy of the Nuremberg trials was the development of international law, and creating tools to deal with massacres. The formation of the United Nations was heavily impacted by the Nazi trials. The Rwanda tribunals today owe a great debt to the failures and successes of the Nuremberg Tribunals.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
July 22nd
On July 22nd, 1937, the United States Senate voted down a proposal to modify the composition of the Supreme Court, known popularly as the court-packing plan.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt had many ambitious plans to pull the United States out of the Great Depression. The Supreme Court, however, declared several programs unconstitutional. The Supreme Court prior to 1937 held that contracts were sacred. Any legislation to impose minimum wages, safe working conditions, or minimum ages to work were considered a violation of that right to contract. This time was known as the Lochner era after a famous case about working conditions (regulations lost). Property rights were also given high priority, making emergency farm mortgage programs impossible.
Roosevelt was also frustrated by the overturning of programs intended to regulate industries like coal and agriculture. Although these industries were clearly affected by interstate commerce, the Supreme Court view of when a commodity became interstate was very narrow. The Schechter decision made setting up legislative agencies very difficult. Roosevelt felt like he was being blocked at every turn.
In autumn 1933, Roosevelt started looking at how to go about reforming the court.
Up until this point, most of these decisions were justifiable under stare decisis, the common law tradition of deferring to precedent. Some, however, were reaching back to old cases that had since been overturned. Even this very conservative court was making law.
Roosevelt's eventual plan was to reform the court based on age. A perpetual complaint about the Supreme Court is how justices stay on too long. The original proposal was that for every justice that stayed on past the age of 70, another judge would be appointed. This younger justice would have a greater say in any decision.
There were other facets to the proposal, including one limiting the number of Supreme Court nominees to six. Other sections applied to lower courts and ways to ease their caseloads.
Reaction from the public was hostile. From this point on, the proposal never really gained much momentum. Nonetheless, the bill worked its way through the House and the Senate, including a few revisions.
Although Roosevelt did not get his extra justices, in the long run he won the war. On March 29th, 1937, the Supreme Court handed down three decisions that made the New Deal possible, the famous Switch in Time that Saved Nine. Notable among these was Parrish v. West Coast Hotel, which allowed a minimum wage in Washington state. While these decisions would be a final nail in the court packing plan coffin, Roosevelt did get his ultimate goal of a less obstructionist Supreme Court.
On July 22nd, the Senate rejected the bill, sending it back to strip all court-packing provisions. The plan was effectively dead.
Ironically, shortly after this the Court finally started to turn over. Roosevelt soon had plenty of appointments to fill. It's difficult to judge whether Roosevelt would have gotten the same results with more patience. But no President since has seriously contemplated reforming the Supreme Court.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt had many ambitious plans to pull the United States out of the Great Depression. The Supreme Court, however, declared several programs unconstitutional. The Supreme Court prior to 1937 held that contracts were sacred. Any legislation to impose minimum wages, safe working conditions, or minimum ages to work were considered a violation of that right to contract. This time was known as the Lochner era after a famous case about working conditions (regulations lost). Property rights were also given high priority, making emergency farm mortgage programs impossible.
Roosevelt was also frustrated by the overturning of programs intended to regulate industries like coal and agriculture. Although these industries were clearly affected by interstate commerce, the Supreme Court view of when a commodity became interstate was very narrow. The Schechter decision made setting up legislative agencies very difficult. Roosevelt felt like he was being blocked at every turn.
In autumn 1933, Roosevelt started looking at how to go about reforming the court.
Up until this point, most of these decisions were justifiable under stare decisis, the common law tradition of deferring to precedent. Some, however, were reaching back to old cases that had since been overturned. Even this very conservative court was making law.
Roosevelt's eventual plan was to reform the court based on age. A perpetual complaint about the Supreme Court is how justices stay on too long. The original proposal was that for every justice that stayed on past the age of 70, another judge would be appointed. This younger justice would have a greater say in any decision.
There were other facets to the proposal, including one limiting the number of Supreme Court nominees to six. Other sections applied to lower courts and ways to ease their caseloads.
Reaction from the public was hostile. From this point on, the proposal never really gained much momentum. Nonetheless, the bill worked its way through the House and the Senate, including a few revisions.
Although Roosevelt did not get his extra justices, in the long run he won the war. On March 29th, 1937, the Supreme Court handed down three decisions that made the New Deal possible, the famous Switch in Time that Saved Nine. Notable among these was Parrish v. West Coast Hotel, which allowed a minimum wage in Washington state. While these decisions would be a final nail in the court packing plan coffin, Roosevelt did get his ultimate goal of a less obstructionist Supreme Court.
On July 22nd, the Senate rejected the bill, sending it back to strip all court-packing provisions. The plan was effectively dead.
Ironically, shortly after this the Court finally started to turn over. Roosevelt soon had plenty of appointments to fill. It's difficult to judge whether Roosevelt would have gotten the same results with more patience. But no President since has seriously contemplated reforming the Supreme Court.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
July 21st
On July 21st, 1925, a verdict was handed down in the Scopes evolution trial.
The Scopes "monkey trial" does not bear much resemblance to Inherit the Wind. While the film is a fine drama, the town of Dayton, Tennessee was excited to have such celebrities as William Jennings Bryan, Clarence Darrow and H. L. Mencken.
The trial was also a setup. The ACLU has been looking for someone to challenge the Butler Act, which prohibited teaching evolution. John Scopes, who was actually a football coach, volunteered. His friends, Sue and Herbert Hicks, would prosecute. (Yes, Sue Hicks inspired the Johnny Cash song.) All-star teams of both sides of the legal aisle quickly formed.
It should be noted that official state textbooks did teach evolution.
It's not even entirely clear that Scopes did teach the contested subject matter, but he was duly arrested and the circus commenced.
The trial was grand entertainment for the town, and was broadcast on national radio. The theory of evolution squared off against the biblical version of events. The First Amendment, specifically the establishment clause, did not factor into the trial until appeal. (The Establishment Clause states that the government may not establish a state religion, or enact legislation designed to favor one belief.)
Many scientific experts were called in, but only one zoologist was allowed to testify in person. The rest instead submitted written reports. To be fair, the experts on the Bible did not present in front of the jury and their testimony was excluded as well.
Bryan had not argued in a courtroom in over three decades. Darrow had won his famous Leopold & Loeb case the year before. It is not surprising that Bryan did not acquit himself as well as had been expected. Nonetheless, it was still a shock when Darrow called Bryan to the stand as a Bible expert. Not so much a shock to Bryan, who had agreed on the condition that Darrow get the same treatment as the next witness.
Darrow ripped Bryan to pieces on the stand when asked to justify various accounts from the Bible. Darrow didn't make a very good impression either, rude and sarcastic. Judge Ralston had endured enough and ended the questioning after two hours. Darrow never testified and the trial wrapped up.
The trial lasted seven days, and ended with Darrow asking for a guilty verdict in order to get an appeal. After all, the basic facts were never in contention. Scopes had admitted to teaching evolution, in defiance of the Butler Act.
On July 21st, Scopes was found guilty and fined $100.00.
Six days later, William Jennings Bryan died. He was still in Dayton, and had died in his sleep.
The Tennessee Supreme Court overturned the trial on technical grounds, not constitutional ones. When referred back to the Supreme Court, they declined to hear the case. So, the defense's case was in vain from a legal standpoint.
The Butler Act itself was repealed in 1967.
For more information about this and other famous trials, see
Douglas Linder's Famous Trials
The Scopes "monkey trial" does not bear much resemblance to Inherit the Wind. While the film is a fine drama, the town of Dayton, Tennessee was excited to have such celebrities as William Jennings Bryan, Clarence Darrow and H. L. Mencken.
The trial was also a setup. The ACLU has been looking for someone to challenge the Butler Act, which prohibited teaching evolution. John Scopes, who was actually a football coach, volunteered. His friends, Sue and Herbert Hicks, would prosecute. (Yes, Sue Hicks inspired the Johnny Cash song.) All-star teams of both sides of the legal aisle quickly formed.
It should be noted that official state textbooks did teach evolution.
It's not even entirely clear that Scopes did teach the contested subject matter, but he was duly arrested and the circus commenced.
The trial was grand entertainment for the town, and was broadcast on national radio. The theory of evolution squared off against the biblical version of events. The First Amendment, specifically the establishment clause, did not factor into the trial until appeal. (The Establishment Clause states that the government may not establish a state religion, or enact legislation designed to favor one belief.)
Many scientific experts were called in, but only one zoologist was allowed to testify in person. The rest instead submitted written reports. To be fair, the experts on the Bible did not present in front of the jury and their testimony was excluded as well.
Bryan had not argued in a courtroom in over three decades. Darrow had won his famous Leopold & Loeb case the year before. It is not surprising that Bryan did not acquit himself as well as had been expected. Nonetheless, it was still a shock when Darrow called Bryan to the stand as a Bible expert. Not so much a shock to Bryan, who had agreed on the condition that Darrow get the same treatment as the next witness.
Darrow ripped Bryan to pieces on the stand when asked to justify various accounts from the Bible. Darrow didn't make a very good impression either, rude and sarcastic. Judge Ralston had endured enough and ended the questioning after two hours. Darrow never testified and the trial wrapped up.
The trial lasted seven days, and ended with Darrow asking for a guilty verdict in order to get an appeal. After all, the basic facts were never in contention. Scopes had admitted to teaching evolution, in defiance of the Butler Act.
On July 21st, Scopes was found guilty and fined $100.00.
Six days later, William Jennings Bryan died. He was still in Dayton, and had died in his sleep.
The Tennessee Supreme Court overturned the trial on technical grounds, not constitutional ones. When referred back to the Supreme Court, they declined to hear the case. So, the defense's case was in vain from a legal standpoint.
The Butler Act itself was repealed in 1967.
For more information about this and other famous trials, see
Douglas Linder's Famous Trials
Monday, July 20, 2009
July 20th
On this day, July 20th, 1969, the Apollo 11 project landed astronauts on the moon. Although a flag was planted, the moon was not declared a U. S. territory.
Well before the landing, international ramifications were already being discussed. The Outer Space Treaty, to which the United States is a party, prohibits the moon and other extraterrestrial bodies from hosting nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction. The moon is prohibited from any but peaceful purposes, such as research.
The moon officially belongs to all mankind, and no government can declare it a territory nor claim its resources.
The Outer Space Treaty has been in force since October 10, 1967.
Well before the landing, international ramifications were already being discussed. The Outer Space Treaty, to which the United States is a party, prohibits the moon and other extraterrestrial bodies from hosting nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction. The moon is prohibited from any but peaceful purposes, such as research.
The moon officially belongs to all mankind, and no government can declare it a territory nor claim its resources.
The Outer Space Treaty has been in force since October 10, 1967.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)