Lowering the Bar

Oregon Says Its Laws Are Copyrighted, Can't Be Published

A battle has been going on for about three weeks now between the state of Oregon, which has laws, and some legal websites that have been publishing those laws.  Oregon is insisting that they not do so.  Justia.com, for example, which had been providing the Oregon statutes online for free, got a cease-and-desist letter from the state in April telling Justia to stop.

Another thing that should be stopped is the phrase "cease and desist."  Since both of those words mean "stop," you only need one.  As it is, the phrase describes something that is literally impossible to comply with: once you've ceased (or desisted), you can't do it again.  But since we are still stuck with "aiding and abetting," which means "helping and helping," I guess this one will probably be around for a while too.

Anyway, a federal law states that the government claims no copyright in federal statutes, but that doesn't apply to the states.  Oregon appears to be the first to try to keep its laws from being published, though.  Why would a state want to do this?  Hard to say.  It might have something to do with the many references on its own website to the opportunity to buy your very own set of the Oregon Revised Statutes, which sure would come in handy if you wanted to know what the law was!

The owners of Justia and of another site, Public.Resource.Org, have objected to the state's Request to Stop, saying that good public policy would be to make the text as widely available as possible.  (You can see all the correspondence here.)  The state then argued that its duty was fulfilled by putting the text of the laws on its website.  One problem with that, according to the objectors, is that there are some errors in the HTML code used to render the statutes -- according to Public Resource, a little over 500,000 errors -- that may make much of the text unreadable in some browsers.  Problem two: the state does not even guarantee that the text it has posted is accurate:

Although efforts have been made [the State said on its website] to match the database text to the official legal text they represent, substantive errors or differences may remain. It is the user’s responsibility to verify the legal accuracy of all legal text.

And where might a user verify the legal accuracy of said legal text?  Why, in the "only Official and Certified edition available," namely the volumes you can order from the Office of Legislative Counsel for $390.  Visa and Mastercard are accepted.

William Patry, author of the treatise "Patry on Copyright," who now has a blog, has weighed in on the side of the websites, suggesting that "Oregon should rein in its wayward Legislative Counsel."  (Another post there discusses an ongoing dispute between the band Ok Go, whose video for "Here It Goes Again" won a Grammy, and the makers of Berocca vitamins, who are running an ad using a similar concept, thus presenting "what may become the world's first legal dispute over treadmill dancing.")

It looks like things may be headed for a showdown.  In a letter dated May 2, the sites' copyright counsel has notified the state that his clients do not agree that the laws are copyrighted, and that they intend to put the Oregon Revised Statutes back online by June 2, 2008.

Link: Boing Boing (April 30)
Link: Ars Technica (April 16)
Link: Oregon Revised Statutes 2007 (online edition)

UPDATE: Transcript of Witchcraft Resolution Hearings Posted

Here's a followup to last week's post on the witch-exoneration resolution that was not passed again this year by the Connecticut legislature.  Testimony on that resolution was heard on March 20, and the transcript has just been posted.  The committee heard testimony from descendants of Mary Sanford and Lydia Gilbert, two women who were executed for alleged witchcraft.

I think the transcript tends to support my suggestion last week that the lawmakers are not taking the issue all that seriously.  For example, here's Judiciary Committee chairman Lawlor, after one of the witnesses estimated that at least eleven people, and possibly many more, were wrongly executed in Connecticut:

REP. LAWLOR:  And apparently, Connecticut was the first state to do this [wrongly execute people for witchcraft].

DEBRA AVERY:  This preceded Salem by about 30 years.  Salem was the 1690s.

REP. LAWLOR: But they really got carried away a bit in Salem, once they got started, right?

DEBRA AVERY:  Yes.

Yeah, you guys stopped at a reasonable eleven executions or so, but they totally got carried away with it in Massachusetts.  That was completely uncalled for.  The Lawlor Comedy Hour continued:

REP. LAWLOR: You know . . . this morning, I remembered this great scene from Monty Python, where they grabbed the witch. And if you Google it, if you Google "Monty Python witch trial," you get to see that scene. There's--

DEBRA AVERY: Yes, about the wood and how wood floats, and, yeah, I'm very familiar with that [suggesting she has heard this one before].

REP. LAWLOR: But as funny as it is, it gives you a sense of, you know, looking back, how outrageous it really was because, it's something.

It sure is.  Funny now, though.

A senator then weighed in with his witch-trial knowledge, which he seems to have gained entirely from watching reenactments during family excursions to Salem:

SEN. KISSEL: . . . And they have trials there . . . and for a small fee you can go in there and you see it all acted out in front of you.  And at the end of the presentation . . . you all take a vote.  Is she a witch or isn't she?

According to Sen. Kissel, the accused is almost always exonerated in these votes by today's enlightened citizens, with a couple of notable recent exceptions:

And you're exactly correct . . . that sometimes, you know, the feelings of the public change.  After having done this with my family [visited Salem, presumably] for a number of years, I will tell you, there were a couple of years, after the Trade Tower bombings in 2001, where the crowds actually found her to be a witch.  They weren't in a really good mood, I guess, around that time, and so they were not cutting anybody any slack, even reenactments of ancient history.

On the one hand, given that John Yoo was writing the torture memo right about that same time, it seems like these kind of slight overreactions are unfortunately not "ancient history."  On the other hand, the Salem tourists did not actually hang any actors in retaliation for 9/11, as far as I can tell, so maybe we have made at least some progress.

Link: Judiciary Committee Hearing of March 20, 2008

 

Youth Rights Under Siege in Midwest

In addition to the continuing War on Low Pants, about which I will report again in the near future, other recent legislative developments in the Midwest are threatening the rights of young people.

In Arkansas, the right of toddlers to marry was eliminated by a bill signed on April 2.  As I reported last October, the legislature intended to create an exception so that (with parental consent) a person under 18 who was pregnant could get married.  But someone, probably Satan, inserted the word "not" into the bill, so that as passed it allowed any person "younger than [18] and who is not pregnant" to be married.  As a result, any minor could get married in Arkansas except a pregnant woman.

State officials noticed and deleted the "not" from the code, but a judge later held that they had no power to make that kind of a change.  The governor declined to call an immediate special session of the legislature in order to delete one word, despite the concerns of one lawmaker that pedophiles would storm into Arkansas "to find parents who are willing to sign a very young child's consent."  (There is no evidence that the delay attracted any pedophiles to Arkansas, though it probably did increase the number of bastards.)

The governor did convene a special session this year, though for a different purpose, and the marriage bill's original sponsor, Rep. Will Bond, jumped at the chance to fix the law.  "[T]hrow me a rope and bail me out here," he asked his colleagues, and they did.

Meanwhile, to the north, Missouri legislators are threatening to ban cage matches for children, citing a recent AP report about youth-league mixed martial arts competitions.

Now I think political correctness has really gone too far.  What is the world coming to when you can't lock two children in a cage and cheer as they beat each other senseless?

Nathan Orand, a trainer hoping to organize a national youth league, argued that the sport is safe, saying that fighters wear pads and that the rules forbid "any strikes to the head of an opponent who is on the ground."  That did not reassure the lawmakers who introduced the anti-child-cage-match bill last week.  "I think it borders on child abuse," said Rep. Bryan Stevenson.  Well, it is child abuse, it's just that the abuse is being inflicted by another child.

Orand said that outlawing the sport would just drive it underground.  (The first rule of Child Fight Club is you do not talk about Child Fight Club.)  He said that his proposed "Freestyle Combat League" would have even more pads and safety rules.  Also, "one of the main concerns I've run into is the fact that it's in a cage.  It can look brutal at first glance," he admitted, which is true, especially the part where they kick the crap out of each other inside it.  Therefore, "[i]n the interests of the youth sport," Orand announced, "we're taking it out of the cage."

Link: "Toddlers Can No Longer Get Hitched in Arkansas," MSNBC.com
Link: "Mo. Asked to Ban 'Cage Fighting' by Kids," AP via FindLaw.com

Southerners Fear War Between the States

In case you missed it, February 27th was "Give Our Georgia Friends a Drink Day," as proclaimed by Ron Littlefield, mayor of Chattanooga, Tennessee.  Littlefield said he was concerned about them because the Georgia Legislature had passed a resolution expressing Georgia's intent to seek a change in the border between the two states, which Tennesseeans Tennesseeites people from Tennessee believe is a grab for Tennessee water.

The resolution doesn't mention water, but it does mention the Tennessee River, which I understand is composed mostly of water.  As things now stand (see map) the northwest corner of Georgia is just short of the river.  According to Georgia, Congress set the border at the "35th parallel," but the dummy who did the survey in 1818 got it wrong.  So the existing border is actually south of the parallel, and ought to be moved:

WHEREAS, the northern border of the State of Georgia and the southern border of the states of North Carolina and Tennessee lies at the 35th parallel, north of the southernmost bank of the Tennessee River; and

WHEREAS, a flawed survey conducted in 1818 and never accepted by the State of Georgia erroneously marks the 35th parallel south of its actual location; and

WHEREAS, [we have been trying for 190 years now to get this fixed] . . .

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA that the Governor of Georgia is hereby directed to [try again, and]

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that there is hereby created the Georgia-North Carolina and Georgia-Tennessee Boundary Line Commission to [help him try again] and to take such [action as may be proper] to establish the definite and true boundary lines.

As far as I can tell, Georgia is right about this.  Congress did set the border at the parallel, but that's not where the border actually is.  (See other map.)  Tennessee's position: the border's been there for 190 years, and it ain't movin'.  The mayor's proclamation tells Georgia to go pound sand:

WHEREAS, it has come to pass that the heavens are shut up and a drought of Biblical proportions has been visited upon the Southern United States, and . . .

WHEREAS, the leaders of Georgia have assembled like the Children of Israel in the desert, grumbled among themselves and have begun to cast longing eyes toward the north, coveting their neighbor's assets, and

WHEREAS, the lack of water has led some misguided souls to seek more potent refreshment or for other reasons has resulted in irrational and outrageous actions seeking to move a long-established and peaceful boundary, and . . .

WHEREAS, it is feared that if today they come for our river, tomorrow they might come for our Jack Daniels . . .

I, Ron Littlefield, Mayor of the City of Chattanooga, Tennessee, do hereby proclaim that Wednesday, February 27, 2008 shall be known as "Give Our Georgia Friends a Drink Day."

Littlefield and a local radio station collected bottled-water donations, which were then delivered to the Georgia capitol by a man dressed as Davy Crockett.

Meanwhile, Rep. Gary Odom (D-Nashville) jokingly suggested that Tennessee might call up the militia if necessary to defend his state's rights, a joke that would be a lot funnier if not made in the South. Ironically, Georgia actually did once go to war with North Carolina over a strip of that border, in two 1810 militia skirmishes called the "Walton War."  North Carolina won.  Not long after that, in what was probably an unrelated story, Georgia announced that there had been a mistake and that it didn't really have a claim to the strip after all.

Presumably, Georgia will ask the Supreme Court to resolve the dispute this time around.

Link: Chattanooga Times Free Press

Politician Reinstated After Scandal

A politician who recently lost his job after a scandal has been reinstated, and his record will be cleared, officials said today.

Thanks for reading, Client-9, but it's not you.

Eighth-grader Michael Sheridan, of New Haven, Connecticut, was suspended and stripped of his title as class vice president after he was busted for buying contraband Skittles from a local dealer.  The Skittles-pusher was one of Sheridan's classmates.  Skittles and similar banned substances have been illegal in the New Haven school district since 2003, when the district implemented something called a "school wellness policy."  (It appears that this was a candy ban and not due to concerns about "skittling," which I've just learned is a term for getting high by taking too much cold medicine, some brands of which look like Skittles.)  In addition to losing his position, Sheridan was suspended for one day and barred from attending a dinner for honors students.

After some controversy over the matter, the district superintendent and school principal Eleanor Turner met with Sheridan's parents this week.  The superintendent announced afterwards that Sheridan would be reinstated.

No reason was given, but in a statement Turner suggested that the "Just Say No to Skittles" policy may have been unclear.  It was apparently a verbal warning, which Turner said she should have reinforced in writing.  "I am sorry this has happened," said Turner, her use of the passive voice indicating that she had done nothing wrong and that the problem was the fault of the thing that happened.  "My hope," she continued, "is that we can get back to the normal school routine, especially since we are in the middle of taking the Connecticut mastery test."  I wouldn't worry too much about that, since I think this story suggests it's not that difficult to master Connecticut.

Sheridan claimed he did not know the purchase was against the rules, but admitted he did notice that his Skittles dealer was "being secretive."

Link: AP via FindLaw.com

Bill Would Make KFC the "Official Picnic Food of Kentucky"

On January 18, Kentucky State Rep. Charles Siler introduced a bill that would designate Kentucky Fried Chicken (specifically, Original Recipe) as the state's "official picnic food."  The provision itself is just one sentence, but the preamble offers some interesting details:

WHEREAS, Harland Sanders opened his first restaurant in Corbin, Kentucky in 1930; and

WHEREAS, Kentucky Governor Ruby Laffoon made Harland Sanders an honorary Kentucky Colonel in recognition of his contributions to the state's cuisine in 1936; and

WHEREAS, Colonel Sanders's "Original Recipe" fried chicken was first cooked in Colonel Sanders's restaurant in 1940; and

WHEREAS, the first "Kentucky Fried Chicken" franchise restaurant selling the Original Recipe chicken was opened in 1952; and

WHEREAS, today, the Original Recipe chicken is sold in more than 11,000 Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurants in more than 80 countries and territories around the world, bringing recognition and fame to the Commonwealth of Kentucky;

NOW, THEREFORE,

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky:

SECTION 1.  A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 2 IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

Original Recipe Kentucky Fried Chicken is designated the official picnic food of Kentucky.

The background facts in the "whereas" clauses are a bit of a mixed bag.  It's good to know that KFC actually did get its start in Kentucky, although it's a little disillusioning to learn that Col. Sanders didn't actually serve in the military.

Perhaps predictably, the bill is being opposed by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.  PETA claims that the chickens KFC serves are abused, even tortured, although it wasn't clear from the report whether PETA claims KFC is the one doing the torturing.  (In a related story, Attorney General Michael Mukasey refused to confirm or deny that chickens had been waterboarded, but said that if they were he wasn't sure if that was torture or not anyway).

"If the state legislature moves forward with this one," said PETA vice president Bruce Friedrich, "then they should change Kentucky's state bird from the cardinal to the debeaked, crippled, scalded, diseased, dead chicken."

Link: CBS News
Link: Kentucky State Legislature

City Sues to Force Alleged Recycler to Keep Trash Service

Eddie House of San Carlos, California, was sued on January 22 by the city of San Carlos, California, for municipal code violations related to garbage.  The problem is apparently that Mr. House doesn't generate any.  Garbage, that is.

House, who claims to "care" about the so-called "environment," says he recycles virtually everything he uses and disposes of what little is left over in ways that makes it unnecessary for him to have his garbage picked up by the city.  So he canceled that service about a year ago.  "It's just me and my dog," he said, "so I don't have a whole lot of garbage to begin with and I recycle everything."

As a result, the city is suing House to force him to maintain trash service, whether he needs it or not.

According to the report, the lawsuit alleges that House's failure to pay for the pickup of trash he doesn't generate is a violation of the municipal code, which requires everyone to contract with the Allied Waste company for pickup at least once a week, or more, possibly, if you don't need it more often than that.  The city is seeking a permanent injunction that would force House to follow that requirement.

"I don't understand a city ordinance that requires you to fill up a can," said House.  "That's downright foolishness."

A city manager told the Examiner that the lawsuit was prompted by complaints from neighbors that House was burning some of the garbage, causing a bad smell.  (If that's true, seems like the remedy should be an order forbidding him to burn things.)  House admits the fire department has been to his home several times, but says that each time he was only burning (evil-smelling?) firewood.  He believes the lawsuit is retaliation for his own complaints about the building next door, a charge the city manager denies.

"We don't go out looking for these things," he said.

Link: Examiner.com

Missouri City Council to Consider Ban on Swearing, Bar Dancing

Saying that legislation is necessary because the historic downtown area "gets a little too lively on some nights," City Councilman Richard Veit of St. Charles, Missouri (a St. Louis suburb) has proposed a measure that would ban swearing and other lively conduct in the city's drinking establishment.

That's the last thing a city needs, especially in Missouri -- a lively downtown.  I remember when Kansas City's downtown used to be just swarming with lively tumbleweeds (actually, I don't remember that, because no one ever went downtown), but I think that situation has changed recently.  As far as I know, swearing is still legal there.

In St. Charles, however, Veit says he proposed Bill 9527 in response to citizen complaints, and that its purpose is only to give police some rules to enforce in rowdy situations.  In addition to the existing prohibitions on certain conduct where alcoholic beverages are sold (hint: there are lots of things that cannot be "exposed to public view"), the bill would make it illegal to "allow any indecent, profane or obscene language, song, entertainment, literature or advertising material upon the premises."  Chapter 115.12(G) (proposed).  That seems significantly less than constitutional, since it would preclude not just swearing but everything from The Onion to Ulysses (I mention that on the off chance anyone might be reading Ulysses in a bar in Missouri).

Another new provision would make it illegal to "permit any person to dance, sit or stand upon a bar, tables, or any other raised surface that is used for preparing or serving food or beverages."  Chapter 115.12(F).  If that passes, I am immediately flying to St. Charles where I plan to lay down on every bar I can find.

Local resident Marc Rousseau, who coincidentally owns a bar, said he thinks the bill needs to at least be revised.  "We're dealing with adults here once again [either he's made this argument before or they frequently deal with adults there] and I don't think it's the city's job or the government's job to determine what we can and cannot play [or dance on] in our restaurant," Rousseau said.  Rousseau runs a place called "R.T. Weilers," which is presumably lively.

According to the "Quick Facts" section of the St. Charles website, the city's "rich heritage" includes the fact that Lewis and Clark left from there to explore the Northwest Territory.  Actually, I guess it includes two facts: (1) Lewis and Clark arrived in St. Charles in May 1804, and (2) then they left.  Clark wrote that upon arriving in St. Charles, "a number [of] Spectators flocked to the bank to See the party . . . . Chiefly French, those people appear pore, polite and harmonious."  In view of the current need for an anti-swearing ordinance, it seems that is at most fifty percent true today.

The city council will discuss the proposal at a meeting on January 14.

Link: AP via FindLaw.com
Link: City of St. Charles

Missouri City Joins Campaign Against Saggy Pants

Earlier this month, the Board of Aldermen in Pine Lawn, Missouri, voted to impose fines for wearing pants that sag below the waist, joining several other communities bravely fighting this scourge of modern society.

Pine Lawn is a small community of about 4,000 people, located in St. Louis County (just west of the city).  In the past it has suffered from financial problems and official mismanagement (see "The Little City That Couldn't," Riverfront Times, July 5, 2006), but maybe that will change now that Pine Lawn has its priorities straight.  The new law prohibits pants worn below the waist if said wearing of low pants exposes undergarments or skin.  Offenders can be fined $100, with a $500 fine (or jail time) for parents who knowingly allow their children's pants to ride low.

According to the mayor, Sylvester Caldwell, the ordinance was prompted by a group of developers who visited the city this summer, and apparently suggested that the city needed to "change its image."  He said the developers (who were not identified) specifically mentioned the issue of low-rise pants.  Caldwell said he has tried to deal with the problem informally -- taking young people aside and asking them "Why do you sag?" -- but to no avail.  Asked "What about plumbers?" local police chief Rickey Collins "chuckled" and said, "It's the police officer's discretion."

That's one reason it might be unconstitutional, says the ACLU.  And because Pine Lawn's population is overwhelmingly African-American, local ACLU director Redditt Hudson predicted the law might also be open to charges of racial profiling, if it were ever enforced.  Caldwell (who is also African-American) wasn't worried.  "That's what we have an attorney for," he said.

For now, the law is not really being enforced, other than as something for officers to cite when rousting offenders for "showing their behinds."  Collins said there would not be a "pants patrol," at least not anytime soon.  "We just want them to be mindful," he said.  "And if you come to Pine Lawn, pull your pants up."

Link: St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Colbert Is Tied in Election for Conservation District Board, But Cannot Serve

Stephen Colbert's run for president ended earlier this month after Democrats in South Carolina refused to put him on the primary ballot.  Now, a second disappointment: he will not be allowed to participate in a runoff for a seat on the board of the Colonial Soil and Water Conservation District in Williamsburg, Virginia, although he is in a three-way tie for second.

Colbert and two others (both students at the College of William and Mary) each received three write-in votes in the November 6 election.  Under local rules, the tie will be broken by drawing a name out of a hat, but Colbert will not be included because he's not registered to vote in Virginia.

Matt Beato, a student at William and Mary, was quoted as expressing concern about the write-in process, possibly because he was one of the two students in the race.  (The article doesn't identify him as such, but it's hard to see any other reason why someone would be interested in an election for the Colonial Soil and Water Conservation District Board, unless it's the fancy office.)  "I'm not crazy," Beato said, "but any nut case could win with three votes."  (The "I'm not crazy" disclaimer also seems to support the idea that Beato was a candidate.)  "Somebody should make sure that doesn't happen."

Colbert has not yet commented on this travesty, as far as I can tell, but another candidate has.  A comment posted on the Comedy Central website, purporting to be from a fourth and winning candidate, Gregory Hancock (who claims 1050 votes), clarifies that Colbert is in a three-way race for second place and that the drawing will determine only who can participate in a runoff with the winner, namely him.  It's a pretty good post:

As the one (and only...) candidate on the ballot for the two Soil and Water Conservation Board Director positions here in Williamsburg, I'd like to commend Mr. Colbert on his well-organized write-in campaign that resulted in his second place finish (he got 3 votes, I got 1050). As I am sure Mr. Colbert knows, there are few elected positions with as much influence on the daily lives of Americans as Soil and Water Conservation Board Director. We are constantly called upon to make the tough decisions on issues that weigh heavily on the nation, like which winter cover crop to grow this year or whether pickerel rush is a good choice for wetland plantings. I am sad that a silly technicality requiring candidates to be a resident of Williamsburg stood in the way of his being elected to the board. Were it not for this, he could have participated in a runoff with the two undergraduate students . . . But, perhaps Mr. Colbert will consider moving to Williamsburg to establish residency before the next election in 2010. It is never to early to begin campaigning, and I’d be happy to help advise him on making a successful bid for Soil and Water Conservation Director.

Link: FindLaw
Link: The Colonial Soil & Water Conservation District
Link: List of Candidates for Virginia SWCD Directors (listing only Hancock in Williamsburg)

NYC Councilman Proposes Legislative Ban on Pigeon Feeding

Fed up with the government's failure to act against the pigeon menace, New York City Councilman Simcha Felder said yesterday that he would introduce legislation that would ban pigeon feeding in the city and impose fines of up to $1,000.

Felder's report to the council stated that pigeons pose a serious problem to city infrastructure, or at least their crap does.  According to Felder, each pigeon is responsible for an average of 25 pounds of droppings per year (the report did not say whether he consulted an expert, or followed a pigeon around for a year), and the acidic droppings can rust steel and corrode infrastructure.  The report notes that other cities have tried a variety of measures to deal with the pigeon menace.  London brought in hawks to scare them away, Los Angeles is trying pigeon birth control (probably something in the feed, unless they have little pigeon condoms), and in Basel, Switzerland, where people apparently have even more time on their hands, they go around stealing the pigeon's eggs and replacing them with fake ones.

New York tried hawks a few years ago, but abandoned that plan after one of the hawks attacked somebody's chihuahua.

Felder apparently recognizes the difficulty in prosecuting the pigeons themselves for their bad behavior, although he finds it frustrating that the pigeon gangs are allowed ro run wild.  "We have pigeons doing whatever they do all over the city without anyone trying to stop it," he said.  He blamed the pigeon enablers: "If people like pigeons, take theim into [your] homes, feed pigeons in your house and let them crap all over the place in your living rooms."  Presumably the law will contain an exception for those who want to harbor pigeons behind closed doors.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg acknowledged that pigeons were a problem, but seemed to favor a voluntary feeding boycott rather than a ban.  "We do have a lot of pigeons," he said, confirming what many had feared.

Link: CBS News

Minneapolis to Remodel Larry Craig Memorial Restroom

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports that two men's restrooms at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, including the one made famous as the scene of Senator Larry Craig's alleged foot-tapping, will be remodeled.  Specifically, the stalls are to be fitted with longer dividers to make, shall we say, "liaisons" more difficult.

As you are likely aware, Craig was charged with disorderly conduct after an undercover officer said Craig had tapped his foot and waved his fingers under the divider in a way that the officer says signals a desire for liaisons.  These sting operations were going on because liaisons had frequently been reported in these airport restroooms, and airport officials had discovered that liaisons there were being planned in advance over the Internet.  Police had made about three dozen arrests there prior to the time that Senator Craig showed up.

Airport officials say that the two restrooms scheduled for remodeling first are "among the busiest" -- seems hard to argue with that -- and that they have not yet decided whether the other 78 restrooms at the airport will be similarly refitted.  Liaison-proofing all 80 restrooms would cost about $1 million, an amount that is apparently being spent despite the fact that, as the article put it, "complaints about sexual activity in the bathrooms have evaporated since Craig's arrest and [since] people realized the bathrooms were under surveillance."  But a spokesman appeared to be resigned to the likelihood that the conduct would recur somewhere else.  "If everybody would behave themselves," he said, "we wouldn't have to spend money on any of these modifications."

It is unclear whether the modifications will stem the public interest in the stall in which Craig was arrested, which has apparently been drawing enough attention that they might as well add it to the Register of National Historic Places.  "It's become a tourist attraction," said one airport worker.  "People are taking pictures."  Jon and Sally Westby, a couple on their way to Guatemala, said they "just had to" stop and check out the site.  "In fact," said Sally, "it's Jon's second time - he was here last week."  "It's the second stall from the right," Jon confirmed.  If he laughed nervously, it was not recorded.

Link:  Minneapolis Star-Tribune
Link:  Pioneer Press

Two Louisiana Cities Join Latest Wave of Low-Pants Legislation

The city council of Alexandria, Louisiana, has chosen to join other municipalities that are bravely fighting against the greatest scourge of our day, namely the problem of people wearing low-riding pants that do not conceal all of their undergarments.  On August 28, the council met to, among other things, address this agenda item:

To consider final adoption of an ordinance adding Section 15-128 to the Alexandria City Code relative to appropriate dress for persons in certain public places; to prohibit public exposure in certain attire; to provide for fines and civil penalties.

The measure passed unanimously.

The text is not available yet on the council's website, but if it is anything like the other ordinances on this popping up around the country, it criminalizes the wearing of pants that hang a certain distance below the waist and/or expose any portion of the wearer's undergarments.  Marshall said that the law imposes fines that begin at 25 dollars and go "up every time the pants go down."  It will appear in Chapter 15 (the criminal code) just after 15-127, which bans fortune-telling, palmistry, phrenology, or any "activities of a similar nature," even if no fee is charged.  This important chapter also criminalizes, among other things, the use within city limits of "'silly string' or any product which, upon activation, makes a string-like substance by means of a propellant" (Section 15-101(c)), again showing that the city council has its priorities firmly in the right order.

Council member Louis Marshall told reporters that "[w]e unanimously passed the legislation because we have had so many complaints from citizens who don't want to see young men with pants hanging so low, showing their underwear and, in some cases, their posterior."  He insisted that "[t]he legislation is gender neutral: we wouldn't want to see young ladies walking down the street showing their underwear either," he said.  "Dressing like that -- it's just not right or decent."

In Shreveport, council member Calvin Lester agreed, adding three other adjectives to the list: "unsightly, unseemly and disrespectful."  The Shreveport council passed a similar law, though only by a 4-3 vote.  The mayor must still approve the law in Shreveport but has reportedly said he will do so.

Added to the existing ordinance in Delcambre, Louisiana, which punishes low pants by up to $500 or six months in jail (presumably for exceptionally low pants), Louisiana is developing a de facto Decency Corridor roughly stretching along Interstate Highway 49:

Larger Map of the Louisiana Decency Corridor

A refuge, possibly, for those who can no longer live in an America besieged by unseemly and disrespectful undergarments.

Link: AFP via Yahoo! News
Link: New York Times

Activist Convicted of Pelting School Board Members With Grapes

Agnes Hitchcock says she has made her point and will no longer disrupt school-board meetings, now that her act of civil disobedience on April 4 has served its purpose of allowing her to talk about mismanagement of the Detroit-area school district.  Hitchcock was prosecuted, convicted, and fined for pelting school board members with grapes during a meeting at which the board voted (6-5) to close 34 city schools.

Hitchcock was lucky not to have been charged with assault and battery, given that she successfully beaned at least one board member with one of the fruity missiles.  She was also lucky not to have been charged under the PATRIOT Act, given that there is not very much you can't be charged with under the PATRIOT Act.

The report did not say whether Hitchcock had assaulted the board with relatively benign green table grapes (probably Thompson Seedless) or a more threatening variety such as Bastardo or Canadian Moonseed.  Much more serious penalties would probably have been imposed had she used one of the harsh German varietals such as Blaufrankisch or even Gewurztraminer, let alone something like Black Monukka or the notorious Preto de Mortagua, normally spoken of only in hushed voices.  Few know that the Croatian autochthonous varietal Crljenak Kastelanski was involved in the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, sparking World War I.  Speaking of sparking, some research suggests that even common seedless grapes can be made to "combust spectacularly" if properly prepared, something that likely brings the PATRIOT Act back into the picture.

Whatever Hitchcock used, board president Jimmy Womack took the traumatic assault quite seriously.  He told reporters that he was glad Hitchcock had been punished.  "This shows there are consequences to the actions we take," he said. "It's just regrettable [Hitchcock] has no remorse for attacking school board members [with grapes]."

Hitchcock remained defiant.  "It was worth the risk in order to be able to talk about these things in court," she told the Detroit Free Press, although it was unclear how many people were there to listen.  The judge imposed a $250 fine and Hitchcock must serve six months unsupervised probation.

Link: CBS News
Link: Learn about grapes at Wikipedia and
        The Super Gigantic Winegrape Glossary

Atlanta Joins Those Bravely Fighting Low-Pants Epidemic

The Associated Press reports today that a proposed amendment to Atlanta's indecency ordinances would target baggy, low-riding pants that allow portions of the wearer's underwear to be seen.  The ordinance would make "the indecent exposure of [one's] undergarments" in a public place unlawful.

As I have stated before, I oppose what many of these people are wearing but would defend to the death their right to wear it.  (Well, not to the death, maybe, but I would be willing to suffer a slight wound.  Meaning something like a paper cut.  One of those really painful ones, though, because this is important to me.)

The sponsor of the amendment, city councilman C.T. Martin, said the law was a response to a saggy-pants "epidemic" that was becoming a "major concern" around the country, which will come as news to those of you who live in that country.  "I don't want young people thinking that half-dressing is the way to go," he said.  "I want them to think about their future."

But the ACLU responded to defend the rights of half-dressers.  The Georgia ACLU director, Debbie Seagraves, noted that the ordinance would not only raise pant levels but would also make it illegal for a woman's bra strap to show or even for them to wear jogging bras in public.  She went further by arguing that because extremely baggy pants are most common among young African-Americans, the law could not be enforced in a nondiscriminatory way.

Martin -- who is African-American -- said he understood there would be comparisons to the battle over "the value of the hip-hop culture."  He noted that the penalty would be fines (in an amount to be determined) rather than jail time, and suggested that the proposal was only a starting point.  "The purpose of the [amendment]," he said, "is to generate some conversation to see if we can find a solution."  It'll generate conversation, at least.

This is not the first attempt to legislate people's pants up.  A prior attempt in Louisiana (mocked here and, more importantly, on the Daily Show) failed a couple of years ago, although at least one city in that state has since passed a local ordinance of this kind.  Not to minimize the serious nature of our national half-dressing epidemic, but more extensive legislation in this area seems unlikely.

Link: CBS News

Decisions Loom in $54-Million-Pants Case

According to Washington Post bloggers, a decision in the Pants Case is expected by Monday, possibly this afternoon.  With any luck, the court's opinion will be available for immediate posting and review.

Also, Marc Fisher reported this week on the status of Roy Pearson's bid to be reappointed to another term as a D.C. administrative law judge notwithstanding the furor surrounding his antics in the lost-pants extravaganza.  Pearson's initial two-year term expired on April 30, but the three-member commission that decides whether to reappoint judges still has not made a decision in his case.  Apparently that is because it doesn't currently have three members -- one member's term expired at the end of April and the mayor hasn't appointed anyone new yet.  Probably says something about District government that they can't get around to appointing anyone to the appointment panel that will decide whether to reappoint the man who is now the most famous administrative law judge in the history of administrative law judging, and not for good reasons.

Note that a reappointment would be for a ten-year term, not just another two, which is only the duration of an initial term.  The commission can remove an ALJ during his or her term, but still.

The D.C. Office of Administrative Hearings helpfully provides a link to the 2001 statute that established it and that now sets forth the standards for appointing ALJs.  It appears that, when the law was passed,

Administrative adjudication in the District of Columbia [suffered] from the general perception, and in some cases the reality, of unqualified hearing officers who lack[ed] the qualifications to fairly and properly adjudicate the cases before them.

Obviously, the law instantly rendered that a thing of the past.

Shall Judge Roy Pearson be appointed to a full ten-year term as ALJ?  You decide.  Among other requirements, the 2001 statute provides as follows:

Sec. 11. Administrative Law Judges.

(a) Administrative Law Judges shall be accountable and responsible for the fair, impartial, effective, and efficient disposition of cases to which they are assigned by the Chief Administrative Law Judge.

* * *

(d) To be eligible for appointment, an Administrative Law Judge shall:

(1) At the time of appointment, be a member in good standing of the District of Columbia Bar and remain in good standing throughout his or her tenure . . .Sec. 12. Powers, duties, and liability of Administrative Law Judges.

* * *

(5) Possess judicial temperament, expertise, experience, and analytical and other skills necessary and desirable for an Administrative Law Judge . . . .

Seems to me that Section 11(d)(5) is the show-stopper here.  Unless valuing a lost-pants case at $65 million (subsequently revised to $54 million) demonstrates the analytical skills "necessary and desirable" for an ALJ in the District, this alone ought to make Pearson not eligible for reappointment.

In the meantime, Fisher reports, Pearson is still drawing a six-figure salary although he is not currently performing any duties other than making the District of Columbia look ridiculous.

Link: Raw Fisher
Link: OFF/beat

City Council Successfully Prosecutes Itself; Feels "Vindicated"

Saying that he believed the Waitakere (New Zealand) City Council had done the "right thing," Judge Paul Barber convicted the council on six charges of failing to obtain necessary authorizations connected with a new building project.  That is, it had done the wrong thing by not following the law, but had done the right thing by prosecuting itself for the violations once it learned what it had done.

The city council ordered six homes moved out of a flood plain, something that under local law cannot be done without the consent of the city council.  Although the city council had good reason to believe it would not object to the order, it still decided to take itself to court for not getting its own consent before acting.  In a statement, the city council said it was acting "in the name of even-handed administration of justice."

Once in court, the city council decided there was little point in defending against its charges and pleaded guilty.  Judge Barber fined it $800 on each of the six charges and ordered it to pay court costs.  Ten percent of the fines will also go to the court, with the remainder of the money going to the city council.  Reportedly, the city council also hired an attorney to represent itself against itself (which of course created a conflict of interest that he should have disqualified himself for).

Thus, the city council will be collecting $4800 in fines from itself, minus $3000 (reportedly) that it paid its attorney, minus $1260 that it has to pay to the court, so that it will ultimately be recovering $540 of its $4800.  Or, looked at another way, the taxpayers just paid some lawyers $4,260 for their city council to sue itself for failing to get its own consent for something it had agreed to in the first place.

"We feel vindicated by this decision," said city councillor Vanessa Neeson of the council's complete victory/stinging defeat.  "We have been mocked for prosecuting ourselves," she continued, "but it is a very important principle of democracy, justice and common fairness that if we are prepared to prosecute ordinary citizens and contractors for such things, we must be seen to be prosecuting ourselves too.  We are not above the law."

Also pleased by the decision were the two contractors who actually removed the homes in question.  They had done so without seeking consent from the city council to do the work it had told them to do, which is a clear violation of the law.  "We are quite happy the council only got a small fine," said the owner of one of the firms.  "Hopefully our fines will be only small too."  We'll see about that.

The council also said that its "internal procedures had been reinforced" to prevent it from violating them again.

Link: Scoop (NZ)
Link: Waitakere City Council

Today's NY Crime Quiz

What do all of the following people have in common?

• "Fat Frank" Esposito, indicted as an associate of the Bonnano crime family.
• Frank Capello, arrested for possession of crack cocaine.
• Nesly Dorce, arrested four times for burglary and drug possession.
• Joe Petrillo, who recently assaulted his father with a knife.

Answer: they are (or recently were) New York City school-bus drivers.

That one was probably too easy.

The NY Daily News has been doing an investigation ("School Bus Disgrace") of bus drivers and "bus monitors," who I assume are people who monitor the kids while the driver is driving.  78 of them were arrested last year, and the newspaper found a total of 173 arrests on 241 charges between 2004 and 2006.  These included 46 assaults, 10 DWIs, 7 weapons charges, and at least one murder.  Most or all of these, thankfully, were for off-duty conduct, although the report cited one arrest for shoplifting during a field trip, and a child-endangerment charge against one driver who allegedly tied up a 7-year-old with seatbelts and electrical tape.  Well, they act up sometimes -- what's a driver to do?

The accused murderer was suspended, as are many (but not all) drivers or monitors who are charged with a serious crime.  As of Sunday, though, Fat Frank was still behind the wheel.

Link: NY Daily News

Unrepentant City Council President Says He Took Bribes "For the People"

It was all for the people of Atlantic City, said former city council president Craig Callaway.  Since he was saying this at a sentencing hearing after being convicted of taking bribes from an FBI informant, it is possible that he was exaggerating his altruistic motives a bit.

Callaway, who was elected to the council in 2002 and ascended to the presidency the next year, was described as the head of a "political crew" that sought to maintain power in part by intimidating its opponents.  More specifically, he was described as a "man who routinely showed up at opponents' political events with a bullhorn to drown them out, and who once threw a brick through an opposing candidate's windshield."  He seemed to have the same kind of attitude on Tuesday as he was arriving at the courthouse, which he did "with his middle finger raised" as his supporters were "cursing, pushing and shoving reporters."

He had put that finger away, though, by the time he got before the judge, unless he used it to get out his handkerchief.  Callaway reportedly "blinked back tears" and "choked up" as he asked the judge to go easy on him.  "I stand before you today," he told Judge Joseph Rodriguez, "extremely remorseful, with a heavy heart."  It wasn't that clear what he was extremely remorseful about, though, because he said he had only taken the $36,000 in bribes in order to help his constituents, or that's what he implied, anyway: "The reason why I had a good relationship with the informant is because Mr. Jacobs was doing the right thing for the people of Atlantic City," he said.  "He hired local people, he empowered them economically."  (And part of a good relationship is accepting money that your partner wants to give you in exchange for favors.  It's just rude not to.)  "I just wanted to help the people," he continued.  "They are the real victims."

As CNN put it, "Callaway did not explain how pocketing $36,000 in bribes helped the people he represented."  Nor did his attorney, who nonetheless was able to build on his client's statements to make what might now be the leading candidate for legal argument of the year (although it's still early).  At least, he told the judge, his client had not tried to disguise the bribes as campaign contributions, and so should get some credit for not being disingenuous.  That honesty is noble indeed, plus he is remorseful, with a heavy heart.

On the other hand, Judge Rodriguez pointed out, this story of redemption and reform is a little inconsistent with the fact that, while out on bail awaiting sentencing, Callaway had tried to blackmail another councilman after setting him up to be filmed with a prostitute.  At least he did not try to hide the camera, his attorney might have said to that.  He should get some credit for being open about the blackmail.

Unimpressed, Judge Rodriguez sentenced Callaway to 40 months in prison, fined him $1000 and, in a blow to the good government that Atlantic City has obviously been enjoying, barred Callaway from ever again holding public office.

Link: CNN.com

WARNING: "Welsh Dragon Sausages" May Not Contain Real Dragon

In November, the Trading Standards department for Powys County, Wales, forced a sausage manufacturer to change the label of its "Welsh Dragon"-brand spicy sausage, on the grounds that the label was misleading because the product did not contain real dragon.

It is actually made with pork.

Jon Carthew, owner of the fraudulent sausage maker, Black Mountains Smokery,  said that he had yet to receive any complaints about the absence of real dragon meat in the sausages, and believed that might be an indication that his customers did not think there was dragon meat in the sausages to begin with.  "We use the word because the dragon is synonymous with Wales," he said.  A spokesman for the county council, however, insisted that the product's label "was not sufficiently precise to inform a purchaser of the true nature of the food."  He later told the BBC that the concern was really that vegetarians might eat the sausages thinking that, because the label featured a fictional beast, there was no meat in the sausages at all, but that is the kind of BS that we have all come to expect from the Trading Standards Department for Powys County, Wales, isn't it?

The Times story said that the sausages were to be labeled "Welsh Dragon Pork Sausages" to avoid customer confusion, but the company's website calls them both "Smoked Welsh Dragon Sausage 'Pork'" and just plain "Smoked Welsh Dragon Sausage."

Link: Times Online
Link: Black Mountains Smokery

San Francisco OKs Pot, Bans Styrofoam

Depending on your viewpoint, this symbolizes everything that's wrong with San Francisco, or everything that is so great about it.

On Tuesday, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted to outlaw the use of styrofoam and similar products, and (according to the report) to "effectively decriminalize the use, sale and cultivation of marijuana by adults."

Styrofoam has been banned by a number of U.S. cities because it is not biodegradable, does not break down in landfills and can harm wildlife when nondigestible pieces are eaten. Many restaurants have already switched to biodegradable containers and the industry generally supported the legislation.

Marijuana, or cannabis sativa, evidently contains a chemical compound that has psychoactive and medicinal effects when consumed. It was well-known to the ancient Assyrians, Persians, Hindus, Scythians, Dacians, Thracians, and Greeks, and remains well-known to modern Iraqis, Iranians, Indians, Central Asians, Romanians, Thracian Greeks, other Greeks, university Greeks, Rastafarians, Canadians, South Americans, Spaniards, and San Franciscans, especially the guy who lives below me, who judging from the smell in the hallway is baked about four days a week.

According to Wikipedia, where I've learned all I know about this substance, "cannabis has a broad spectrum of possible cognitive, behavioral, and physiological effects." However, this section of the article contains the following note:

List of effects

This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. Please help recruit one, or improve this page yourself if you can.

If any readers are familiar with this substance, please do what you can to help.

Under San Francisco's new anti-styrofoam laws, those caught using styrofoam can be fined $100 (first offense) or as much as $250 (for recidivist styrofoam abusers). Under the new marijuana policy, entitled "Policy Making Marijuana Offenses the Lowest Law Enforcement Priority," marijuana offenses will be the city's lowest law enforcement priority. Users are essentially to be ignored, unless the marijuana-related acts involve minors, violence, driving under the influence or dealing on public property.

Both new laws will require a second vote to become effective.

Link: SFGate.com
Link: Meeting Agenda for Nov. 13 (with link to draft ordinance)

Andy Griffith Running for Sheriff in Wisconsin

In what seems like an unfair move -- how could you not vote for "Andy Griffith" to be your sheriff? -- a music store owner in Grant County, Wisconsin, changed his name from "William Fenrick" to "Andy Griffith" upon entering the race as an independent.  He is running against incumbent "Keith Govier" and Democratic challenger "Doug Vesperman," each of whom has over a decade of experience but are stuck with boring, non-famous names that probably leave them with no chance at all against the pseudo-Griffithian juggernaut.

Griffith, 42, said his goal was to draw attention to a race that would otherwise get little of it.  "Nobody knows who's running or what the issues are, if there are any issues, or how the people differ," Griffith said.  I note that the AP report did not say what the issues are, if there are any issues, or how the people differ, but at least we do now know who's running for sheriff in Grant County, Wisconsin.

New Griffith may or may not be aware that the fictional sheriff of Mayberry, R.F.D., was actually named "Andy Taylor," although of course the show was called "The Andy Griffith Show" after the star.  I was hoping there would be another layer here resulting from "Andy Griffith" being a pseudonym in the first place, but that appears to have been his real name -- "Andy Samuel Griffith."  I guess it was a simpler time.

Link: AP via My Way News
Link: Wikipedia article on Andy Griffith

Utah Government Says It Will Try Not to Bomb Any Homes This Season

Utah's Department of Transportation reassured Provo residents recently that it will not be firing artillery shells into their backyards any more. Apparently, Utah uses 105mm howitzers to trigger controlled avalanches in areas including Provo Canyon. In March, avalanche safety workers (who might be misnamed) used too much propellant for one shot and ended up firing a 105mm shell into Lori and Scott Connors' backyard on the other side of the canyon. The explosion left a gaping crater and sent shrapnel into the Connors' house as well as neighboring homes.

Complaints were lodged.

A UDOT spokesman announced this week that UDOT had reviewed the matter before starting up again with artillery this season, and was confident that it had the problems under control. "What we found," he said, "wasn't a breakdown in procedure but a breakdown of the human element of the procedure." I'm really not sure what that means. I think it translates to, "the artillery shell did what it was supposed to do -- the problem was that we shot it into somebody's house." And that's not all that reassuring.

I found it interesting that the Salt Lake Tribune's website, where this story appears, has a link on its main menu (left side) specifically for "Polygamy." I guess that makes sense.

Salt Lake Tribune