Vincent G. Rinn Law Library

Harry Potter and the Law ??

The AALL ( American Association of Law Libraries) conference to be held next week in Portland,Oregon has many sessions on such issues as information technology, library management, research services and government  documents. But along with these more serious issues there will be some programs on less weighty matters. One such program is entitled "Harry Potter and the Law". The moderator for this program, Joel Fishman, from Duquesne Allegheny County Law Librirary, has co-athored a law review article in the Texas Wesleyan Law Review with the same title.

The introduction states, "This collection of essays about the law and Harry Potter explores the intersections between law, culture and the Harry Potter stories".  While being a creative and speculative collection, it can still serve to show, "...the limitations of law and legal institutions as depicted in the Harry Potter narratives". In some of the essays the author , "...uses the narratives to explore the roles of excuse and justification in their relationship with legal authority and rule of law", and "that in spite of legal and institutional limitations, the wizarding world allows for individual moral choice, which is a recognition of the importance of individual liberty". So weightier matters do get addressed by this seemingly fanciful collection.

However, the  great publicity about  the legal case over the publication of a portion of the online fan site known as the Harry Potter Lexicon , pitting Warner Bros and author J.K. Rowling against RDR Books and  Vander Ark, the originator of the Lexicon  before  Manhattan federal judge Robert Patterson, will probably be the primary basis for disscusion at the conference program. It will probably be a case where real-life copyright issues overtake those related to  Harry and the Ministry of Magic.

You be the judge ! Check out the legal arguments (courtesy of Justia.com) and decide who should be sent to Azkaban !

Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. et al v. RDR Books et al
Plaintiff's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Defendant's RDR Books' Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

What Should We Mean by "Judicial Accountability"

The issue of "judicial accountability" seems to have generated much media coverage and public interest.  A recent article from a state court publication in California, "What Does It Mean to Be Accountable?", takes a broad conceptual view of how judicial accountabilty and the mechanisms for its enforcement, differ from those employed for the other two branches of government. The author argues that policies and procedures for the judiciary need to take account of these differences, if they are to hold judges accountable but also maintain the independence and impartiality of the courts, expected in our system.
Link to article, here, (at page 12 in PDF document)

Earlier this year the Judicial Conference adopted new binding, nationwide rules for judicial conduct and disability. These rules  were developed in response to recommendations made in September 2006 by a special committee chaired by Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer (the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act Study Committee). Justice Breyer stated that,"I am pleased the Judicial Conference has taken action on all of the recommendations of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act Study Committee. The implementation of these new rules is a very good thing for the federal Judiciary and for those who use the federal courts."

See PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED, For aditional suggestions and criticisms of the new rules.

Also see: Judging the Judges, By Mark Hansen , ABA Journal, May 2008

George Carlin Dies - His "7 Bad Words" Led to Supreme Court Case

George Carlin who went from a career as a clean-cut comedian to the irreverent voice of the 1970's counterculture and who was still doing shows, died of heart failure on Sunday at age 71.

"Known for his edgy, provocative material developed over 50 years, the bald, bearded Carlin achieved status as an anti-Establishment icon in the 1970s with stand-up bits full of drug references and a routine called "€œSeven Words You Can Never Say On Television."€ A regulatory battle over a radio broadcast of the routine ultimately reached the U.S. Supreme Court. In the 1978 case, Federal Communications Commission vs. Pacifica Foundation, the top U.S. court ruled that the words cited in Carlin's routine were indecent, and that the government’s broadcast regulator could ban them from being aired at times when children might be listening."
(Source: George Carlin Dies at 71, James Joyner, Outside The Beltway,June 23, 2008 )

Link to Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726,Decided July 3, 1978

Majority by: Stevens Joined by: Burger, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Powell
Concurrence by: Powell Joined by: Blackmun
Dissent by: Brennan Joined by: Marshall
Dissent by: Stewart Joined by: Brennan, White, Marshall

MP3 File recording FCC v. Pacifica Foundation - Opinion Announcement
MP3 File recording of the oral argument before the Court.
The Oyez Project, FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978)

The Kucinich Impeachment Articles & The Presidential Election

On June 10, U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio) introduced articles of impeachment against President Bush in the House of Representatives. Mr. Kucinich had previously tried to bring Vice President Cheney to trial for lying about why the U.S. was going to war in Iraq. The measure has been sent to the House Judiciary committee which will probably be its final resting place.

While many Bush opponents are pleased that the charges will become part of the Congressional Record, many also fear that taking up this issue, in a serious way, before the looming presidential election, will only benefit the Republicans and possibly create a voter backlash that could insure a Republican victory.

They are probably correct in their assessments. But there is a part of Mr. Kucinich's charges that are even more relevant to the coming election. One whole article of the 35 that were presented, is devoted to issues of the subversion and corruption of the electoral process, with many examples drawn from Mr. Kucinich's home state of Ohio. That artice is entitled, "Article XXIX.-CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965". The list of charges of deliberate disenfranchisement of African-American voters and interference with DOJ ( Dept. of Justice) officials who were pursuing lawsuits for violations of  the voting rights of African-Americans and other minorities, should raise serious concerns among voters that the coming election will be "free and fair". Terms that the Bush administration constantly lectures other countries with.

Sources:

Kucinich Forces Vote On Bush's Impeachment
By Ben Pershing, washingtonpost.com,  June 11,2008

Editorial: Articles of Impeachment - Footnote to disaster
Philly.com , Jun. 16, 2008

When is doing the right thing — the wrong thing?
by Stephen P. Pizzo   Atlantic Free Press,  Wednesday, 18 June 2008

Law Professor Cavise Quoted on Changes in Closing Arguments

Law Professor Len Cavise is quoted in a June 16 article from The Daily Herald Newspaper (Suburban Chicago) that examines the possible impact that courtroom dramas and thrillers may be having on juror expectations and in turn how these may be influencing how attorneys present their closing arguments. Professor Cavise's comments from the article:

"The juries definitely want more action in the closing argument," said DePaul University law professor Leonard Cavise. "They want visuals, sound effects. They want lawyers jumping on tables." …

Cavise said the evolution of the closing is part of a natural change in courtroom tactics, which for attorneys, in addition to their clients, is a high-stakes game of win or lose.

"This is war. It's not just TV. It's the nature of the adversarial system," Cavise said, adding, "Only about 2 percent of cases go to trial, so when they are, you go for it."

On the other hand, two local criminal attorneys see influence in the other direction. This may be described as the "CSI effect". Jack Donahue, a Lisle defense attorney,says "But it seems to me as if it's more sterile, because jurors are so focused on the facts." Geneva lawyer D.J. Tegeler agrees, "Theatrics are nice, but juries don't want their time wasted,"... "When you're hoodwinking them, juries know that."

The balance may be tipping toward the over-the-top presentation of a closing argument. The author points out that , “The higher courts are paying attention to closings and in Illinois have ruled prosecutors are barred from trying to anger or prejudice jurors without addressing the issues in a case.” Although, he says that they act only if the arguments egregiously affect the outcome of a case.

If the courts have found it necessary to examine and occassionaly to require a new trial, in some of these criminal cases. Perhaps prosecutors have been more interested in  “…using the closing to seek a conviction, not justice.”

Celebrate "Loving Day"

This day is not yet a "Hallmark Card" holiday and the "Loving" refers to the last name of a couple who were plaintiffs in a very significant U.S. Supremen Court case,Loving vs the State of Virginia (1967). Although the connotation of "loving" does fit the character of the decison which removed the legal barriers against the interracial marriage in the United States.

According to Wikipedia,"Loving Day is an annual celebration held on June 12, the anniversary of the 1967 United States Supreme Court decision Loving v. Virginia which struck down all anti-miscegenation laws remaining in 16 states citing "There can be no doubt that restricting the freedom to marry solely because of racial classifications violates the central meaning of the equal protection clause," In the United States, anti-miscegenation laws were state laws banning interracial marriage, mainly forbidding marriage between non-whites and whites. Loving Day is not an officially, government-recognized holiday, but is celebrated by a growing number of people throughout the United States, especially by those involved in interracial relationships."

The official Loving Day website includes a map of the U.S. which through color coding (no pun intended) is synchronized to clickable  historical dates, to show where and when interracial marriages were legalized. Only seven states never had a restriction: Vermont, New Hampshire, Connetticut,New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin,Minnesotta. The map shows that after the New England area,four Midwestern states( MN, WI,IA, IL) were an area with legal interracial marriages. Most of the West followed over a long period of time. But in the South it took the 1967 Loving decision to do the same.

Even with the Supreme Court decison,in South Carolina it took till 1998 to remove a clause that prohibited "marriage of a white person with a Negro or mulatto or a person who shall have one-eighth or more Negro blood", from the  South Carolina's state constitution. And in Alabama,it took till 2000 to remove an article from the Alabama State Constitution that stated, "The Legislature shall never pass any law to authorize or legalize any marriage between any white person and a Negro, or a descendant of a Negro."
( Courtroom History, Loving Day web site)

Mildred Loving, died on May 2, 2008 at aged 68.Richard Loving died years earlier in a car accident.
See these articles examining their legacy :

Mildred Loving - Mildred Loving, law-changer, died on May 2nd, aged 68
The Economist,  May 15th 2008

LOVING'S LEGACY WILL NOT BE FORGOTTEN
By Frank Thomas Croisdale
Niagara Falls Reporter

Access To Legal Documents - A Tale of Two States

A previous posting on this blog, State statutes: copyright vs. public access,reported how the Oregon's Legislative Counsel Committee was demanding that Justia, a provider of publicly accessible legal resources,take down its copies of the Oregon Revised Statutes, claiming copyright in the arrangement, subject matter, notes, etc. of the statutes. Justia and Public.Resource.Org, have filed a federal law suit in the Northern District of California,against the Legislative Council.

But this kind of confrontation over access to and use of publicly created legal information does not need to be the only model. An example from the May 2008 LLMC ( Law Library Micoform Consortium) Newsletter, provides a very different scenario for the public access use of state-produced legal information, from the state of Maine.

The Hon. Matthew Dunlap, Secretary of State for Maine, has approved a non-exclusive license to LLMC permitting LLMC to offer state copyrighted volumes of the Maine Supreme Court Reports on LLMC-Digital. Using that license they will offer Maine Reports Vol. 123-161, i.e., from 1924 to 1965. (The reason for stopping at 1965 initially is that the State of Maine only holds the copyright for the hardcopy published opinions up to that year. Sub-sequent reports of the Maine Supreme Court were officially reported only in the Atlantic Reporter, 2nd Series.) LLMC expect that these books will be scanned and mounted online before the end of the summer.

This fortuitous outcome came about  through the enterprise and perseverance of John Barden,the State Law Librarian for Maine. He is working with other Maine state agencies to make additional titles available for scanning by LLMC. Thanks also to the enlightened outlook of the Maine Secretary of State in making  these legal documents more accessible to the public.

Source: LLMC Newsletter, Issue 29, May 15,2008 ( Online link will be provided when available)

New Museum Acquisition Guidelines Released - But Not Uncontested

Law Professor Patty Gerstenblith has been quoted in a New York Times article examining the new guidelines for how art museums should collect antiquities.

“The Association of Art Museum Directors, whose 190 members also include leaders of Canadian and Mexican museums, says the new policy will probably make it even more difficult for museums to build antiquities collections through purchases or, as is more often the case,through gifts and bequests from wealthy private collectors. But they assert that the change will help stanch the flow of objects illegally dug up from archaeological sites or other places.”

Professor Gerstenblith expressed some reservations regarding the effectiveness of the new policies:

“ "On an overarching level this is a significant step forward," said Patty Gerstenblith, a law professor at DePaul University in Chicago and the president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation.

Still, she added, “the fact that a museum can use its own informed judgment obviously leaves a lot of discretion, a lot of room for exceptions.”

Ms. Gerstenblith also criticized the spirit of the guidelines, which speak primarily of the museums’ need to balance acquisitions against potential harm to their reputations or to their finances should they have to return a valuable object that is later found to have been looted. “It does not seem to take into account the possible damage to the world’s cultural heritage and to archaeological sites in source countries,” she said.' ”

Interestingly, a new book by James Cuno, president and director of the Art Institute of Chicago, entitled “Who Owns Antiquity?”, takes a strongly contrarian position that the national governments of countries containing antiquities should not have the primary say in where such items should be housed and studied.

Mr. Cuno, given his position, must have had input into the process that lead to the new guidelines for museums. But putting his views into a book that is released on heels of the presentation of these policies, moves the debate into a much broader public arena.

See  Commentary : Who Owns Antiquity? In a controversial new book, Art Institute president James Cuno argues that museums should trump nations.
Chicago Reader,  By Deanna Isaacs,  June 5, 2008

City Appeals Ruling From Civil Suit That Became Confidential Police Records Issue

Yesterday, in a court hearing before a panel of the the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the City of Chicago appealed a ruling this past Summer by Judge Lefkow that the Chicago Police Dept. was required to release records of complaints against police officers. The records were made available to the court as part of civil law suit by Diane Bond, a Chicago Housing Authority resident, against five Chicago police officers alleging sexual, physical and psychological abuse.

The case against the police officers was actually settled on March 23, 2007. However, the issue of the public release of the complaints became an issue because Jamie Klaven, a independent journalist, petitioned to intervene in the case. Klaven wanted the court to strike the confidential designation of the documents in question and to make them publicly accessible. Klaven did not make use of a first amendment argument but rather on the provisions of a rule ( Rule 26 (c) ) of the Federal Rules of  Civil Procedure which permit, in the absence of a “good cause”, the party receiving the materials to make them public.

On July 2, 2007, Judge Lefkow ruled in favor of Klaven, stating that “The fact that the allegations of police misconduct contained in the requested materials would bring unwanted, negative attention on defendants is not a basis for shielding the materials from public disclosure. The public has significant interest in monitoring the conduct of its police officers and a right to know how allegations of misconduct are being investigated and handled.”

On July 9, 2007, in response to an emergency motion by the City, Judge Lefkow granted a stay of her order until 5:00 PM on July 16.On July 16,2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued a stay pending the City's appeal of Judge Lefkow's ruling.

Since that time, other parties have joined the suit. Alderman from the Chicago City Council who said they too had been denied access to the documents joined the suit. Also several media organizations have filed a brief in the case supporting the release of the documents.

The panel of  justices including Michael Kanne, Diane Sykes and John Tinder will deliver  a written ruling at a later time.

           ******************************************
SOURCES:

Federal appeals court hears arguments over release of Chicago police files
Chicago Tribune, June 3, 2008

U.S. Court of Appeals stays Lefkow order to unseal documents pending appeal by City
The View From The Ground, July 23rd, 2007

Hidden From Public View
By: Jennifer Chen, Kimbriell Kelly and Jeff Kelly Lowenstein
The Chicago Reporter

CASE DOCUMENTS :

Bond v. Utreras , Case 1:04-cv-02617 Document 268 Filed 07/02/2007

Jamie Klave’s Petition To Intervene

Chicago Police Dept & City of Chicago Emergency Motion For Stay Pending Appeal

Appellee-Intervenor’s Response To Appellants’ Emergency Motion To Stay

Center for Latino Research Lecture - Federal Courts and Immigration Appeals

     Anna O. Law Faculty Home Page

Four BAR/BRI Law Suits - Two To Pay Out, Two Dismissed

Anthony S. Park, et al., v. The Thomson Corporation and Thomson Legal and Regulatory, Inc., Case No. 05 Civ. 2931 (WHP)

PARK BAR/BRI Settlement Website (estimated $30 - $40 per class member)

Settlement Agreement

        >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Rodriguez, Ret. al v. West Publishing Corp., d/b/a BAR/BRI, and Kaplan, Inc., Case No. CV-05-3222 R (MCx)

BAR/BRI Class Action Website   (claim form for  $125 )

Settlement Agreement

        >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

For following cases,information was gathered from the US Courts, PACER service :

Stephen Stetson v. West Publishing Corp., No. 2:08-cv-00810 (C.D. Calif.)

Antitrust Complaint Against BARBRI Stetson

Dismissal Stetson Antitrust Case BARBRI

        >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

JEFFREY PROVENZANO et. al. v. THE THOMSON CORPORATION and WEST, PUBLISHING CORPORATION   No. 1:07-CV-00746 (N.D.  N.Y. )

Brief case Information

Dismissal Provenzano Fraud Complaint Against BARBRI

DePaul Researcher Co-authors Study On Chicago Sex Trafficking

On May 7 The Schiller DuCanto & Fleck Family Law Center at the DePaul University College of Law held a press conference at the downtown campus to announce the release of an important research study on  Domestic sex trafficking of Chicago women and girls, by Jody Raphael, Senior Research Fellow DePaul University College of Law and  Jessica Ashley, Senior Research Analyst Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.

The press release says the study, “was conducted in conjunction with the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority and funded by a grant from the Chicago Foundation for Women. It examined the strategies used to recruit young women; the levels of coercion involved in their recruitment; and the control and violence used to keep women in the trade. The research also examined the geographical areas in which women are forced to work, including the distances they are transported and whether state lines are crossed in the process. One of the goals of the investigation was to explore parallels between young women in the local sex trade and those internationally trafficked to Chicago.

“This new information raises serious issues that Chicago communities must confront about the exploitation of needy girls within their midst to meet the sexual needs of male customers,” said Jody Raphael, an attorney and senior research fellow at the Family Law Center who led the investigation. “Like the responses provided to victims of international trafficking, alternatives to charging, sentencing and incarceration need to be implemented in a way that offers needed social service programming and housing, all supported with adequate resources.”

Link to the study from DePaul, From the ICJIA

Excellent article on the study and the issues it raises, Satisfied Sex Worker or Domestic Trafficking Victim? By Kari Lydersen, AlterNet.  May 8, 2008.

State statutes: copyright vs. public access

Once upon a time, the only way to access cases, statutes, and regulations was in hardcopy at a library, or via subscription databases like Westlaw and Lexis.  Over the past decade or so, sites like Justia, the LII, and others have made these primary legal sources avalable to the public. But while federal legislative and judicial materials generally go into the public domain, the status of state materials isn't so clear.

Via the Volokh Conspiracy, it appears that Oregon has demanded that publicly accessible legal resources cease to carry the Oregon Revised Statutes, claiming a copyright for the state's Legislative Counsel Committee, not in the text of the statutes themselves, but in the arrangement, subject matter, notes, etc.  (Documents available at the OLC's site.)

The Committee notes that the statutes are freely available on the state's own site.  On the other hand, restricting the statutes in this way limits the possibilities for other vendors to provide better search engines, improved display options, and integration with other resources that would benefit public users.

Copyright is a limited monopoly intended to encourage the creation of artistic and other creative endeavors by allowing the creator to profit from it; whether the state of Oregon needs such an incentive to produce laws is, at least, an open question.  Current copyright law may well give the state the legal right to limit the distribution of its statutes in this way, but it's difficult to see the public interest in doing so.

Summit on Wrongful Convictions to be held May 8 at Texas State Capitol

In the last few days there have several news stories about the growing number of exonerations of prioners in Texas who were convicted for serious crimes. Due to the work of the Innocense Project of New York City and the determination of the new Dallas District Attorney Craig Watkins, 17 men have been exonerated so far by DNA evidence in Dallas County, which has more DNA exonerations than any other county in the nation. At the state level in Texas, 31 people have been exonerated, more than any other state.
( Source: DNA frees man who spent almost 23 years in prison for rape, By Jeff  Carlton )

“As a result of the unprecedented number of exonerations in Texas, key leaders from across the state will gather in Austin on May 8 for a landmark Summit on Wrongful Convictions. Judges, lawmakers, defense attorneys, prosecutors, exonerees, professors and many others will come together for the Summit. The Summit will mark the first time any state’s criminal justice leaders have initiated a high-level meeting themselves to address wrongful convictions. Texas State Senator Rodney Ellis is spearheading the Summit, and Innocence Project Co-Director Barry Scheck will attend. The Summit will be open to the public.”
( Source; As 18th Person is Freed Based on DNA in Dallas, Summit on Wrongful Convictions in Texas Is Set for May 8 )

The Innocence Project is a non-profit legal clinic affiliated with the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University and created by Barry C. Scheck and Peter J. Neufeld in 1992. The project is a national litigation and public policy organization dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted people through DNA testing and reforming the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice. As a clinic, law students handle case work while supervised by a team of attorneys and clinic staff.

     **************************************************

Other coverage of story:

18th Innocent Man Freed in 1 Texas County; Officials Vow Change
By Martha Neil, ABA Journal, Apr 30, 2008

Two Incredible Men - One in jail, and one that got him out.
The Freedom Files, columnist: RS Davis

Student helps free man imprisoned in Dallas 27 years
By MAX B. BAKER, Star-Telegram Staff Writer

Reconciling Law Day and May Day ?

Today on May 1ST in Chicago, thousands of people are expected to march dowtown for immigrant rights. Over the last couple years these marches in major U.S. cities have almost become a tradition. This harkens back to the historical links that Chicago has with the origin of May 1ST as an international  workers’ holiday.( See May Day as the Labor Day )

However, ever since President Dwight D. Eisenhower proclaimed "May 1 Law Day, U.S.A.",  in 1958, stating that  “…free people can assure the blessings of liberty for themselves only if they recognize the necessity that the rule of law shall be supreme and that all men shall be equal before the law.”  May 1St has been officially celebrated in the U.S. as Law Day, as codified by Public Law 87-20 in 1961.  The American Bar Association   (ABA) has taken the lead in popularizing & celebrating Law Day.

Interestingly, the theme chosen by the ABA for the 2008 celebration seems to bring the spirit of both these manifestations of the May 1ST holiday, together !  Not necessarily in full agreement but at least in mutual support for common goals.

The theme of Law Day 2008 is:

The Rule of Law: Foundations for Communities of Opportunity and Equity.

"Many people do not make the connection between the rule of law and their daily lives—their safety, jobs, health, education, and infrastructure. Advancing the rule of law helps achieve an array of public benefits. We all have a stake in the rule of law,and we all can do our part to strengthen it.

The rule of law refers to a system of self-government with a strong and accessible legal process. It features a system based on fair, publicized, broadly understood and stable laws, and diverse, competent, and independent lawyers and judges. This foundation is essential to foster sustainable communities of opportunity and equity.

Without the rule of law, individuals are consigned to live in societies characterized by violence, poverty, illness, and ignorance."

Source : ABA Law Day, May 1, 2008 brochure

Local Law Student Fortuitously Contributes to Work of International Tribunal

This past Friday, DePaul’s International Human Rights Law Institute ( IHRLI )  co- sponsored a conference on the role of the International Criminal Court ( ICC ), ten years after its creation. (See blog posting: Midwest Regional Conference on International Justice ) . In addition to the ICC there are several conflict-specific regional international tribunals that have been formed to deal with accountability for war crimes in these conflicts. The Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia is one such tribunal that the IHRLI has been closely involved with.

Coincidentally, in today’s Chicago Tribune there is a very interesting story about, Andrew Strong, a law student from the Chicago-Kent school of law who through being at the right place at the right time, took advantage of an opportunity to became an important part of a defense team for one of the defendants before this tribunal. In addition to the personal courage and prodigous work of Mr. Strong, the story shows the importance of providing a credible defense for the defendants, for having such tribunals regarded as genuinely fair judicial proceedings.

See story:  War crimes trial a lifetime's lesson for Chicago man
By Christine Spolar, Tribune correspondent, April 29, 2008

See official tribunal press release re. the case, here.

EPA Report To Congress On Re-opening EPA Libraries

 
In  a previous blog posting earlier this year, it was reported that after considerable lobbying by EPA library employees, library associations, practicing scientists and public users, Congress provided for the re-opening of EPA libraies that were closed by EPA management in 2006.

In the March 26, 2008, EPA National Library Network Report to Congress the EPA descibes its overall plan to carry out the congressional mandate. This will include re-opening four of the closed regional libraries including the one in Chicago, Illinois, on or before September 30, 2008. This is what the report says specifically about the Chicago site :

“EPA will re-establish an on-site library in Chicago’s Region 5 facility. Appropriate space is currently being identified and will be designed to provide facilities for library operations, including library staff functions, patron-staff interactions, and an onsite collection. Region 5 will retain a professional library staff to provide on-site support to EPA staff and the public. The Region 5 Library will institute and maintain an on-site collection of core reference materials and additional library resources to meet specific local needs. Region 5 will provide core library services to EPA staff, including Reference/Research Assistance and Interlibrary Loan/Document Delivery, and will provide public access to the library and its collection.”

This is great news and the EPA management should be commended for follwing through on the legislative provision. However, the report also contains language that seems to minimize the damage done by the closings and to re-assert a rationale that was exposed to be disingenuous by the stakeholders mentioned above.  By claiming that the closings were mainly just “changes in physical structure” that did not  seriously affect their users. EPA management is trying to dodge the critiques that finally lead Congress to act to re-establish the libraries. Also by stating that “EPA remains fully committed to meet customer needs by harnessing technology”, as if that objective was somehow resisted by EPA employees  and library users. Also  keeps alive the non-issue that was used as a cover for dismantaling the physical library locations.

While the movement is in the right direction, it appears that the mis-guided management assumptions and the un-acknowledged political pressures from the Adminstration,  are still alive and well among EPA management. While EPA employees and other stakeholder should definitely engage with the EPA to move in a positive direction. They need to remain vigilant so that what some have  characterized as actions of “Orwellian” dimensions, do not get imposed again.

"CLEAR Initiative" Symposium On Revision of Illinois Criminal Code

Today the the “CLEAR Initiative” is sponsoring a day-long symposium on the comprehensive revisions for codification in Illinois' Criminal Code at the John Marshall Law School, 315 S. Plymouth Court Chicago, IL .

“Illinois' Criminal Code was last rewritten 45 years ago. Those using the code today recognize its redundancies, inconsistencies and confusing language. Through the Criminal Law Edit, Align and Reform (CLEAR) Initiative, the state is working on a new Criminal Code that is less complex, easier to comprehend and includes the same crimes and punishments enacted by past legislatures.

The John Marshall Law Review will publish its spring 2008 issue as a symposium issue that will contain legal analysis of the new code by Professor Timothy O'Neill and other criminal law experts from academe, as well as public officials and members of the bench and bar. That issue will become the official report for the code's commentary and future court decisions will cite to it.”

( Source: John Marshall Law Review Plans Program on Criminal Code Revisions, In the Loop, March 16 - 22, 2008 )

John F. Decker, Emeritus Professor of Law at DePaul University Law School, is the Special Advisor to the CLEAR Initiative.

See previous blog posting, CLEAR Commission Panel Discussion at DePaul, April 24, 2007

Former Appellate Justice R. Eugene Pincham Dies

Former judge, mayoral candidate R. Eugene Pincham dies
Crains Chicago Business, April 03, 2008

"R. Eugene Pincham, a former judge who spent much of his career as a civil rights attorney defending people he believed had been wronged by the criminal justice system, died Thursday. He was 82.

Pincham, a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago, was one of the most well-known defense attorneys in the city and a vocal critic of police and the courts.

... In a prepared statement, the Rev. Jesse Jackson praised Pincham."He aided so many, who could not afford a lawyer or had access to a judge, and brought them justice," Jackson said."

Also see :  Former Appellate Justice R. Eugene Pincham Dies
cbs2chicago.com  Apr 3, 2008

Two Exemplary Local Lawyers Pass Away This Week

Fred Herzog, Dean Emeritus of The John Marshall Law School,age 100, died on March 21.

"Fred F. Herzog had been appointed a judge for life in Austria in 1935, but as a Jew he was removed three years later in the wake of Hitler's invasion. He fled to Sweden and later settled in the U.S., eventually coming to Chicago and making a name for himself in the Chicago and Illinois legal communities.

In his adopted country, he resumed a legal career that began with a 1942 degree from the University of Iowa College of Law. He spent 25 years at the Chicago-Kent College of Law as professor, associate dean and dean, and he was first assistant attorney general in Illinois from 1972 to 1976. Mr. Herzog's career culminated as dean of the John Marshall Law School from 1976 to 1983."

(Source: Fred F. Herzog: 1907 - 2008; As dean, helped law school grow.  Jeff Long. Chicago Tribune. Chicago, Ill.: Mar 26, 2008. pg. 11 )

A Memorial Tribute to Dean Emeritus Fred Herzog

In honor of his long, distinguished career, his contributions to Chicago-Kent and the Chicago legal community, and a special induction into the IIT hall of fame, please join us for a memorial tribute : Monday, April 7, 2008, 5:30 - 7:30 PM, Chicago-Kent College of Law  565 W. Adams St, 10th Floor, Chicago, IL 60661
Please RSVP to alums@kentlaw.edu or call (312) 906-5240

         ************************************************************

Former Appellate Court Judge Edward Egan 84,died on March 26.

"After the War [World War II] , Mr. Egan used the G.I. Bill to become the first member in his family to attend college, graduating from DePaul University Law School in 1949 before embarking on a legal career that stretched across six decades."

His many positions in public service included : Cook County assistant state's attorney, Judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois Appellate Court Judge, general attorney for the Chicago Transit Authority,  appointment to the Illinois Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission, special prosecutor responsible for investigating the police torture allegations.

( Source: Edward Egan, Appellate Court judge - As a prosecutor, he investigated claims of torture under former Chicago Cmd. Jon Burge. By Monique Garcia, Chicago Tribune, March 28, 2008 )

See also:  Legal giant from Orland Park dies at 84
By Abdon M. Pallasch,March 28, 2008   
southtownstar.com (Sun-Times News Group)

"60 Minutes" Segment on the Local Case of Alton Logan

This past Sunday, the  television news program, "60 Minutes", featured a story about a Chicago resident , Alton Logan, who has been in jail for 26 years for a killing, that lawyers, Dale Coventry and Jamie Kunz, have known he did not commit. One of  the clients of the two attorneys, was Andrew Wilson, who confessed to them that he was the one who had killed the person that Logan had been convicted of murdering. When questioned why they had not disclosed this information to possibly exonerate Mr. Logan, the attorneys said that they were bound by the requirements of legal ethics provisions and their duty to their own client,not to subject him to trial for a capital offense. Fortunately for Mr. Logan, Mr. Wilson recently died in prison after having given the attorneys permission to disclose his confession after his death.

The case raises the question whether the attorneys were upholding the integrity of the legal system by safeguarding client-lawyer confidentiality or whether they chose priorities that could have cost an innocent person a life sentence in prison. The attorneys stated that it was a tough decision for them but that they would have to stand by it, unless Mr. Logan had been threatened with execution.

Professor Andrea Lyon, the director of the DePaul Center for Justice in Capital Cases, worked with the two attorneys in defending Mr. Wilson, their client. As a practical matter she considered Mr. Wilson to be her client as well. So she also was among the attorneys who decided not disclose the confession.

Back on January 31st , a Chicago Reader article had explored this case in depth. It presents considerably more information than the television interview and also takes an editorial position re. the choices made by the attorneys involved. It’s worth a look especially since the case has now received such national exposure.

SOURCES :

26-Year Secret Kept Innocent Man In Prison
Lawyers Tell 60 Minutes They Were Legally Bound From Revealing Secret
CBS News, 60 Minutes

26-Year Secret Kept Innocent Man In Prison
March 10, 2008,   WBBM Newsradio 780,

The Greater of Two Evils - When is it OK to let an innocent man rot in jail?
By Michael Miner  Chicago Reader,  January 31, 2008

Follow-up addendum :

After 26 years, a taste of freedom
New trial ordered in '82 slaying of guard
By Steve Schmadeke, Tribune reporter, April 18, 2008
chicagotribune.com

Law Professor Gerstenblith Quoted in Stolen Antiquties Story

Federal government agents have conducted raids on four museums & an art gallery in southern California. The information from the search warrants indicates that these were the result of a five year undecover operation by the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement office, the National Park Service and the criminal investigation division of the Internal Revenue Service, investigating the illegal importation of antiquities from Thailand, Myanmar and China. It is alleged that the museums & gallery were aware of or should have been aware of, the illegal status of the materials which were donated to or purchased by them. The investigation has also been looking at stolen artifacts from Guatemala and El Salvador.

A Chicago connection has emerged from this investigation. Mr. Barry L. MacLean, an art collector and industrialist who is a vice chairman of the Art Institute of Chicago and who maintains a museum, known as the MacLean Collection, in Libertyville, Ill., north of Chicago, has been accused of buying artifacts looted in Cambodia, Thailand, Myanmar and Vietnam. These were apparently for his own museum. The Art Institute of Chicago said the museum had no works in its collection donated by Mr. MacLean.

DePaul law professor & specialist in cultural heritage law, Patty Gerstenblith, was quoted in the, Jan. 26, New York Times story:

“Museums are in a sense just turning a blind eye to what everybody knows in their heart of hearts is going on,” … “By not thinking about what they buy, they are putting money into an international network of smugglers, looters, thieves and destroyers. As educational institutions, museums have a responsibility to look beyond that particular object” that they may be acquiring.

Sources:

Museum Workers Are Called Complicit    By EDWARD WYATT
New York Times, January 26, 2008

Four California Museums Are Raided By EDWARD WYATT
New York Times, January 25, 2008

Papers Show Wider Focus in Inquiry of Artifacts  By EDWARD WYATT
New York Times, January 30, 2008

Afgan Student Sentenced to Death For Sharing Printouts Questioning Islam

A story about a trial in Afghanistan posted today on cnet News.com, indicates what a long way to go projects like our own IHRLI/ISISC Provincial Justice Initiative ( International Human Right Law Institute/International Institute of higher Studies in Criminal Sciences), have to go in the reform of the justice sector in that country. According to the article, “A 23-year-old Afghani journalism student is facing a death sentence in his home country for distributing articles allegedly critical of Islam that he had printed from a Web site, according to various news reports.” The student has been held since October and reportedly had no lawyer at the closed-door, three-judge session that resulted in the death sentence.

The legal basis claimed for the alleged crime is "judicial discretion" that finds  the student to have been, "insulting Islam and Prophet Mohammad." Besides the very questionalble legal basis for this decision, it is even of more concern that this happened in the capital city Kabul. This is said to be one of the areas that has had the majority of attention and resources dedicated to justice sector reform projects.

Apparently calls for the intervention of President Karzai have yield no results. One might expect this kind of trial in the more distant and isolated provinces where Taliban exerts greater influence. But to have it happen in Kabul shows how difficult it can be trying to develop a “justice sector” in a society where religion and the state are perceived as being conjoint.

Also see:

Shock at death sentence passed on young journalist for blasphemy
Reporters Without Borders

U of C Law School Study of Chicago Police Disciplinary Practices

Craig Futterman, a Clinical Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School, Melissa Mather, a Clinical Lecturer, and Melanie Miles, a recent law graduate, have released a major study of the Chicago Police Department’s supervisory and disciplinary practices: “The Use of Statistical Evidence to Address Police Supervisory and Disciplinary Practices: The Chicago Police Department’s Broken System"  (Preliminary Draft). This study presents a comprehensive analysis, based on the most current statistics, of the CPD’s “broken system” for investigating complaints of civilian abuse.

(Source: Edwin F. Mandel Legal Aid Clinic, Civil Rights and Police Accountability Project news release)

You can read the study here  (PDF, 456K)

   **********************************************************
News stories about the study :

Certain areas have more bad cops, attorney says                                                                                     By Michael Higgins,  Chicago Tribune staff reporter

Chicago Police Abuse Cases Exceed Average
By SUSAN SAULNY, New York Times

Official GITMO Manual Leaked Through Website

From WIRED.com news story :

Sensitive Guantánamo Bay Manual Leaked Through Wiki Site
By Ryan Singel

“A never-before-seen military manual detailing the day-to-day operations of the U.S. military's Guantánamo Bay detention facility has been leaked to the web, affording a rare inside glimpse into the institution where the United States has imprisoned hundreds of suspected terrorists since 2002.  The 238-page document, "Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures," is dated March 28, 2003. It is unclassified, but designated "For Official Use Only." It hit the web last Wednesday on Wikileaks.org."

The Wikileaks site provides this short summary:

“Joint Task Force Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO) standard operating procedures (SOP) for Camp Delta (Guantanamo Bay prison). This is the primary document for the operation of Guantanamo bay, including the securing and treatment of detainees. The document is extensive and includes, in addition to text various forms, identity cards and even Muslim burial instructions. It is signed by Major General Miller, who Donald Rumsfeld later sent to Abu Ghraib to "Gitmoize it". The document is also the subject of an ongoing legal action between the ACLU, which has been trying to obtain it, and the Department of Defense, which has withheld it in full…”

Wikileaks link to full PDF file of the manual

Religious Books Restored to Federal Prison Libraries

Following up on the recommendations of 2004 report by the Office of the Inspector General in the Justice Department, to take steps to reduce the possibility of recruitment to radical religious groups within federal prisons, the Federal Bureau of Prisons instituted a chapel library program to limit holdings to 150 book titles and 150 multimedia resources for each of 20 religions or religious categories they identified. The Bureau had previously instructed the prison chapel libraries to remove all materials by nine publishers, some Muslim, some Christian. All other materials already in chapel libraries were to be removed. This policy lead to thousands of donated texts being removed.

But prisoners and prison chaplains, and groups that minister to prisoners protested that these measures depleted the libraries and denied prisoner access to religious materials, beyond any legitimate security concerns of the Bureau. “It’s swatting a fly with a sledgehammer,” said Mark Earley, president of Prison Fellowship, a Christian group. “There’s no need to get rid of literally hundreds of thousands of books that are fine simply because you have a problem with an isolated book or piece of literature that presents extremism.” Also, “…chaplains routinely reject any materials that incite violence or disparage, and donated materials already had to be approved by prison officials.”

Two prisoners from Federal Prison Camp in Otisville, N.Y., about 75 miles northwest of Manhattan, filed a pro se suit against the policy raising raises serious First Amendment concerns. Later, lawyers at the New York firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison took on the case pro bono. In the suit, Milstein v.  Federal Bureau of Prisons, they claim that, “This purge is an unnecessary, unconstitutional, and unlawful restriction of the ability of federal inmates nationwide to practice and learn about their religion, and has substantially burdened their ability to exercise their religion.” Sympathic individuals and groups sent over 21,000 emails in just over a week, lobbying for a change in the Bureau’s policy.

Apparently, the extent of this challenge lead the Bureau to rescind their policy of limiting the number of books  and other materials in  the chapel libraries. On September 26, 2007,  a statement from the Bureau stated that,  “The Bureau of Prisons is committed to providing inmates all appropriate materials that support the pursuit of religious interests and commitments as well as other opportunities for self improvement. At the same time, the agency is committed to ensuring that we maintain the safety and security of staff, inmates and the community.

In response to concerns expressed by members of several religious communities, the Bureau of Prisons has decided to alter its planned course of action with respect to the Chapel Library Project. The Bureau will begin immediately to return to chapel libraries materials that were removed in June 2007, with the exception of any publications that have been found to be inappropriate, such as material that could be radicalizing or incite violence. The review of all materials in chapel libraries will be completed by the end of January 2008.”

              *******************************************

Sources :

New York Times Article : “Prisons Purging Books on Faith From Libraries”, By Larie Goodstein

beliefnet.com : “Karl Barth Belongs in Prison”   by Kevin Lum
                       “Karl Barth Is Going Back to Prison!”, by Kevin Lum

From NPR.org : “Prisons to Remove Unapproved Religious Books”

Complaint in Milstein v.  Federal Bureau of Prisons ( First 6 pages )

Addendum:

See also :  "The Word Unchained - A Saga of Religiois Materials in the Prison System"
                  By Gethan Ward
                  Liberty Online, A magazine of relious liberty, March 13, 2008                   

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Memoir Released Today

   From:  Fort Wayne Journal Gazette article :

  “My Grandfather’s Son,” for which Thomas has received a reported $1.5 million, is    a 289-page [304] memoir of his life in rural Georgia, his reliance on religious faith and his rise to the Supreme Court. His book ends with the day he was sworn in and contains only fleeting mentions of his time on the bench.

Thomas lovingly describes the iron-willed grandfather who raised him after his own father abandoned him as a toddler; critically admires the Catholic church that provided him with an education but was not as “adamant about ending racism then as it is about ending abortion now”; and gives a detailed description of the confirmation hearings that electrified the nation in 1991 and the sexual harassment allegations by Anita Hill that he said destroyed his reputation.

They are the most extensive comments Thomas has made about Hill since his confirmation. Although he has given numerous speeches since he has been on the court, he has rarely mentioned Hill or spoken in detail about the nomination fight.

In the book, Thomas writes that Hill was the tool of liberal activist groups “obsessed” with abortion and outraged because he did not fit their idea of what a black man should believe. ...

     *********************************************************

Publisher’s web page

Other news stories:

An Angry Justice Thomas Targets Liberal Groups
By Debra Cassens Weiss ,  ABA Journal online

In New Book, Justice Thomas Weighs In on Former Accuser
By NEIL A. LEWIS ,   New York Times online

Clarence Thomas: The Justice Nobody Knows
Supreme Court Justice Gives First Television Interview To 60 Minutes' Steve Kroft

Additional Sections of Patriot Act Ruled Unconstitutional

There was a second judicial rebuff this month to provisions of the Patriot Act,in an opinion handed down yesterday by Judge Anne L. Aiken of Federal District Court in Portland in the case of  MAYFIELD v. UNITED STATES of AMERICA. ( see posting on previous case )

Brandon Mayfield, is a lawyer in Portland who was arrested and jailed after the Federal Bureau of Investigation mistakenly linked him to the Madrid train bombings in March 2004. They had mis-identified a fingerprint found at the Spanish site. Under current Patriot Act provisions the FBI mounted an investigation that, “Mayfield claimed in the suit, that his home and law offices were secretly broken into by the FBI, his clients' files at his office were searched, his business and personal computers were secretly copied, his telephone was wiretapped and his home was bugged.”
( Source: “Federal judge rules 2 Patriot Act provisions unconstitutional” )

The government reached a settlement after acknowledging that the finger print was not Mr. Mayfield’s. But he was allowed to continue his legal challenge to the provisions of the Patriot Act. Judge Aiken ruled in favor of Mr. Mayfield’s challenges. In her opinion, Judge Aiken stated that,

“Prior to the Patriot Act, the government was required to certify that the primary purpose of its surveillance was to obtain foreign intelligence information. The Patriot Act now authorizes FISA surveillance and searches as long as a significant purpose of the surveillance and searches is the gathering of foreign intelligence. 50 U.S.C. §§ 1804(a)(7)(B) and 1823(a)(7)(B). This amendment allows the government to obtain surveillance orders under FISA even if the government's primary purpose is to gather evidence of domestic criminal activity.

The practical result of this amendment, objected to by plaintiffs, is that in criminal investigations, the government can now avoid the Fourth Amendment's probable cause requirement when conducting surveillance or searches of a criminal suspect's home or office merely by asserting a desire to also gather foreign intelligence information from the person whom the government intends to criminally prosecute. The government is now authorized to conduct physical searches and electronic surveillance upon criminal suspects without first proving to an objective and neutral magistrate that probable cause exists to believe that a crime has been committed.”…

“Therefore, I conclude that 50 U.S.C. §§ 1804 and 1823, as amended by the Patriot Act, are unconstitutional because they violate the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint for declaratory relief is granted.” …

     **********************************************************

The judge's opinion and order

The civil rights violation complaint

In re Sealed Case. A 2002 opinion from the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review  whose anaysis and conclusion, Judge Aiken questioned and declined to adopt in reaching a conclusion in the Mayfield case.

A Conversation with the Judiciary - A Proposal for Volunteer Judges to Hear Patent Cases

A congressional bill ( H.R.34) has sought to establish a pilot project for the federal distirct courts to test the voluntary designation of  judges to hear patent cases, to attempt to enhance the relevant expertise brought to hearing these types of cases. A recent article in the publication “The Third Branch” describes the aim of the proposed legislation.

Patent Case Assignment Pilot Program

"The House passed H.R. 34 in mid-February, a bill that would establish a pilot program in at least five U.S. district courts “to encourage enhancement of expertise in patent cases among district judges.” The bill is now pending in the Senate.

Introducing the legislation, Representative Darrell E. Issa (R-CA) said that, “The core intent of this pilot is to steer patent cases to judges that have the desire and aptitude to hear patent cases, while preserving random assignment as much as possible.” The pilot program would terminate in 10 years, and periodic studies would occur to determine its success. Under the legislation, the Director of the Administrative Office would designate “not less than 5 United States district courts, in at least 3 different judicial circuits” to participate in the pilot program, choosing the courts “from among the 15 district courts in which the largest number of patent and plant variety protection cases were filed in the most recent calendar year.”

The Judicial Conference has not taken a position on the patent pilot project legislation; however, the Conference has a long-standing position favoring the random assignment of federal cases filed. Last Congress, the House passed the same bill where it enjoyed bipartisan support and backing from many intellectual property associations. H.R. 34 is now pending in the Senate."

( Source: The Third Branch Vol.39,No.4 — April 2007 )

The DePaul Center for Intellectual Property Law & Information Technology will be hosting three Illinois federal district court judges to discuss this proposal on Wednesday, October 24, 2007, 12 - 1:30pm at the DePaul Center, 1 E. Jackson Blvd., room 8005. See link for participant information and contact.

New Commemorative Stamp for Medez v. Westminster, Significant 1940's Civil Rights Case

"A World War II-era legal case in which a group of civic-minded parents in California successfully sued to end segregation based on national origin in their schools, the Mendez et al. v. Westminster School District of Orange County et al. court case will be remembered on a U.S. postage stamp during its 60th anniversary.

…Thurgood Marshall was one of the authors of an amicus brief submitted by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in the Mendez case. That brief later served as a model for the argument used in Brown v. Board of Education."
( Source: http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/2007/pr07_038bkgrnd.htm )

       **********************************************

"La causa caratulada Mendez et al. v. Westminster School District of Orange County et al., demanda judicial de la época de la Segunda Guerra Mundial que entabló con éxito un grupo de padres de California, conscientes de sus derechos civiles, a efectos de poner fin a la segregación por nacionalidad en las escuelas, será conmemorada en una estampilla postal al cumplirse el 60º aniversario.

… Thurgood Marshall había sido uno de los autores de una opinión respecto del caso Mendez presentada por la National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Dicha opinión sirvió como modelo para el argumento usado en la causa Brown v. Board of Education."
(Source: http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/2007/pr07_038bkgrndspan.htm )

     *************************************************

Text of opinion, 64 F. Supp. 544 ( 1946)

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND NOTES - Extensive annotated bibliography of court  documents, newspaper articles, interview transcripts etc.

Federal Court Strikes Down National Security Letter Provision of Patriot Act

The case, Doe v. Gonzales, was originally filed in April 2004 [ by the ACLU ] on behalf of an anonymous Internet access company that had received an NSL. [ National Security Letter ]

The government appealed Judge Marrero's first ruling, but Congress amended the NSL provision before the court issued a decision. In May 2006 the appeals court asked the district court to consider the constitutionality of the amended law. In a concurring opinion, Judge Richard Cardamone strongly criticized the government for continuing to argue that a permanent ban on speech would be permissible under the First Amendment.

A federal court today struck down the amended Patriot Act's National Security Letter (NSL) provision. The law has permitted the FBI to issue NSLs demanding private information about people within the United States without court approval, and to gag those who receive NSLs from discussing them. The court found that the gag power was unconstitutional and that because the statute prevented courts from engaging in meaningful judicial review of gags, it violated the First Amendment and the principle of separation of powers.

( Source: ACLU  Press Release )

From Court Order :

“IV. CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, the Court concludes that § 2709(c) is unconstitutional under the First Amendment because it functions as a licensing scheme that does not afford adequate procedural safeguards, and because it is not a sufficiently narrowly tailored restriction on protected speech. Because the Court finds that § 2709(c) cannot be severed from the remainder of the statute, the Court finds the entirety of § 2709 unconstitutional. Additionally, the Court concludes that § 3511(b) is unconstitutional under the First Amendment and the doctrine of separation of powers.”

…“The court has granted a 90 days stay “intended to give the Government the opportunity to move this Court, or the Court of Appeals, for whatever appropriate relief it may seek to maintain the confidentiality of any information implicated by the Court’s ruling.”

Link to full court order,here.

Link to Sections  2709 and  3511 U.S. Code, here.

EPA Employees Score FLRA Win To Keep Information Accessible

PUBLIC ACCESS TO EPA LIBRARY HOLDINGS IN JEOPARDY
Agency Refuses to Consult with Its Own Scientists; Arbitration Hearing Scheduled

"Washington, DC — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is finalizing procedures that may lock away  a large portion of its library collections from access by the public, according to agency documents  released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Compounding the  inaccessibility of physical collections, the public’s ability to electronically search digitized EPA  holdings is problematic as well

Over the past 18 months, EPA has closed large parts of its library network, including regional libraries serving 23 states, as well as its Headquarters Library and several technical libraries. The  holdings from these shuttered facilities have been shipped to one of three “repositories” – located in Cincinnati, North Carolina’s Research Triangle Park and D.C. How the public, and even EPA’s own  staff, access these growing repositories has been uncertain.

Even as Congress moves to reverse EPA’s library closures, the agency is now racing to cement new  procedures restricting the ability of the public to locate or read technical documents in the  agency’s possession. A new proposed policy circulated internally for comment on July 11, 2007  provides: “Repository libraries are not required to provide public access to their collections…”

… A union grievance filed on August 16, 2006 protesting the closure of libraries as making it harder  for scientists and other specialists to do their work. EPA ignored the grievance. On Monday, February  5, 2007, the American Federation of Government Employees National Council of EPA Locals filed an  unfair labor practice complaint before the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA). On June 26,   2007, the FLRA upheld the complaint and ordered EPA into binding arbitration with a hearing slated  for August 14, 2007."

( Source