Kansas Threatens Judicial Independence
Posted: June 15, 2015 Filed under: General Law | Tags: brownback, judicial independence Leave a commentI missed this interesting article in the New York Times last week about an ongoing battle between Kansas Governor Sam Brownback and the state judiciary. Brownback recently signed a bill that “stipulates that if a state court strikes down a 2014 law that removed some powers from the State Supreme Court, the judiciary will lose its funding.”
Arrest Records Transparency Bill Passes Senate
Posted: June 3, 2015 Filed under: General Law | Tags: 6750, arrest records, colleen murphy, freedom of information act, kevin kane, transparency Leave a commentShortly after 1:00 a.m. this morning, the Senate gave final approval to a bill that substantially restores much of the public access to arrest records that was lost last year when the state Supreme Court issued a decision that held that the public was only entitled to minimal access to arrest records while a law enforcement action or prosecution was pending. The bill, which passed the House unanimously last week, now goes to Governor Malloy for his signature. (Read Jon Lender’s story in the Hartford Courant about the bill.)
The Spending Cap, Ctd
Posted: April 29, 2015 Filed under: Appellate Law, General Law | Tags: spending cap Leave a commentThe Yankee Institute for Public Policy, a Connecticut-based conservative think tank, recently released a policy brief concerning Connecticut’s spending cap. The brief is referenced in an Op-Ed on CT News Junkie authored by Peter Bowman, President of the Connecticut Lawyer’s Chapter of the Federalist Society.
Contrary to my earlier post, which explains why the spending cap is judicial unenforceable, the Executive Summary of the policy brief states that “if lawmakers raise taxes while also exceeding the spending cap without an emergency declaration, taxpayers may have cause to challenge their tax bills in court.” The key word in this sentence is “may,” and it is a word with which I respectfully disagree, unless it is construed to mean “infinitesimally small possibility.”
Is Connecticut’s Spending Cap Judicially Enforceable?
Posted: April 28, 2015 Filed under: Appellate Law, General Law | Tags: article third, political question, spending cap Leave a commentShort answer: No. Long answer: No. Short explanation: The “political question” doctrine. Longer explanation: See below.
State Republicans Propose Moving Watchdog Agencies To Judicial Branch
Posted: April 24, 2015 Filed under: General Law | Tags: freedom of information, watchdog agencies Leave a commentThe House and Senate Republicans released their own budget proposal today, called the “Blueprint for Prosperity.” As a lawyer with a strong interest in open government, page 21 of the report caught my eye. It contains a section entitled “Safeguarding Connecticut’s Watchdog Agencies.” The section states:
Supreme Court Releases Written Decision In Cassandra C. Case
Posted: April 15, 2015 Filed under: Appellate Law, General Law | Tags: cassandra c., mature minor, mature minor doctrine 4 CommentsOn January 8, 2015, the Supreme Court heard expedited oral arguments in In re: Cassandra C, the case involving a 17-year-old adolescent who claimed the right to refuse life-saving chemotherapy for her Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Only minutes after the oral argument concluded, the court issued a brief oral ruling from the bench in which the justices unanimously rejected Cassandra C.’s argument that the court should adopt the so-called “mature minor” doctrine. The court said that a formal written opinion would follow. Today, the court issued its written opinion.
An A+ For Rep. Jutila On Police Transparency
Posted: March 31, 2015 Filed under: General Law | Tags: foi, freedom of information, raised bill 6750 Leave a commentKudos to Representative Ed Jutila (D-East Lyme) and eight other members of the Government Administration and Elections (GAE) committee for voting to send Raised Bill 6750 to the floor of the House for consideration. (Read CT News Junkie’s story about the vote.)
I’ve written about the importance of Raised Bill 6750 in a previous post; it would overrule a bad Connecticut Supreme Court decision that substantially curtailed public access to arrest-related records. The proposed bill would restore the Freedom of Information Commission’s longstanding interpretation of state law, which allowed greater access to such records, subject to important exemptions, including protecting the identity of witnesses and avoiding disclosures that would prejudice a prospective law enforcement action. The bill strikes the proper balance between the public’s right to know and law enforcement’s need to avoid premature disclosure of certain information in order to protect the integrity of investigations and potential prosecutions..
Connecticut Is Not Indiana
Posted: March 30, 2015 Filed under: General Law | Tags: 52-571b, first amendment, freedom of religion, peyote, rational basis, religious freedom restoration act, strict scrutiny 11 CommentsLast week Indiana enacted a controversial law that many believe is intended to allow individuals, particularly for-profit business owners, to discriminate against persons who identify as LGBT, on the ground that providing services to such persons may burden the provider’s religious convictions. Today, Governor Dannel P. Malloy announced that he will sign an executive order banning state-funded travel to Indiana. The governor stated, “When new laws turn back the clock on progress, we can’t sit idly by. We are sending a message that discrimination won’t be tolerated.”
In response to the governor’s announcement, some are arguing that Connecticut is being hypocritical because it has its own law, enacted in 1993, that is (allegedly) no different from, or is even worse than, the new Indiana law. (Click here and here for examples of such arguments.)
Are those arguments correct? I think not. Nothing in the text or history of the Connecticut law suggests that the General Assembly intended to allow individuals or business owners to discriminate against members of the LGBT community based on religious beliefs.
What Happens When A Jewish Man Won’t Give His Wife A Get?
Posted: March 25, 2015 Filed under: General Law | Tags: divorce, first amendment, gett, jewish law, vivane absalem Leave a comment
Under Jewish law, a “Get” is a document that a husband must give his wife to effect a divorce. Without a Get, a woman who has obtained a civil divorce is still considered married under Jewish law and may not remarry.
The biblical requirement (Deuteronomy 24:1) that the husband give his wife a Get in order to formally end their marriage under Jewish law means that a recalcitrant husband can use the Get as leverage in a civil divorce. Or he can simply be cruel and refuse to give the Get out of spite. And in Israel, where there is no distinction between civil and religious marriage, and in very orthodox communities outside of Israel, a husband who won’t give his wife a Get effectively enslaves her to him.
When Felons Run For Public Office
Posted: March 11, 2015 Filed under: General Law Leave a commentNews about former Bridgeport Mayor Joseph Ganim’s interest in running for public office once again prompted me to take a look at the law in Connecticut concerning the rights of felons to vote and run for public office. Those rights are set forth in Chapter 143 of the General Statutes.
A person convicted of a felony forfeits his right to become an elector, i.e. his right to vote, AND “may not be a candidate for or hold public office.” See Conn. Gen. Stat. § 9-46. However, the law allows for the restoration of electoral privileges, including the right to run for and hold public office, “upon the payment of all fines in conjunction with the conviction and once such person has been discharged from confinement, and, if applicable, parole.” Id., § 9-46a.
Mr. Ganim was released from prison in 2010. Does anyone know whether he has satisfied the requirements for restoration of his electoral privileges and, if so, have his electoral privileges been formally restored?
Appealingly Brief! 