by Jacquelyn Horkan, Editor
August, 2002

AN INJUDICIOUS JUDGE

Does the name Stephen Reinhardt sound familiar? He’s one of the two judges on the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals who ruled that forcing schoolchildren to recite the Pledge of Allegiance violated the First Amendment.

The pledge ruling, written by Judge Alfred T. Goodwin, has been put on hold so it may never come under the scrutiny of the U.S. Supreme Court, but if it does it will probably receive the same treatment as other outlandish Ninth Circuit rulings.

During the last Supreme Court term, the justices took up 18 of the circuit’s cases reversed 12, seven of them unanimously, which represents a particularly stinging judicial reproof. Five years ago, the Ninth Circuit was reversed in 27 of 28 cases reviewed. The Ninth Circuit is well known in legal circles as the renegade court, with Reinhardt regarded as the Che Guevera of the pack.

Reinhardt’s left-wing activism, is one of the most overturned judges in history, in part because his judicial philosophy borders on the outlandish. He has found a myriad of rights in the U.S. Constitution, including the right to physician-assisted suicide, that remain invisible to other judges. Reinhardt, appointed to the Ninth Circuit by Jimmy Carter in 1980, has ruled that minorities have a constitutional right to communicate in their own languages when dealing with government. He has also determined that the Fourth Amendment prohibits the use of police dogs in tracking down drugs or criminal suspects. According to Reinhardt, farmers may not challenge the Endangered Species Act because they are motivated by “an economic interest.”

A political warrior rather than an impartial judge, a phrase that shouldn’t be an oxymoron but is, Reinhardt is the poster boy for judicial irresponsibility. He is also the recipient of the California Trial Lawyers 1987 “Appellate Judge of the Year” award.

 

DOOMED FROM THE START

Still need evidence that Social Security was destined for financial failure from its inception? How about this interesting little trivia quiz, courtesy of the Social Security’s own Web site (http://www.ssa.gov/history/puzzles/quiz26.html).

Question: In March 1937, this Cleveland streetcar motorman received the very first Social Security retirement benefit payment. It was a one-time, lump-sum payout. How much was it for?

Answer: For those persons retiring before the start of monthly benefits in 1940, a single lump-sum payment was made. Ackerman worked one day under Social Security, earned $5, and paid a nickel in payroll taxes. His lump-sum was equal to 3.5% of his wages, so he got 17 cents.

In other words, the very first recipent of a Social Security check was paid 3.4 times the amount he paid in. Not to mention that the expense of cutting his check far outweighed its value.

 

CONGRESSIONAL REPORT CARDS.COM

The 2002 Voting Records is now available on-line at AIF’s members only Web site, FBNNET.COM. This exclusive publication lets you know how your senator and representative performed on key business legislation.

A number of national associations also produce congressional rankings. Congressional Report Cards.com, a project of the non-partisan Voter Information Services, offers links to a number of the ratings published by qualifying advocacy groups. Visit http://www.vis.org/visweb/scripts/top.asp?com=grpinfopg to learn more about evaluating your U.S. senators and representive.

 

THE MOSQUITO’S WHINE

In June, the nation marked the thirtieth anniversary of three pivotal events, two of which remain unjustly non-controversial.

On June 14, EPA Administrator William Ruckelshaus banned the use of DDT. Three days later five men broke into the Democratic National Committee’s offices at the Watergate complex. Six days would follow before Richard Nixon signed into law the Educational Amendments of 1972, including Title IX, which was supposed to eliminate sex discrimination in programs at federally funded educational institutions.

We all know the end result of the Watergate break-in. The unintended consequences of Title IX — the destruction of men’s athletic programs in the name of parity — have received some attention over the last several weeks. But of this trio of June events, only the restriction on the production and use of DDT has avoided criticism — despite its deadly consequences.

DDT was a powerful and inexpensive weapon against mosquitoes that was credited for preventing 100 million malaria deaths in Africa , Asia , and South America in the two decades before its use was restricted. DDT did embody some environmental risks, which called for judicious limitations on its application. With a flourish of his pen, however, Ruckelshaus virtually halted use of the pesticide, against the advice of the scientific community and to the detriment of the poor in Third World nations.

Malaria had been all but vanquished from 1950 to 1970, when DDT use was widespread. The World Health Organization now estimates that one African child dies of malaria every 30 seconds. Almost 60 million or more lives have succumbed to this easily preventable disease since the ban on DDT went into effect.

The anti-DDT propaganda, however, promises to continue tolling more malaria deaths. A bill sponsored by U.S. Sen. Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont) would implement an international treaty that would put an end to any remaining use of DDT.

 

WHEN GOOD IDEAS GO BAD

Speaking of anniversaries, July 26 was the 12^th birthday of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Not even a teenager yet, the ADA is exhibit one in the display of legislation written poorly but with the best intentions.

Florida ’s role in the degradation of the ADA can’t be overlooked. Some of the nation’s most notorious ADA legal mills can be found in parts south of Lake Okeechobee . They are the lawyers that make millions suing small businesses over minor violations. A July 9, 2001 , article in The National Law Journal revealed that south Florida ADA cases outnumbered those in Chicago by a factor of 12; there were 24 times as many cases as there were in Manhattan or Philadelphia federal courts.

Among the most laughable demands for disabled accommodation came in the form of a lawsuit against a liquor store filed on behalf of a young child. And then there was the recent case of paraplegic who sued the Wildside Adult Sports Cabaret in West Palm Beach because of lack of access to the lap-dancing room.

Apparently the lack of disabled access to adult entertainment is an international dilemma. According to the invaluable Web site Overlawyered.com, the Pussycats Club in East Sussex , England , wants permission to let its blind patrons touch the exotic dancers. The club’s license currently forbids such hands-on encounters.

Overlawyered.com also reports on an Australian lawsuit filed by Kathleen Faye Ball, who describes her occupation as “activist in human rights and civil rights movement.” Ball attended a “swingers’ party” at Club Jacaranda, an illegal brothel run in a private home. According to Ball, her rights under Australia ’s Disability Discrimination Act of were violated by the mistress of the house, who told Ball, “We don’t cater to wheelchairs.” Ball goes on to explain that she was subjected to “an attitude of discouragement throughout the evening.”

And so are the best hopes of those deserving of aid made ridiculous by the lawyers and gadflys willing to take advantage of carelessly drafted legislation.

Jacquelyn Horkan is editor of Florida Business Insight, Associated Industries of Florida’s on-line magazine (e-mail: jhorkan@aif.com).