by Analicia Jaramillo
The Oklahoma House passed legislation protecting students' right of religious expression in school. Several individuals have objected saying this measure will only ignite problems in the classroom.
Republican representative, Dan Sullivan said this legislation was passed in order to provide equal opportunity for students to express his or her religious beliefs, which he feels can be done without imposing those beliefs on the other students. This was passed solely as an effort to allow students the right to express their views and do so without retribution.
Students will have the right to form organizations and have all the same rights as other extra-curricular and secular organizations do.
Opponents of this measure argue that by passing this legislation it will encourage students to express beliefs that are contradictory to the "traditional Christian views" the school currently upholds.
Those opponents also feel that because students already have a legal protection to pray in school, this measure is pointless.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
High school principal bans use of Confederate Flags
by Analicia Jaramillo
Photo courtesy of Associated Press Images
Fort Hill High School Principal Stephen Lewis has banned students from displaying the Confederate flag on their vehicles or clothing. Lewis says the ban was issued in order to respond to the recent racial tensions affecting several of his students.
The use of the flags allegedly lead to altercations between several of the white and black students on campus. Lewis noticed the increase use of racial slurs among the white students both in school and online through websites such as MySpace.com. As a result, he felt it was best to ban the display of the Confederate Flag, as they were encouraging the use of racial slurs and encouraging students to harass the black students on campus.
Some of the students involved in these altercations were suspended because of the use of racial slurs, which then outraged several other white students. They then began to wear the flags in protest of the ban.
Courts rule for a right of access to secret plea agreements
by Analicia Jaramillo
The federal appeals court ruled on whether or not to make public plea agreements in two different cases, one regarding a drug cartel defendant and the other regarding a businessman accused of money laundering. The San Diego Union Tribune requested access to this information, thus prompting the courts to deliberate over the public's right to access.
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski stated that the issue involved was a compelling government interest involved that would override the public's right to access. Chief Kozinski claimed that a plausible government interest may be the safety of those involved in the two cases. As a result, the panel ruled to keep the documents sealed.
U.S. District Court Judge Larry Burns originally ruled to maintain the seal on the documents due to possible risk to the individuals involved in the cases, but later lifted this ruling and unsealing several of the documents, saying the risk was less severe than previously assumed.
The Tribune continues its battle in the court in the hopes to have more of these documents unsealed, arguing that it is the public's right to access, especially in cases such as these.
The federal appeals court ruled on whether or not to make public plea agreements in two different cases, one regarding a drug cartel defendant and the other regarding a businessman accused of money laundering. The San Diego Union Tribune requested access to this information, thus prompting the courts to deliberate over the public's right to access.
Chief Judge Alex Kozinski stated that the issue involved was a compelling government interest involved that would override the public's right to access. Chief Kozinski claimed that a plausible government interest may be the safety of those involved in the two cases. As a result, the panel ruled to keep the documents sealed.
U.S. District Court Judge Larry Burns originally ruled to maintain the seal on the documents due to possible risk to the individuals involved in the cases, but later lifted this ruling and unsealing several of the documents, saying the risk was less severe than previously assumed.
The Tribune continues its battle in the court in the hopes to have more of these documents unsealed, arguing that it is the public's right to access, especially in cases such as these.
Judicial Complaints to be made public
by Analicia Jaramillo
Photograph courtesy of Associated Press Images
This past Thursday, the Judicial Conference of the United States implemented a new set of rules regarding the investigation of complaints filed against judges.
Chief Justice John Roberts, as chair of the 27-judge body, began discussions regarding the publication of judicial complaints after suggestions made by the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act Study Committee. These new rules serve as a way to make these complaints more open to the public, allowing the public to retrieve information regarding the specific complaint filed as well as the judge in question.
Having implemented these new rules, the hope is to make these complaints public record and allow for greater clarity in the judicial process.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Sunshine Week commemorates FOIA
by Naomi P.
Cartoon by John Cole, courtesy of SunshineWeek.org
This week, March 16-22, is Sunshine Week.
During this week, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA; also called the “sunshine” law) and open government are promoted though discussions and related activities.
Sunshine Week is co-sponsored by the American Society of Newspaper Editors (ASNE). Other organizations across the country are participating by hosting events.
Information about and resources for Sunshine Week are available on the official website.
Cartoon by John Cole, courtesy of SunshineWeek.org
This week, March 16-22, is Sunshine Week.
During this week, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA; also called the “sunshine” law) and open government are promoted though discussions and related activities.
Sunshine Week is co-sponsored by the American Society of Newspaper Editors (ASNE). Other organizations across the country are participating by hosting events.
Information about and resources for Sunshine Week are available on the official website.
Oklahoma blocks online access to public court documents
by Naomi P.
In related news, The First Amendment Center posted an AP report that the Oklahoma Supreme Court is banning or restricting access to public court records and documents that are available online, effective June 10, 2008.
The court’s rationale, as explained in a partial dissent by two of the justices, is that since not all Oklahoma counties have their documents online, no one should have access to the ones posted by the counties that do, until all counties are 'up to speed'.
Documents may still be obtained by going to the actual courthouses. However, personally identifiable and other information may be blacked out, in the interest of privacy issues, as required in the same ruling.
In related news, The First Amendment Center posted an AP report that the Oklahoma Supreme Court is banning or restricting access to public court records and documents that are available online, effective June 10, 2008.
The court’s rationale, as explained in a partial dissent by two of the justices, is that since not all Oklahoma counties have their documents online, no one should have access to the ones posted by the counties that do, until all counties are 'up to speed'.
Documents may still be obtained by going to the actual courthouses. However, personally identifiable and other information may be blacked out, in the interest of privacy issues, as required in the same ruling.
Offensive ads by UK agency ordered discontinued
by Naomi P.
A March 13 post on The Media Law Professors blog says that The Advertising Standards Authority in England ruled that several ads produced by British ad agency Jemilla for hair product Ghd by Sephora should be discontinued in their present incarnation because they were offensive to the Christian faith.
Other ads from the same campaign, which has quasi-religious overtones, have also received complaints, but are not affected. One of the allowed print ads can be seen on the Sephora website.
The Advertising Standards Authority is an industry self-regulating body and not part of the government of the UK.
A March 13 post on The Media Law Professors blog says that The Advertising Standards Authority in England ruled that several ads produced by British ad agency Jemilla for hair product Ghd by Sephora should be discontinued in their present incarnation because they were offensive to the Christian faith.
Other ads from the same campaign, which has quasi-religious overtones, have also received complaints, but are not affected. One of the allowed print ads can be seen on the Sephora website.
The Advertising Standards Authority is an industry self-regulating body and not part of the government of the UK.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
