DOCSLIB.ORG

Tourt of Tlpt Liluitc!I ~Tttre!L

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tourt of Tlpt Liluitc!I ~Tttre!L IN THE ~Upr£ltt£ (!tourt of tlpt lIluitc!I ~tttre!l GOVERNOR ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al., Appellants, v. MARCIANO PLATA AND RALPH COLEMAN, et aI., Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Courts for the Eastern District of California and the Northern District of California JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT APPENDIX EDMUND G. BROWN JR. CARTER G. PHILLIPS* ATTORNEY GENERAL OF EAMON P. JOYCE CALIFORNIA SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP JAMES M. HUMES 1501 K Street, N.W. CHIEF DEPUTY ATTORNEY Washington, DC 20005 GENERAL (202) 736-8000 MANuEL M. MEDEIROS STATE SOLICITOR GENERAL JERROLD C. SCHAEFER GORDON BURNS PAUL B. MELLO DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL S. ANNE JOHNSON JONATHAN L. WOLFF SAMANTHAD. WOLFF ROCHELLE EAST RENJUP. JACOB SENIOR ASSISTANT HANSON BRIDGETT LLP ATTORNEYS GENERAL 425 Market Street KYLE A. LEWIS 26th Floor DANIELLE F. O'BANNON San Francisco, CA 94105 DEPUTY ATTORNEYS (415) 777-3200 GENERAL 455 Golden Gate Avenue Suite 11000 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 (415) 703·5500 Counsel for Appellants October 5, 2009 *Counsel of Record WILSON-EPES PRINTING Co .• INC. - (202) 789-0096 - WASHINGTON. D. C. 20002 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page APPENDIX A: Coleman v. Schwarzeneggerl Plata v. Schwarzenegger, Nos. 2:90-cv-00520 LKK JFM P, COl-1351 TEH (E.D. Cal.lN.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2009) (population reduction plan opinion and order) ............... ............................. 1a APPENDIX B: Coleman v. Schwarzeneggerl Plata v. Schwarzenegger, Nos. 2:90-cv-00520 LKK JFM P, COl-1351 TEH (E.D. Cal.lN.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2008) (order denying motion for dismissal) .......................................................... 257a APPENDIX C: Plata v. Schwarzenegger, No. COl-1351 TEH (N.D. Cal. July 23, 2007) (order granting motion to convene three-judge panel) .... ........... ................................................. 273a APPENDIX D: Coleman v. Schwarzenegger, No. 2:90-cv-00520 LKK JFM P (E.D. Cal. July 23, 2007) (order granting motion to convene three-judge panel)............................................. 288a APPENDIX E: Coleman v. Schwarzeneggerl Plata v. Schwarzenegger, Nos. 2:90-cv-00520 LKK JFM P, COl-1351 TEH (E.D. Cal./N.D. Cal. Sept. 3, 2009) (order denying motion to stay) ................................................................... 305a APPENDIX F: Defendants' Population Reduc­ tion Plan, Coleman v. SchwarzeneggerlPlata v. Schwarzenegger, Nos. 2:90-cv-00520 LKK JFM P, COl-1351 TEH (E.D. Cal./N.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2009) .................................................. 312a (i) 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS-continued Page APPENDIX G: Notice of Appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, Coleman v, SchwarzeneggerlPlata v. Schwarzenegger, Nos. 2:90-cv-00520 LKK JFM P, COI-1351 TEH (E.D. Cal./N.D. Cal. Sept. 3, 2009) .......... 354a APPENDIX H: Federal Statute ... ........... ........... 356a la APPENDIX A UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, E.D. CALIFORNIA AND, N.D. CALIFORNIA. No. CIV S-90-0520 LKl{ JFM P. No. COl-1351 TEH. RALPH COLEMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al., Defendants. MARCIANO PLATA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et at., Defendants. Aug. 4, 2009. STEPHEN REINHARDT, Circuit Judge. LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, Senior District Judge. THELTON E. HENDERSON, Senior District Judge. OPINION AND ORDER 2a TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION......................................... 6 II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ........................................... 10 A. Plata (Medical Care)................................. 10 1. Complaint, Stipulation, and Order for Injunctive RelieL.................................. 11 2. Appointment of Court Experts and Their Findings .... ...... ... .... ...... ... ... ... .... ... 13 3. Periodic Status Conferences ................. 15 4. Proceedings To Determine Whether a Receiver Should Be Appointed ............. 16 5. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Concerning Continuing Failure To Meet Constitutional Standards and Necessity ofa Receivership................... 17 6. Interim Remedies .................................. 20 7. Appointment of the Plata Receiver ...... 21 B. Coleman (Mental Health Care) ................ 22 1. Findings of Eighth Amendment Violations.... ....... ...... ... ... ... ...... .... ........... 23 2. Remedial Orders .. ...... ... ... ... ... .... ........... 26 a. Mental Health Care Beds and Treatment Space......................... ....... 28 h. Transfers to Appropriate Level of Care.................................................... 32 c. Staffing............................................... 33 3. Special Master's 2006 Monitoring Reports................................................... 34 3a C. Crowding in California's Prison System.. 37 1. The Increasing California Prison Population.............................................. 37 2. Studies Commissioned by the State of California To Examine Prison Crowding................................................ 38 3. Defining the Capacity of California Prisons ................................................... 39 4. Crowding in Relation to Capacity........ 42 D. Governor Schwarzenegger's Emergency Proclamation... ..... ... ... ... .... ...... ..... ............. 43 E. Motions To Convene Three-Judge Court and Subsequent Prison Studies by the State of California..................................... 44 1. Motions To Convene and Initial Proceedings............................................ 44 2. Intervening Reports on Prison Crowding.... .... ..... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ...... ... .... 44 3. Final Hearing and Rulings .. ... ... ... ..... ... 45 F. Proceedings Before this Three-Judge Court.......................................................... 48 III. LEGAL FRAMEWORK................................ 49 A. The PLRA Standard for Prisoner Release Orders: Primary Cause and No Other Relief............................................... 51 B. The PLRA Standard for All Prospective Relief: Need-N arrowness-Intrusiveness and Consideration of Public Safety.. ........ 52 C. The Remedial Nature of the Three- Judge Court Proceeding ........................... 54 4a IV. CROWDING AS PRIMARY CAUSE ........... 55 A. General Problems in the Delivery of Medical and Mental Health Care Caused by Crowding ................................. 58 B. Space Issues Affecting the Delivery of Care ........................................................... 60 1. Reception Centers... ... ... .... ... .... ... .......... 60 2. Treatment Space ................................... 65 3. Inability to House Inmates by Classification ......................................... 67 4. Beds for Mentally III Inmates............... 68 C. Conditions of Confinement....................... 70 D. Other Access to Care Issues ..................... 73 1. Staffing ............ , ..... ....... ......... ....... ..... .... 73 a. Medical Staff...................................... 74 b. Mental Health Staff... ..... ...... ............. 76 c. Custodial Staff...... .... ... ... ....... ... ...... ... 77 2. Medication Management ...................... 79 3. Specialty Medical Care ........... , ....... ...... 80 4. Lockdowns ............................................. 81 E. Medical Records ....... ..... ... ........ ... .............. 83 F. Increasing Acuity of Mental Illness ......... 85 G. Extreme Departures from the Standard of Care and Preventable or Possibly Preventable Deaths, Including Suicides.. 86 H. Expert Opinions Regarding Causation.... 88 1. Findings and Conclusions ........................ 99 5a V. NO OTHER RELIEF.................................... 101 A. Alternatives to a Prisoner Release Order 102 1. Inadequacy of Construction as a Remedy.................................................. 102 a. Prison Construction........................... 102 b. Construction of Re-entry Facilities... 103 c. Medical Facilities and Prison Expansion .... ............ .......................... 105 d. Construction as a Means of Compliance......................................... 108 2. Inadequacy of Additional Hiring .......... 109 3. Insufficiency of the Plata Receivership and Coleman Special Mastership ......... 109 4. Other Proposals ...... ............................... 112 B. Expert Testimony..................................... 114 C. Findings and Conclusions ........................ 119 VI. NARROWLY DRAWN, LEAST INTRU- SIVE REMEDY THAT EXTENDS NO FURTHER THAN NECESSARy................. 119 A. Scope of Relief.... ............ .......... ................. 120 B. Form of Relief.................................... ........ 122 C. The Required Population Reduction........ 124 VII. POTENTIAL POPULATION REDUC­ TION MEASURES AND THEIR IMPACT ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND THE OPERATION OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM .................................... 131 A. Criminogenic Nature of Overcrowded Prisons....................................................... 133 6a B. Potential Population Reduction Measures .. ...... ... .... ..... .... ........ ................... 137 1. Early Release Through Expansion of Good Time Credits ................................ 139 2. Diversion of Technical Parole Violators................................................. 145 3. Diversion of Low-Risk Offenders with Short Sentences..................................... 149 4. Expansion of Evidence-Based Rehabi­ litative Programming III Prisons or Communities ......................................... 152 5. Sentencing Reform and Other Potential Population Reduction Measures................................................ 154 C. Impact of Proposed Measures on Communities............................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • OPINION and DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH; GAIL J
    FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KRISTIN M. PERRY; SANDRA B. STIER; PAUL T. KATAMI; JEFFREY J. ZARRILLO, Plaintiffs-Appellees, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Intervenor-Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., in his official capacity as Governor of California; KAMALA D. HARRIS, in her official capacity as Attorney General of California; MARK B. HORTON, in his official capacity as Director of the California Department of Public Health & State Registrar of Vital Statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her official capacity as Deputy Director of Health Information & Strategic Planning for the California Department of Public Health; PATRICK O’CONNELL, in his official capacity as Clerk-Recorder for the County of Alameda; DEAN C. LOGAN, in his official capacity as Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk for the County of Los Angeles, Defendants, 1569 1570 PERRY v. BROWN HAK-SHING WILLIAM TAM, Intervenor-Defendant, and DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH; GAIL J. No. 10-16696 KNIGHT; MARTIN F. GUTIERREZ; D.C. No. MARK A. JANSSON; 3:09-cv-02292- PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM-YES ON 8, VRW A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA RENEWAL, as official proponents of Proposition 8, Intervenor-Defendants-Appellants. KRISTIN M. PERRY; SANDRA B. STIER; PAUL T. KATAMI; JEFFREY J. ZARRILLO, Plaintiffs-Appellees, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Intervenor-Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., in his official capacity as Governor of California; KAMALA D. HARRIS, in her official capacity as Attorney General of California; MARK B. HORTON, in his official capacity as Director of the California Department of Public Health & State Registrar of Vital Statistics; PERRY v. BROWN 1571 LINETTE SCOTT, in her official capacity as Deputy Director of Health Information & Strategic Planning for the California Department of Public Health; PATRICK O’CONNELL, in his official capacity as Clerk-Recorder for the County of Alameda; DEAN C.
    [Show full text]
  • Notice to Media, Public Regarding Oral Arguments in Perry V. Brown
    A N N O U N C E M E N T November 30, 2011 Contact: David Madden (415) 355-8930 Notice to Media, Public Regarding Oral Arguments in Perry v. Brown SAN FRANCISCO – The following information is intended for news media covering upcoming oral arguments in the Proposition 8 case, Perry v. Brown, Appeal Nos. 11-17255 and 11-16577, and for members of the public seeking to observe the proceedings. Oral arguments will be heard by a panel of three judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Thursday, December 8, 2011, beginning at 2:30 p.m. (Pacific time) in Courtroom One on the third floor of the James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse, 95 7th St., San Francisco. The panel consists of Circuit Judges Stephen Reinhardt of Los Angeles and N. Randy Smith of Pocatello, Idaho, and Senior Circuit Judge Michael Daly Hawkins of Phoenix. Two appeals will be argued: Appeal No. 11-17255 involves an appeal of a ruling by Chief District Judge James Ware of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on September 19, 2011, allowing the public release of videotapes made of the civil bench trial in Perry v. Hollingsworth. Oral arguments in this matter are scheduled to begin at 2:30 p.m. Appeal No. 11-16577 involves an appeal of a ruling by Chief District Judge Ware on June 14, 2011, denying a motion to vacate the judgment in Perry v. Hollingsworth on the ground that the presiding judge, then-Chief Judge Vaughn R.
    [Show full text]
  • C:\Users\Johne\Downloads\ALA Court Memorial Program.Wpd
    OPENING OF COURT UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Cathy A. Catterson FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Circuit and Court of Appeals Executive Special Court Session in Memory of PRESIDING and OPENING REMARKS The Honorable Sidney R. Thomas Chief Judge THE HONORABLE United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ARTHUR L. ALARCÓN REMARKS The Honorable Dorothy W. Nelson Senior Circuit Judge United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit The Honorable Deanell R. Tacha Dean, Pepperdine University School of Law Chief Judge Emeritus, United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (Retired) Richard G. Hirsch, Esq. Partner, Nasatir, Hirsch, Podberesky & Khero Thursday, June 4, 2015, 4:00 P.M. The Honorable Mary E. Kelly Courtroom Three Administrative Law Judge, California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board Law Clerk to Judge Alarcón, 1980 - 1982, 1993 - 1994 RICHARD H. CHAMBERS UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS BUILDING The Honorable Gregory W. Alarcon Superior Court, County of Los Angeles 125 South Grand Avenue Pasadena, California ADJOURNMENT Reception Immediately Following 1925 Born August 14th in Los Angeles, California 1943 - 1946 Staff Sergeant, Army Infantry. Awarded multiple honors for battlefield bravery and leadership 1949 B.A., University of Southern California (USC) 1951 LL.B., USC School of Law Editorial Board Member, USC Law Review 1952 - 1961 Deputy District Attorney, County of Los Angeles 1961 - 1964 Legal Advisor, Clemency/Extradition Secretary and Executive Assistant to Gov. Edmund G. “Pat” Brown 1964 - 1978 Judge, Superior Court, County of Los Angeles 1978 - 1979 Associate Justice, California Court of Appeal 1979 - 2015 First Hispanic judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
    [Show full text]
  • July 13Th 2005
    California State University, San Bernardino CSUSB ScholarWorks Inland Empire Hispanic News Special Collections & University Archives 7-13-2005 July 13th 2005 Hispanic News Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/hispanicnews Recommended Citation Hispanic News, "July 13th 2005" (2005). Inland Empire Hispanic News. 469. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/hispanicnews/469 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Special Collections & University Archives at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Inland Empire Hispanic News by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Support Our Service Organizations “n 33 CO m C/} on T1 CO m c OD o33 Wednesday, July 13, 2005 <*• CD —1 m 1 9 2805 —1 "O Volume 18 as3 o o z > CO CO Number 21 O zs' library p CD oo o a > >o 30 O TheH Inlandispanic Empire's only Hispanic-owned EnglishNi lar ewspaper San Bernardino ♦ Riverside ♦ Colton ♦ Rialto ♦ Fontana ♦ iey Ontario ♦ Corona ♦ Bloomington ♦ Rancho Cucamonga ♦ Hig JIands NEW MAYOR ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA INLAND EMPIRE CELEBRATES 4^” OF JULY ELATES LATINOS Cities in the iniand Empire caught the spirit of patriotism in sup­ port of our Armed Forces and pianned 4*'' of Juiy parades, includ­ ing the City of San Bernardino. The following pictorial reviewed on page 4 reflects the diverse units and exhibits in the parade. Antonio Villaraigosa, center, taking the oath of office for Mayor of the City of Los Angeies, with his wife, Gorina, left, holding the family bible, and Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Mourns Passing of Judge Stephen Reinhardt
    N E W S R E L E A S E March 30, 2018 Contact: David J. Madden, (415) 355-8800 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Mourns Passing of Judge Stephen Reinhardt SAN FRANCISCO — Judges and staff of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit are mourning the loss of a distinguished jurist, Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who died Thursday (March 29, 2018) after suffering a heart attack. He was 87. Judge Reinhardt, who lived and maintained chambers in Los Angeles, served as an active judge of the court for more than 37 years. “Judge Reinhardt is rightly considered to be one of the giants of the law. He earned his reputation by virtue of a brilliant legal mind, an unmatched work ethic and deeply held principles. He resolutely pursued justice as he saw it,” Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas said. Chief Judge Emeritus J. Clifford Wallace said of Judge Reinhardt, “His life was focused on the law and with his brilliant mind, he became one of the most effective contributors to our judicial system.” “Steve battled his entire career for civil rights and civil liberties. In countless cases he was able to help the little person come out on top by the sheer force of his intellect. His death is a staggering loss” said Chief Judge Emeritus Mary M. Schroeder. Judge Richard Paez made a similar observation. “Judge Reinhardt was inspiring in the how he cared about the less fortunate, about individuals charged with crimes or incarcerated. His concern that they be treated fairly and humanely was just an inspiration to me,” Judge Paez, adding that his late colleague’s contributions to Ninth Circuit law and American jurisprudence “were significant and will be long lasting.” Often referred to as the “liberal lion,” Judge Reinhardt did not set aside his principles when he came onto the bench.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas A. Saenz (Chair) President & General Counsel Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF)
    3/5/2019 Thomas A. Saenz (Vice Chair) - The Campaign for College Opportunity Donate Contact Us Select Language ▼ Who We Are What We Do News Room Blog Take Action Donate Thomas A. Saenz (Chair) President & General Counsel Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) Thomas A. Saenz returned to the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) in August 2009 as President and General Counsel. Prior, as Counsel to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Saenz honed his leadership skills by serving on the four-person executive team to the mayor, where his legal and policy advice proved invaluable. During his four-year tenure with the City of Los Angeles, Saenz helped to lead the legislative effort to change the governance of Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), the effect of which has been to take the City a step closer to securing a quality education for all students in Los Angeles. Saenz also served as the lead liaison on labor negotiations, with a personal goal of addressing serious financial challenges in partnership with the city’s workers. Saenz had previously practiced civil rights litigation at MALDEF for 12 years. During that time, he successfully challenged California’s unconstitutional Proposition 187 and led numerous civil https://collegecampaign.org/tom-saenz/ 1/4 3/5/2019 Thomas A. Saenz (Vice Chair) - The Campaign for College Opportunity rights cases in the areas of immigrants’Donate rights, education, employment,Contact and Usvoting rights.Select Language Saenz ▼ achieved several victories against ordinances unlawfully restricting the rights of day laborers, served as lead counsel in the 2001 challenge to California’s congressional redistricting, and initiated the employment discrimination lawsuit resulting in a $50 million settlement with Abercrombie and Fitch.
    [Show full text]
  • Equal Protection Or "Social Tradition"
    EQUAL PROTECTION OR "SOCIAL TRADITION" The Supreme Court’s Test in the Marriage Cases By Jamie Raskin Tradition is often just the evidence years) died, since DOMA prevents same-sex spouses of silence. –Judith Shklar from inheriting marital property on a tax-free basis, If we had a Supreme Court that cared as much for the liberty and equality of people as it cares for the liberty and equality of corporations, deciding the two cases taken up this Term on the future of marriage discrimination in America would be a piece of cake— wedding cake, to be exact. The Constitution, logic, and precedent are all on the side of equal rights. One case, United States v. Windsor,1 deals with the constitutionality of Section 3 of “DOMA,” the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act, Thea Spyer and Edith Windsor Edith Windsor, was forced to pay $363,000 in federal taxes on the a benefit that heterosexual couples, of course, take for estate she inherited after her wife granted. Windsor won a clean victory in the United (and partner of 40 years) died. States Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit, which found that discrimination against gay people triggers Equal Protection “intermediate scrutiny” and that Congress could not demonstrate a valid, much less an important, interest for defining marriage at the federal which provides that the word “marriage” in any federal level so as to exclude from its benefits thousands of law or regulation—including the Social Security actually married couples in the states. Act, the Internal Revenue code, immigration law, and more than 1,000 others—shall apply only to the The other case taken up by the Supreme Court in “legal union of one man and one woman as husband its momentous cert grant of December 7 of last 2 and wife.” This sweeping discrimination means that, year is Hollingsworth v.
    [Show full text]
  • When Judges Lie (And When They Should)
    BUTLER_5FMT 6/15/2007 10:53:19 AM Article When Judges Lie (and When They Should) Paul Butler† What should a judge do when she must apply law that she believes is fundamentally unjust?1 The problem is as old as slavery. It is as contemporary as the debates about capital pun- ishment and abortion rights. In a seminal essay, Robert Cover described four choices that a judge has in such cases. She can (1) apply the law even though she thinks it is immoral; (2) openly reject the law; (3) resign; or (4) subvert the law by pretending that it supports the outcome that the judge desires, even though the judge does not actually believe that it does.2 This Article demonstrates that the fourth choice—judicial “subversion” or lying—is far more common than is openly ac- knowledged. This Article identifies some cases in which judges intentionally have framed the law to achieve a particular out- come. This Article also suggests that this kind of lie is occa- sionally justified. Sometimes it is the best of the imperfect choices that judges have when they are confronted with unjust † Carville Dickinson Benson Research Professor of Law, George Wash- ington University. B.A., Yale University; J.D., Harvard University. Drafts of this Article were presented at faculty workshops at Georgetown Law School, Georgia State Law School, George Washington University Law School, North- eastern Law School, and UCLA Law School. I owe a special debt of gratitude to Hope Lewis, Dan Solove, and Bob Tuttle. Thanks also to Stephen Bain- bridge, Monroe Freedman, Mitu Gulati, Alex Kozinski, Spencer Overton, Ellen Podgor, William Rubenstein, and Gerry Spann.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
    U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit William S. Richardson School of Law University of Hawai’i at Manoa Honolulu, Hawai’i October 18, 2012 Circuit Judge Circuit Judge Circuit Judge Sidney R. Thomas Stephen Reinhardt Richard A. Paez Billings Los Angeles Pasadena (over) Hon. Stephen Reinhardt Age 71 Born in New York, New York Federal Judicial Service: Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; Nominated by Jimmy Carter on November 30, 1979, to a new seat authorized by 92 Stat. 1629. Confirmed by the Senate on September 11, 1980, and received commission on September 11, 1980. Education: Pomona College, B.A., 1951; Yale Law School, LL.B., 1954 Professional Career: U.S. Air Force, 1954-1956; Law clerk, Hon. Luther W. Youngdahl, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, 1956-1957; Private practice, Los Angeles, California, 1957-1980. Hon. Sidney R. Thomas Age 59 Born in Bozeman, Montana Federal Judicial Service: Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; Nominated by William J. Clinton on July 19, 1995, to a seat vacated by Dorothy Wright Nelson. Confirmed by the Senate on January 2, 1996, and received commission on January 4, 1996. Education: Montana State University, B.A., 1975; University of Montana School of Law, J.D., 1978. Professional Career: Legal intern, Hon. W.W. Lessley, Montana State District Court, 18th Judicial District; Private practice, Billings, Montana, 1978-1995; Adjunct instructor of law, Rocky Mountain College, Billings, Montana, 1982-1995. Hon. Richard A. Paez Age 65 Born in Salt Lake City, Utah Federal Judicial Service: Judge, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Stephen R. Reinhardt: a Sense of Fairness and Compassion by HENRY WEINSTEIN*
    APPRECIATIONS Stephen R. Reinhardt: A Sense Of Fairness And Compassion BY HENRY WEINSTEIN* tephen Reinhardt’s sometimes loving tributes to sudden death on the man long known as the SMarch 29 jarred and country’s most outspoken, saddened me. Just six weeks liberal jurist. Those occa- earlier, I sat next to him in a sions brought memories to judge’s chair in the ceremo- the surface. nial courtroom of the Ninth Over a 20-year period, as Circuit Court of Appeals in a reporter for the Los Ange- Pasadena during a confer- les Times, I wrote dozens of ence on the impact of Presi- stories about Reinhardt’s dent Jimmy Carter’s judges trenchant opinions and his on the nation’s largest fed- blistering speeches about eral circuit. We chatted at the increasingly cramped lunch, where he was joined and uncharitable view the by former law clerks, includ- U.S. Supreme Court took of ing one I lobbied him to hire civil rights and civil liberties. after she had been my stu- Among them was a 1992 law dent in the inaugural class at school graduation speech in U.C. Irvine Law School. which Reinhardt declared As I spoke to him that that the federal courts were day, it was clear that at 87 he becoming “a bastion of white was still actively engaged in America.” He lamented, his cases. He simultaneously “only a few years ago it was manifested the same acute the federal courts, and par- intellect, lively spirit and peri- ticularly the Supreme Court, odic grumpiness. He lamented that offered the greatest hope the worsening health of his to our minorities.
    [Show full text]
  • News in Brief@Yale Law School
    News in Brief @ Yale Law school opening Argument’s unique double-sided layout ensures that topics receive equal treatment. Alumni who wish to contribute op-eds to opening Argument should contact Justin Muzinich (justin.muzinich@yale. edu) or Tara Helfman ([email protected]). | Y L r Summer 2006 publications It was Opening Argument’s third issue Opening Argument Broadens Debate at YLS (which simply asked contributors “Is NSA WHEN JOINT-DEGREE STUDENT Justin Muzinich and Tara Helfman ’06 first con- wiretapping good policy?”) that garnered sidered starting an op-ed publication at the Law School, they envisioned their peers the most attention from outside the Law School. Contributors included Harvard and faculty as their primary audience. A non-partisan publication focused on current Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz ’62, issues, they reasoned, would be a means of fostering political dialogue within the YLS Senator Conrad Burns, Yale Law School community. Professor John J. Donohue, and several YLS But Opening Argument quickly found ground as far as what’s going on, what students. The issue, in fact, had just been legs beyond the Law School’s courtyard people are talking about,” Muzinich says. printed when it was included in brief- and classrooms. By its second issue, the Among the issues Opening Argument ing materials for members of the Senate publication included opinions on U.S.-U.N. has debated: the Law School’s stance on Judiciary Committee on the eve of their relations penned by former House Speaker military recruiting; the Alito nomination; NSA hearing. Newt Gingrich and former Member of the economics and employment policies of Besides that unanticipated audience of Parliament Tony Colman.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Counsel Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT 2011 Dear Friends, This economy has been devastating for people in California and across the nation. More families are losing their jobs and homes, more children are losing out on their educational futures, more veterans are returning home to find fewer opportunities, and more businesses are struggling to get off the ground. As the economic crisis has deepened, we have risen up to meet it. I am proud to report that, in 2011, Public Counsel once again affirmed its commitment to equality and opportunity for all. We launched an ambitious new project to support Los Angeles neighborhoods ravaged by foreclosure and eviction, and expanded substantially our special education services for children. We also started two new offices to serve our veterans in Hollywood and at the Veterans Affairs West Los Angeles Medical Center, and embarked on another full-service legal office at the Jordan Downs housing complex in Los Angeles’ historic Watts neighborhood as it undergoes a $1 billion redevelopment. Thanks to your generous and growing support, we added an additional five staff attorneys to our ranks, bringing our total staff size to 100. We broadened our Hernán Vera work in Sacramento by sponsoring, drafting, and supporting numerous bills in President and CEO the last legislative term that will improve the lives of tens of thousands of foster children and youth with developmental disabilities around the state. We have increased our docket of impact cases, obtained legal protection for thousands of LAUSD students who faced losing more than 70% of their teachers to layoffs, and protected 3,400 Section 8 families in the Antelope Valley from a campaign of harassment and discrimination by their municipal leaders.
    [Show full text]