DOCSLIB.ORG

Asset Forfeiture Victory 2 Victory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Asset Forfeiture Victory 2 Victory March 2001 Volume 10 Issue 2 Inside This Issue Illinois School Choice Asset Forfeiture Victory 2 Victory IJ’s Chairman of the Board Celebrates 10 Years of “The IJ Way” 3 IJ Takes on Eminent Domain Abuse In Connecticut 6 With the Institute for Justice’s help, Carol Thomas won her car back after it was unconstitutionally taken from her. She is now continuing her legal challenge to end the government’s abuse of civil asset forfeiture. By Scott Bullock Court Judge G. Thomas Bowen, reading from the Carol Thomas—a former Cumberland County bench, dismissed the government’s claim against her New Assistant Director deputy sheriff whose own car was seized when her car, and ordered both the title to her car and a Joins IJ Clinic son was caught in a marijuana bust—has her car and $1,500 bond she posted to be returned to her. But her cash back, but she is not ready to give up her just as important, the judge allowed a counterclaim fight to overturn New Jersey’s unconstitutional civil for- filed by Thomas and the Institute for Justice challeng- 10 feiture laws. The Institute represented Thomas (and ing the state’s civil forfeiture law to continue in court. her car) not only in her successful effort to reclaim Judge Bowen found that even though Thomas’ case is ownership of her car but also to challenge what drives over, it is in the public interest to decide whether or civil forfeiture abuse in New Jersey and in many other not New Jersey’s perverse incentive structure violates states: the direct profit incentive underlying the laws, the Due Process Clause of the Constitution, especially Published Bimonthly by the whereby police and prosecutors are entitled to keep since the government has not changed its policy of Institute for Justice the cash and property they seize. distributing forfeited property to the very agencies On January 19 of this year, the Institute secured charged with enforcing the law. visit us online: an early-round victory in Thomas’ case when Superior www.ij.org Forfeiture continued on page 5 Illinois Appellate Court Upholds Constitutionality of Choice By Matthew Berry Rather, the tax credit allows Illinois par- In a significant victory for Illinois families ents to keep more of their own money as well as for school choice supporters nation- to spend on the education of their chil- wide, the Appellate Court of Illinois for the dren as they see fit. Fourth Judicial District in a decision issued on The court went on to say, howev- February 8 unanimously upheld the constitu- er, that the tax credit would still be tionality of the Illinois educational expenses tax constitutional even if one considered credit law. The ruling was handed down the money claimed through the credit Excerpt from approximately three months after oral argument to constitute public funds. This is “Presidential Update” was held in Springfield, Illinois. At that argu- because the tax credit is fully consis- Cleveland Teachers ment, IJ defended the constitutionality of the tent with both U.S. Supreme Court Union Newsletter credit on behalf of 12 Illinois families. and Illinois Supreme Court precedents Because of this decision, when IJ’s clients indicating that programs providing gen- “. I got an interesting note from and other Illinois taxpayers file their tax returns eral educational assistance are consti- one of our elementary teachers this spring, they will be sending less money to tutional so long as religious and nonre- along the lines of, "Why are you the government, which will enable them to ligious options are treated equally and wasting your time with vouchers spend more money on their children’s educa- funds are guided by the private and and charter schools instead of tion. The February ruling of the three-judge independent choices of parents. important issues like how unpre- panel was the third decision by an Illinois court IJ also represents Illinois families pared the students are to learn and affirming the constitutionality of the tax credit in in a separate case challenging the other more pressing issues like less than two years; two Illinois trial courts had constitutionality of the tax credit. Oral inclusion and lack of supplies." already dismissed challenges to the credit filed argument was held before the My answer was . vouchers and by the Illinois Education Association, Illinois Appellate Court of Illinois for the Fifth charter schools are like cancer: Judicial they are silent killers of your The tax credit allows Illinois parents to keep more District in career and public education in of their own money to spend on the education of Mount general. They are not going to go their children as they see fit. Vernon, away by themselves, they have to Illinois, be made to go away, and you Federation of Teachers and other special-inter- earlier this year, and we expect a deci- don't have the time to do that. I est organizations opposed to education reform. sion in that case to be released by the do (I make the time), and that's is The teachers’ unions and their allies argue middle of the summer. [sic] what you pay me to do. .” that the law, which provides a credit against Although the teachers’ unions will state income taxes for 25 percent of tuition, undoubtedly appeal their recent defeat book fees or lab fees incurred by K-12 students to the Illinois Supreme Court, five at public or private schools up to a maximum of judges have now looked at the educa- $500 per family, violates four provisions of the tional expenses tax credit, and all five Illinois Constitution, two of which deal with have concluded that it’s constitutional. establishment of religion. The appellate court, That record of success makes us however, emphatically rejected these argu- hopeful about our prospects in our ments. remaining battles defending the consti- The opinion written by Justice Rita Garman tutionality of the credit.N was a complete victory for school choice sup- porters. The court ruled that the tax credit Matthew Berry is an Institute for Justice attorney. does not violate the Illinois Constitution because no public money is spent at religious schools. 2 March 2001 Board Chairman Dave Kennedy On IJ’s 10th Anniversary Bolick wanted to make to start a new non-lawyers. They belong to the kind of public interest law firm. The organization not for any specific year was 1986, and knowing Chip expertise they may bring, but rather, and Clint, I looked forward to hearing for their fundamental commitment to what they had to say. Not surprising- the mission of the Institute—securing ly, they brought passion, vision and the rule of law essential to a society intellect to the proposal. However, I of free and responsible individuals. had to give them my candid advice This Board is a marvelous collection when they asked, and that was that of deeply committed individuals who they were not quite yet seasoned give freely and much more than gen- enough to pull off the ambitious erously of their time, their energies agenda they had in mind. That set and their personal resources. the two of them off to develop the Added to that kind of commit- strategic litigation blueprints, fundrais- ment at the Board level, is a staff—a IJ Chairman of the Board Dave Kennedy personifies IJ’s ing talents, management acumen team—of individuals who, at their rela- commitment to principle and tireless devotion to action and other skills they brought together tively very young age, would make and results. when they finally launched the any idealist proud. They share com- By Dave Kennedy Institute for Justice ten years ago. pletely the Board’s commitment and The experience since then has been, devotion to principle. They work long It’s hard to believe it was more for me at least, a dream come true. hours, tirelessly and always without than 20 years ago when I first met Since the Institute began, it has complaint, to further the cause of indi- Chip Mellor, and Clint Bolick only the been characterized by a steadfast vidual liberty, and to vindicate the year following. We all lived out West commitment to principle and at the rights of our clients. All of this they do and became involved with a regional same time by a tireless devotion to in a very special way, which we have public interest law firm based in action and results. As anyone who all come to call simply “The IJ Way.” Denver, Colorado. Each of us felt has started a business in either the You just have to understand passionately about the overarching, profit or non-profit world knows, the how incredibly inspiring it is for all of coercive arm of government and its start-up phase is a make-or-break us to be affiliated with such an enter- intrusion into the daily lives of not just time of great intensity. That was cer- prise! each of us, but into the lives of plain, tainly true at the Institute for Justice. As we look ahead, the future of ordinary people everywhere. We tried I remember fondly, and with some IJ has never looked brighter. We to do something about intrusive gov- amazement, those early days when know there will always be challenges, ernmental action—about unaccount- we were confronting the challenge of but with the strength and integrity this able bureaucrats presuming to force actually creating an organization that organization has demonstrated over “solutions” and programs on others would leave its mark on constitutional the years, we will turn those chal- because those bureaucrats “knew jurisprudence.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture
    The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture by Marian R. Williams, Ph.D. Jefferson E. Holcomb, Ph.D. Tomislav V. Kovandzic, Ph.D. Scott Bullock March 2010 The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture by Marian R. Williams, Ph.D. Jefferson E. Holcomb, Ph.D. Tomislav V. Kovandzic, Ph.D. Scott Bullock March 2010 I 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary 6 Foreword by Scott Bullock 9 Part I: Policing for Profit 15 What is Civil Asset Forfeiture? 15 Incentives for Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture 15 Profit Motive 17 An Unlevel Playing Field for Property Owners 20 Standard of Proof 20 Burden on Innocent Owners 23 Federal Equitable Sharing 23 Extent and Nature of Asset Forfeiture in the United States 27 Data Sources 27 Part I: Policing for Profit I: Policing Part Findings 29 Is Law Enforcement Policing for Profit? 35 Analysis 37 Results 37 Part II: Grading the States 41 How to Use “Grading the States” 41 State Grades 43 Alabama 46 Alaska 47 Part II Part Arizona 48 Arkansas 49 I 3 California 50 Colorado 51 Connecticut 52 Delaware 53 Florida 54 Georgia 55 Hawaii 56 Idaho 57 Illinois 58 Indiana 59 Iowa 60 Kansas 61 Kentucky 62 Louisiana 63 Maine 64 Part II: Grading the States Part Maryland 65 Massachusetts 66 Michigan 67 Minnesota 69 Mississippi 71 Missouri 72 Montana 73 Nebraska 74 Nevada 75 I 4 New Hampshire 76 New Jersey 77 New Mexico 78 New York 79 North Carolina 80 North Dakota 81 Ohio 82 Oklahoma 83 Oregon 85 Pennsylvania 86 Rhode Island 88 South Carolina 89 South Dakota 90 Tennessee 91 Part II: Grading the States Part Texas 92 Utah 94 Vermont 95 Virginia 96 Washington 98 West Virginia 100 Wisconsin 101 Wyoming 102 I 5 Stories of Civil Forfeiture Abuse Shakedown in Tenaha, Texas 16 Extravagance with Forfeiture Funds in Camden County, Ga.
    [Show full text]
  • LITTLE PINK HOUSE a True Story of Defiance and Courage
    LITTLE PINK HOUSE A True Story of Defiance and Courage Jeff Benedict & Scott Bullock Center of the American Experiment is a nonpartisan, tax-exempt, public policy and educational institution that brings conservative and free market ideas to bear on the hardest problems facing Minnesota and the nation. MARCH 2010 LITTLE PINK HOUSE A True Story of Defiance and Courage JEFF BENEDICT & SCOTT BULLOCK Jointly Sponsored by The Federalist Society – Minnesota Lawyers Chapter Institute for Justice – Minnesota Chapter Center of the American Experiment Introduction More often than not, those studies were filled with the same modern planning-speak about the Before there were Tea Parties, there was Kelo. importance of “redevelopment and revitalization” Susette Kelo’s name turned into a movement. in a “public transport centric manner” to create a Her loss of her property was the final straw for “gateway community” with “upscale amenities” and Americans in 2005. When they heard about the “large anchors” designed under “smart growth tools” Kelo decision, homeowners and small businesses to ensure “sustainability” and conducted under the across this country refused to accept the idea that auspices of a “public-private partnership.” a well-connected developer could turn city hall into a real estate broker and force a hardworking, Well, Susette Kelo personified the opposition to honest, middle-aged nurse to leave her home all of that gobbledygook and Americans knew that for the economic benefits accruing to a large those words just meant two things for them: that pharmaceutical company and the political benefits corporate welfare now extended to land grabs, and accruing to a soon-to-be jailed governor.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 5: Civil Rights Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Supreme Court Preview Conferences, Events, and Lectures 1996 Section 5: Civil Rights Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School Repository Citation Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School, "Section 5: Civil Rights" (1996). Supreme Court Preview. 77. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview/77 Copyright c 1996 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview THE SUPREMES FIND A THEME The Court Steers to the Center And Stresses Equal Rights The Washington Post, OUTLOOK Sunday, July 7, 1996 Garrett Epps What in the world is happening at the Supreme for example is the beginning of the court's opinion Court? The justices split three ways in deciding in Adarand Constructors v. Pena, a high-profile whether the government could restrict "indecent" affirmative-action case from the 1994-95 term: programming on cable TV, and then refused to "O'CONNOR, J., announced the judgment review Hopwoodv. Texas, a closely watched case in of the Court and delivered an opinion with which a lower court threw into doubt the whole area respect to Parts I, II, r-A, 1-B, III-D, and IV, of affirmative action in higher education admissions. which was for the Court except insofar as it But confusion at the Rehnquist court is old might be inconsistent with the views expressed news; we've been reading about it for nearly a in the concurrence of SCALIA, J., and an decade.
    [Show full text]
  • JOURNAL of LAW & Public Policy
    Volume 1 Number 2 Fall 2010 GROVE CITY COLLEGE JOURNAL OF LAW & Public Policy Five Years After Kelo: The Sweeping Backlash Against One of the Supreme Court’s Most-Despised Decisions . Scott G. Bullock Equal Protection or First Amendment Freedoms: Which Would New Jersey Rather Lose? Boy Scouts of America v. Dale and Bernstein v. OGCMA . Kevin A. Hoffman Do Unto Others, or Watch over Your Shoulder? Tracing Sanctuary and Illegal Immigration as a Church and State Issue . Samuel S. Stanton, Jr. Jared M. Walczak District of Columbia v. Heller: A Dispute over Historical Fact . Esther J. Winne Federalism, Family Law and the Supreme Court . Michael L. Coulter Politics and Justice: A Critical Look at the Disenfranchisement of Felons in America . Elizabeth A. Oklevitch GROVE CITY COLLEGE Journal of Law & Public Policy Volume 1 Number 2 Fall 2010 CONTENTS Editor’s Preface . James R. R. Van Eerden viii Foreword from the President . Richard G. Jewell xi Five Years After Kelo: The Sweeping Backlash Against One of the Supreme Court’s Most-Despised Decisions . Scott G. Bullock 99 Equal Protection or First Amendment Freedoms: Which Would New Jersey Rather Lose? Boy Scouts of America v. Dale and Bernstein v. OGCMA . Kevin A. Hoffman 117 Do Unto Others, or Watch over Your Shoulder? Tracing Sanctuary and Illegal Immigration as a Church and State Issue . Samuel S. Stanton, Jr. 137 Jared M. Walczak District of Columbia v. Heller: A Dispute over Historical Fact . Esther J. Winne 177 Federalism, Family Law and the Supreme Court . Michael L. Coulter 191 Politics and Justice: A Critical Look at the Disenfranchisement of Felons in America .
    [Show full text]
  • LITTLE PINK HOUSE a Film by Courtney Moorehead Balaker
    Presents a Korchula Productions film in association with Brightlight Pictures • based on the book by Jeff Benedict LITTLE PINK HOUSE a film by Courtney Moorehead Balaker Starring Catherine Keener, Jeanne Tripplehorn, and Callum Keith Rennie Screenplay is adapted from Jeff Benedict’s book, Little Pink House: A True Story of Defiance and Courage. Original song "Home Free" by DAVID CROSBY OnDemand & Digital Release: July 24, 2018 Publicity/Press Contact: Film Sales Contact: Producer Contact: Samuel Goldwyn Films FILM MODE ENTERTAINMENT KORCHULA PRODUCTIONS Ryan Boring Clay Epstein Ted Balaker 310.860.3113 818-426-6359 310-913-0398 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] AWARDS & HONORS “The bottom line—it hits a nerve … unmistakable timeliness … excellent performances … Jeanne Tripplehorn performs with force and complexity … Little Pink House brings urgency to a fascinating, underexplored theme.” THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER “Catherine Keener nails the combination of anger, grace, and attitude that made Susette Kelo a nationally known crusader.” DEADLINE HOLLYWOOD “When bulldozers show up and demolish the house next door, the sensation is almost akin to watching a bloodbath. The hypnotically controlled shots recall nothing so much as Eisenstein at his best, no low compliment for a debut filmmaker.” POP DUST Winner, HBO Audience Award, Provincetown International Film Festival Winner, Audience Choice Award, Vail Film Festival Winner, Jimmy Stewart Legacy Award, Heartland Film Festival Winner, Grand Prize,
    [Show full text]
  • Short Circuit 136
    Short Circuit 136 Anya Bidwell 00:07 Welcome to this special edition of the Short Circuit podcast. I'm your host, Ayana Bidwell and with me today are four outstanding guests. As President and General counsel, Scott Bullock. Hi, Scott. Scott Bullock 00:19 Hello. Anya Bidwell 00:21 And three IJ senior attorneys Dick Komer. Hi, Dick. Dick Komer 00:25 Hi, Anya. Anya Bidwell 00:26 Wesley Hottot. Hey! Wesley Hottot 00:28 Hi. Anya Bidwell 00:29 And Bill Maurer. Hi, Bill. Bill Maurer 00:31 Hi. Anya Bidwell 00:33 What do they all have in common? All four of them argued before the United States Supreme Court. Today on the podcast they will tell us about their orator experiences and share some wisdom with those of you listening who one day will be making your own arguments before the court. I'm anxious to dive - 1 - Transcribed by https://otter.ai in. But first, let me briefly talk about IJ’s US Supreme Court practice. We have had nine cases before the court, including the most recent one, Brownback vs King, a police accountability case, which will be argued next year. So far, we won all but one of the cases Kelo v. City of New London and Scott, I'll put you on the spot for that one. These victories have often been secured with broad coalitions of justices. Wesley here brought a unanimous victory in our civil forfeiture Eighth Amendment incorporation case, Timbs vs. Indiana and Michael Bindas’s economic liberty case, Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association v.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Studies Research Paper Series
    Jeff Benedict’s The Little Pink House: The Back Story of the Kelo Case, a book review (Forthcoming in 42 CONN. L. REV. (February 2010)) George Lefcoe USC Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09-32 LEGAL STUDIES RESEARCH PAPER SERIES University of Southern California Law School Los Angeles, CA 90089-0071 Jeff Benedict’s The Little Pink House: The Back Story of the Kelo Case Book Review by George Lefcoe Little Pink House is a fast paced account by Jeff Benedict of the events surrounding the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London. Along with tracking Benedict’s story line, this review also highlights some of the core legal and policy issues that are an important part of the story for law-trained readers. At the core of the tale is how Kelo and a handful of her neighbors challenged the New London Development Corporation’s (NLDC) use of eminent domain for the economic redevelopment of the Fort Trumbull neighborhood. A libertarian-inspired public interest law firm named the Institute for Justice (IJ) agreed to represent the beleaguered property owners. IJ challenged the notion that economic development could be regarded as a public use. IJ also unfurled an effective national public relations campaign against what it dubs eminent domain abuse. Benedict gives us front row seats to see how the media drama unfolded. IJ lost the Kelo case in the Connecticut and US Supreme Courts. A majority of judges in both courts flatly rejected IJ’s contention that takings for economic development weren’t for a public use.
    [Show full text]
  • The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture
    The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture by Marian R. Williams, Ph.D. Jefferson E. Holcomb, Ph.D. Tomislav V. Kovandzic, Ph.D. Scott Bullock March 2010 The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture by Marian R. Williams, Ph.D. Jefferson E. Holcomb, Ph.D. Tomislav V. Kovandzic, Ph.D. Scott Bullock March 2010 Table of Contents Executive Summary 6 Foreword by Scott Bullock 9 Part I: Policing for Profit 15 What is Civil Asset Forfeiture? 15 Incentives for Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture 15 Profit Motive 17 An Unlevel Playing Field for Property Owners 20 Standard of Proof 20 Burden on Innocent Owners 23 Federal Equitable Sharing 23 Extent and Nature of Asset Forfeiture in the United States 27 Data Sources 27 Part I: Policing for Profit I: Policing Part Findings 29 Is Law Enforcement Policing for Profit? 35 Analysis 37 Results 37 Part II: Grading the States 41 How to Use “Grading the States” 41 State Grades 43 Alabama 46 Alaska 47 Part II Part Arizona 48 Arkansas 49 California 50 Colorado 51 Connecticut 52 Delaware 53 Florida 54 Georgia 55 Hawaii 56 Idaho 57 Illinois 58 Indiana 59 Iowa 60 Kansas 61 Kentucky 62 Louisiana 63 Maine 64 Part II: Grading the States Part Maryland 65 Massachusetts 66 Michigan 67 Minnesota 69 Mississippi 71 Missouri 72 Montana 73 Nebraska 74 Nevada 75 New Hampshire 76 New Jersey 77 New Mexico 78 New York 79 North Carolina 80 North Dakota 81 Ohio 82 Oklahoma 83 Oregon 85 Pennsylvania 86 Rhode Island 88 South Carolina 89 South Dakota 90 Tennessee 91 Part II: Grading the States Part Texas 92 Utah 94 Vermont 95 Virginia 96 Washington 98 West Virginia 100 Wisconsin 101 Wyoming 102 Stories of Civil Forfeiture Abuse Shakedown in Tenaha, Texas 16 Extravagance with Forfeiture Funds in Camden County, Ga.
    [Show full text]
  • Judge Daniel Boggs U.S
    Keynote Guest Speaker Judge Daniel Boggs U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Louisville, Kentucky Judge Boggs was born in Havana, Cuba, October 23, 1944. He grew up in Bowling Green, Kentucky, and then attended Harvard College. He received his A.B. degree cum laude from Harvard in 1965, after twice winning the Coolidge Debate Prize and serving as President of the National Model General Assembly. He attended the University of Chicago Law School on a Mechem Scholarship, was elected to Law Review, and won the Hinton Moot Court competition. After receiving his Juris Doctor degree in 1968, and being elected to Order of the Coif, he taught at the Law School for the 1968-69 academic year. He then returned to Kentucky, where he served as Deputy Commissioner of the Department of Economic Security (1969-70), Legal Counsel to the Governor (1970-71) and Legislative Counsel to the Minority in the State House of Representatives (1972). He was called to Washington, where he served as Assistant to the Solicitor General of the United States (1973-75), Assistant to the Chairman of the Federal Power Commission (1975-77), and Deputy Minority Counsel to the United States Senate Energy Committee (1977-79). He then left government and entered private practice. He returned to serve as Assistant Director of the White House Office of Policy Development and Special Assistant to the President of the United States (1981-83), and Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy (1983-86). In 1986 he was appointed by the President to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the 2006 Templeton Lecture
    2006 TEMPLETON LECTURE: EMINENT DOMAIN POST-KELO INTRODUCTION TO THE 2006 TEMPLETON LECTURE HITrING HOME-THE SUPREME COURT EARNS PUBLIC NOTICE OPINING ON PUBLIC USE Douglas W Kmiec Supreme Court decisions often make headlines-for a day or so. Then, the nation's attention usually moves on. But there is nothing usual about the Court's decision in Kelo v. New London,' and despite the continued anxiety of the war on terror, the nation's attention re- mains transfixed upon what many see as an injustice and an abuse of eminent domain power sanctioned by a narrow 54 majority. Oth- ers-mostly public officials-assess the outcome quite differently, as the pursuit of overriding community good. Those skeptical of the Court's handiwork cannot credit how forcing families from their homes for the economic development advantage of other private owners is explainable by the constitutional words "public use." The Court's defenders say it is all a matter of settled precedent. Scott Bullock, who with the Institute for Justice represented Susette Kelo and the other families whose homes were targeted for destruction in Kelo, concurs in the public's puzzlement and dismay. Thomas Merrill of Columbia does not. Professor Merrill sees the de- cision in Kelo as an unsurprising application of existing case law. Unsurprising or not, Congress and dozens of states have intro- duced legislation seeking to bolster the protection of private prop- erty. Legislation has passed the House expressing the view that "emi- nent domain should never be used to advantage one private party over another."2 Proposed federal legislation would limit the use of federal power or money for condemnations or expressly exclude such private economic development from the meaning of "public use.
    [Show full text]
  • Institute for Justice in Support of Petitioner
    No. 13-1487 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- TONY HENDERSON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eleventh Circuit --------------------------------- --------------------------------- BRIEF FOR AMICUS CURIAE INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER --------------------------------- --------------------------------- SCOTT BULLOCK DAVID G. POST,ESQ.* ROBERT E. JOHNSON 3225 33rd Place N.W. INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE Washington, DC 20008 901 North Glebe Rd. (202) 256-7375 Suite 900 [email protected] Arlington, VA 22203 (703) 682-9320 Counsel for Amicus Curiae Institute for Justice *Counsel of Record ================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................... ii INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE ........................ 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................ 1 ARGUMENT ........................................................... 5 I. UNDER THE ONE FORD COACH CANON OF CONSTRUCTION, STATUTORY LANGUAGE MUST BE CONSTRUED TO AVOID FORFEITURES .............................. 5 II. THE DECISION BELOW TURNS THE ONE FORD COACH PRINCIPLE UPSIDE-DOWN ........................................... 11 III.
    [Show full text]
  • AIER Summer Fellowship
    American Institute for Economic Research Great Barrington, MA www.aier.org AIER Summer Fellowship Since 1946 Summer 2007 PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS: Modern Explorations into Economic Foundations • Interactive, in- tensive econom- At the AIER Summer social theory. At AIER, support—our average ics seminars Fellowship Program, stu- participants apply a his- in-absentia fellowship dents who are applying to torical, institutional, and award exceeds $5,000. • Guest lectures or enrolled in a doctoral methodological focus to Visiting Research delivered by re- program in economics, economics, as distinct Fellows receive a stipend, nowned speakers as well as econom- housing, office space • Learn from and ics professors, gain and access to our ex- network with a unique, objective tensive library. distinguished perspective into Each of our month- visiting scholars economic, monetary, long sessions brings • Engage in critical and social issues. together students and thinking about As an indepen- scholars to live, learn, important eco- dent, nonprofit The “Castle” on the 100-acre read, write and social- AIER campus. nomic issues economic research ize in residence at the institution, AIER is free from traditional under- AIER campus. from the influence of graduate and graduate Located in Great INSIDE THIS any special interest or instruction. Barrington in western ISSUE: concentration of wealth. Student Fellows re- Massachusetts, AIER is This independence ceive a weekly stipend, situated in the beautiful About the allows us the freedom to and room and board. Berkshire hills—home Program 2 focus on educating stu- All qualified students to numerous world class The Seminars 4 dents by moving beyond are eligible to apply for cultural and recreational textbook economic and graduate school financial attractions.
    [Show full text]