Wednesday, November 11, 2009

"Tweaks"

Now, no one is more of a defender of an independent high school press than the Vega, having once been the proud editor of a suspended high school newspaper. But I'm missing the outrage here. I'm not so sure how unusual it is to ask to review attributed quotes before publication. It is certainly not uncommon (I saw it in All the President's Men, dammit!) to read something to a source and ask for factual confirmation before it's published. And frankly, given Scalia's famed openness, Kennedy is a veritable ray of sunshine. It sounds like the appearance was a waste of time, anyway...for the students.

The article itself, by Kristian Bailey, a Dalton senior and one of the paper’s editors in chief, is a straightforward account of Justice Kennedy’s biography and his wide-ranging remarks. The article is expected to be published in the paper’s next issue. Editors at The Daltonian either would not comment for this article or did not respond to requests for an interview, although a staff member provided a draft of The Daltonian’s article.

At the assembly, Justice Kennedy discussed the separation of powers, federalism, Isaac Newton (“the poster boy for the Enlightenment”) and George Washington (“the poster boy for the Constitution”), according to the article. One student quoted in the article expressed disappointment that Justice Kennedy had not had time to answer the written questions students had been asked to submit.

Labels:

Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Liberal fascism at Yankee stadium

It's long been the case that the ushers at Yankee Stadium stop all movement in the aisles during the singing of the National Anthem. Fine. A little twisted, but fine.

Now, however, it seems that some NYC PD officers think it is a crime to want to take a bathroom break during the forced patriotism of the seventh inning stretch.

A police dept. spokesman said the man was unruly, drunk, and screaming profanity while standing on his seat. The NYPD is, of course, a credible source.

Labels: ,

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

RICO'd free speech

It's Tuesday, so it's Adam Liptak day. It's bad enough a corporation would try to silence critics using RICO statutes. That a judge would agree with their argument is very disturbing.

Smithfield Foods, which raises, kills and processes more pigs than any company on earth, does not like some of the things a union has been saying about conditions at its giant slaughterhouse in Tar Heel, N.C., where 4,650 people work and 32,000 hogs die every day.

So Smithfield has filed a racketeering lawsuit against the union, on the theory that speaking out about labor, environmental and safety issues in order to pressure the company to unionize amounts to extortion like that used by organized crime.

“It’s economic warfare,” explained G. Robert Blakey, one of Smithfield’s lawyers. “It’s actually the same thing as what John Gotti used to do. What the union is saying in effect to Smithfield is, ‘You’ve got to partner up with us to run your company.’ ”

One hesitates to argue with Mr. Blakey, who helped write the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, the 1970 law Smithfield is suing under, as a staff lawyer in the Senate. But what Mr. Blakey calls extortion sounds quite a bit like free speech.

Gene Bruskin, the director of the union’s organizing drive and a defendant in the suit, said his work “bears no relationship to the Mafia whatsoever.”

“If we kidnapped the C.E.O. and we said, ‘We know where your children go to school,’ that’s a Mafia-like act,” Mr. Bruskin said. “If we told the truth about how the company abuses workers to its customers, that’s traditional free speech.”

Smithfield says the union, the United Food and Commercial Workers International, and its officials violated RICO by issuing press releases, contacting civil rights and environmental groups, organizing protests and calling for boycotts.

But the most striking assertion in the suit, one Smithfield devotes five pages to, is that the union was engaged in racketeering when it urged local governments in New York, Boston and other cities to pass resolutions condemning the company. After meeting with the union in 2006, a dozen members of the New York City Council sponsored a resolution calling for the city to stop buying meat from Smithfield’s Tar Heel factory “until the company ends all forms of abuse, intimidation and violence against its workers,” citing a ruling by a federal appeals court in Washington that Smithfield had engaged in “intense and widespread coercion” in battling unionization at its Tar Heel plant.

Councilwoman Melissa Mark-Viverito was a sponsor of the resolution, and she said she had been happy to meet with representatives of labor and business groups to hear their concerns. The practice Smithfield calls racketeering is, Ms. Mark-Viverito said, what others call lobbying. The First Amendment has a name for it, too: the right to petition the government.

I know both sides of this, as I once had a client -- a bottled water company -- that was sued under RICO by smaller competitors (I had to give a deposition). That was stupid and the case was, I believe, dismissed without merit. This, on the other hand, is corporate anti-democracy and rank union-busting.

The whole thing is worth a read.

Labels:

Friday, September 21, 2007

We don't need no stinking First Amendment

The ad was stupid. This is worse.

Labels:

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com Site Meter