Politics, Government and Business in Southern California's Inland Empire
PolitiCal
On politics in the Golden State
By Paige St. John
May 13, 2013, 3:59 p.m.
Gov. Jerry Brown has, as promised, filed legal papers to appeal federal court orders to reduce the state’s prison population with the U.S. Supreme Court.
By Denny Walsh
dwalsh@sacbee.com
Published: Thursday, May. 2, 2013 – 10:53 pm | Page 1A
Last Modified: Friday, May. 3, 2013 – 7:53 am
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — The Brown administration told a federal court Thursday night that to further reduce inmate prison population the Legislature would have to agree to dramatically restructure the laws governing California’s corrections system.
By David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times
April 30, 2013
WASHINGTON — Americans do not have a right to obtain public records from states other than their own, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, dealing a setback to businesses and researchers who gather data across the nation.
Landmark case will determine whether gays can marry in California, possibly nationwide
By Howard Mintz, San Jose Mercury News
Posted: 03/26/2013 04:51:33 PM PDT
Updated: 03/26/2013 04:56:33 PM PDT
WASHINGTON — Struggling with the gay marriage issue for the first time in history, the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday resembled the kid at the end of the highest diving board at the pool for the first time – inclined to turn around and try another day rather than take a bold jump into an uncertain future.
By Robert Barnes
Published: March 25 | Updated: Tuesday, March 26, 7:07 AM
A four-year legal battle to extend the right of marriage to same-sex couples no matter where they live gets its moment before the Supreme Court on Tuesday in historic oral arguments difficult to imagine even a decade ago.
Bob Egelko
Updated 10:30 p.m., Friday, December 7, 2012
More than eight years after San Francisco’s mayor told city clerks to ignore state law and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and four years after gays and lesbians first won and then lost the right to wed in California, the burning question of who can marry in the state – and perhaps the nation – has reached the U.S. Supreme Court.
Bob Egelko
Updated 10:51 p.m., Friday, November 30, 2012
The U.S. Supreme Court was unexpectedly silent Friday about whether it will take its first look at same-sex marriage, in cases involving California’s Proposition 8 and a law banning federal recognition and benefits for married same-sex couples.
Published: Nov. 29, 2012 Updated: 6:26 p.m.
By BRIAN JOSEPH / THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
Same-sex marriage could be legal in California by the end of Friday.
Or the legal wrangling over Proposition 8 could continue for several more months — or even longer.
By JENNIFER HABERKORN
6/28/12 10:08 AM EDT
Updated: 6/28/12 11:10 AM EDT
The Supreme Court upheld most of President Barack Obama’s health care law Thursday, ruling that Congress did not overstep its power by requiring nearly all Americans to buy health insurance.
Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the court’s four liberal justices in the ruling, which says Congress had the authority to impose the law’s individual mandate under Congress’s taxing power.
By Sam Baker and Jonathan Easley – 06/25/12 10:40 AM ET
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday tossed out most of Arizona’s controversial immigration law.
The court upheld the most controversial part of the law, which allows law enforcement officials to verify a person’s legal status when they’re stopped on suspicion of committing a separate offense.
By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press
Posted: 06/25/2012 07:27:27 AM PDT
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court says it’s unconstitutional to sentence juveniles to life in prison without parole for murder.
Sunday, June 23, 2012 – 11:00 a.m.
News from across the transom this Sunday morning.
Arnett to challenge Shorett again
Joe Arnett is going to take another shot at unseating San Bernardino City Councilman Fred Shorett.
By Jon Ortiz
jortiz@sacbee.com
Published: Friday, Jun. 22, 2012 – 12:00 am | Page 1A
Last Modified: Friday, Jun. 22, 2012 – 7:48 am
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that California’s largest state employee union violated the free speech rights of 28,000 so-called “fair-share” nonmembers by coercing them to finance political campaigns in 2005 and 2006.
The 7-2 ruling highlights the strained relationship between Service Employes International Union Local 1000 and its nonmember contributors and could have implications for a key November initiative that would restrict union fundraising.
Thursday, June 21, 2012 – 08:45 a.m.
News coming across the transom this morning.
No healthcare ruling from Supreme Court
It looks like next week will be the week. Next Monday that is.
By Chad Terhune, Los Angeles Times
April 1, 2012, 9:42 p.m.
As doubts grow about the survival of the federal healthcare law, state officials are considering ways to keep key elements of the legislation alive in California.
Skepticism of the Affordable Care Act by conservative Supreme Court justices during oral arguments last week has raised the possibility the court will strike the individual mandate to purchase health coverage or throw out the entire law as unconstitutional.
By David G. Savage, Washington Bureau
March 31, 2012, 5:05 p.m.
WASHINGTON — When the incoming Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. came before the Senate for confirmation seven years ago, President Reagan’s solicitor general gave him a warm endorsement as a “careful, modest” judge.
Money & Politics | Daily Report
March 23, 2012 | Will Evans
Wealthy Californians are keeping the money flowing to super political action committees, even as some state lawmakers want to turn off the faucet.
Super PACs on the left and right drew hefty contributions last month from the rich and famous – such as controversial comedian Bill Maher and GOP mega-donor Jerry Perenchio – as well as from the merely rich.
By George F. Will,
Published: February 10, 2012
All elected officials, and those who help finance elections in the expectation that certain promises will be kept — and everyone who cares about the rule of law — should hope the Supreme Court agrees to hear Don Siegelman’s appeal of his conviction. Until the court clarifies what constitutes quid pro quo political corruption, Americans engage in politics at their peril because prosecutors have dangerous discretion to criminalize politics.
McClatchy Newspapers
Created: 11/09/2011 01:39:10 AM PST
California’s ban on the commercial slaughter of downed livestock will come before the Supreme Court today, in a case that pits state against federal power.
By Kevin Yamamura
kyamamura@sacbee.com
Published: Sunday, Oct. 16, 2011 – 12:00 am | Page 1A
Last Modified: Sunday, Oct. 16, 2011 – 1:44 pm
Inmates in orange jumpsuits trudge across the screen against an ominous soundtrack. Gov. Jerry Brown appears in hazy black-and-white footage. Later, a tattooed skinhead and some shirtless thugs loom.
Friday, October 7, 2011 – 10:15 a.m.
“Fathom the Hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured… but not everyone must prove they are a citizen.”
Associated Press
Posted: 09/27/2011 10:33:32 AM PDT
WASHINGTON – In a case stemming from Rialto, the Supreme Court will decide whether private lawyers hired as outside counsels for governments can be sued.
Sunday, July 31, 2011 – 09:25 a.m.
The demand for campaign finance reform in San Bernardino County has reared its head once again.
Corrections officials hope to cut state prison population by 40,000
Neil Nisperos, Staff Writer
Created: 07/09/2011 10:19:28 PM PDT
County jail officials are bracing for a significant influx of prisoners as the state gets closer to sending them thousands of low-level inmates.
By Michael Doyle
mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com
Published: Tuesday, Jun. 28, 2011 – 12:00 am | Page 3A
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday undercut states’ negotiating clout with Indian tribes, effectively upholding a decision that the state of California overreached when it sought to compel general fund payments in exchange for casino approvals.
Privatization call draws criticism from officials
Neil Nisperos, Staff Writer
Created: 06/11/2011 10:24:02 PM PDT
Gov. Jerry Brown’s solution to meet a court-ordered prison reduction is to shift low-level state inmates to county jails, but others say turning to private prisons is a good idea as well.
By Jack Dolan, Los Angeles Times
June 8, 2011
Reporting from Sacramento — California is in danger of violating the first court-ordered deadline for cutting its prison population unless lawmakers pass Gov. Jerry Brown’s tax plan, state officials said Tuesday.
By Dan Walters
dwalters@sacbee.com The Sacramento Bee
Published: Wednesday, Jun. 8, 2011 – 12:00 am | Page 3A
California’s prison dilemma is a yeasty mélange of big money, power politics and constitutional law, and it’s difficult to know where one ends and another begins, as Gov. Jerry Brown’s response to last month’s U.S. Supreme Court decree underscores.
Capitol Alert
The latest on California politics and government
June 1, 2011
As Gov. Jerry Brown continued pushing his tax plan in a speech today, county leaders lobbying lawmakers on Brown’s behalf said there’s a new reason to think a budget deal may be near.
The recent Supreme Court ruling requiring California to reduce its prison population has been “a game changer” in budget talks, California State Association of Counties Executive Director Paul McIntosh said.
By David G. Savage, Washington Bureau
May 26, 2011, 5:59 p.m.
Reporting from Washington— The Supreme Court gave a big boost to proponents of stricter state laws against illegal immigration by upholding Arizona’s “business death penalty” for employers who repeatedly hire undocumented workers.
Skelton
By George Skelton Capitol Journal
May 26, 2011
From Sacramento– My initial gut reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ordering California to empty its prison cells of 33,000 criminals was that Gov. Jerry Brown should respond: “Easy for you to say. You have bodyguards.
By Jack Dolan and Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times
May 25, 2011
Reporting from Sacramento and Los Angeles — California’s effort to shift tens of thousands of inmates out of its chronically overcrowded prisons to comply with a U.S. Supreme Court order could be undone by the state’s tough sentencing laws, persistent recidivism and recurring budget crises, analysts say.
An undated photo from the California corrections department shows inmates in crowded conditions at the state prison in Lancaster. (California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation)
By David G. Savage and Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times
May 24, 2011
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that California must remove tens of thousands of inmates from its prison rolls in the next two years, and state officials vowed to comply, saying they hoped to do so without setting any criminals free.
Dan Walters
By Dan Walters
dwalters@sacbee.com The Sacramento Bee
Published: Tuesday, May. 24, 2011 – 12:00 am | Page 3A
Last Modified: Tuesday, May. 24, 2011 – 7:27 am
History should record the late 1970s as an era of pivotal socioeconomic change in California – a new wave of inter- national migration, a shift from an industrial to a post-industrial economy, and a new baby boom.
February 8th, 2011, 2:30 pm · posted by Kimberly Edds, Staff Writer
The County of Orange’s fight to overturn the county’s generous “3 percent at 50″ pension plan for sheriff’s deputies is not over just yet. Next stop: the California Supreme Court.
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
San Francisco Chronicle
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
The U.S. Supreme Court asked the Obama administration Monday to weigh in on whether California can require Indian tribes to share hundreds of millions of dollars in gambling revenue with the state when they expand their casinos.
By Howard Mintz
hmintz@mercurynews.com
Posted: 11/28/2010 12:01:00 AM PST
Updated: 11/28/2010 03:48:38 AM PST
For decades, California’s Legislature, governors and a parade of experts in managing state prisons have been unable to fix the state’s overgrown, bloated prison system. Now the U.S. Supreme Court must decide whether three federal judges have the power to do the fixing for them.
Sandra Emerson, Staff Writer
Created: 09/16/2010 09:55:35 PM PDT
UPLAND – Medical marijuana cooperatives fighting the city to stay open are looking to the state Supreme Court for help.
An attorney representing three cooperatives in the city has filed a petition for review and an application for a stay with the state Supreme Court in San Francisco.
Friday, September 10, 2010 – 08:15 a.m.
Remember John Hueston?
Hueston is the high-profile Democratic Party heavyweight Orange County lawyer who convinced the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors to hire him for a mission to pursue civil litigation against former County Assessor Bill Postmus and several of Postmus’ former office aides.
In convincing the board of supes to contract for his services, John Hueston presented himself as the federal prosecutor who five years ago secured convictions in jury trials against executives related to the collapse of merchant energy generator Enron.
PolitiCal
On politics in the Golden State
September 9, 2010 | 9:18 am
Democratic gubernatorial nominee Jerry Brown tore into Republican rival Meg Whitman on Thursday morning, accusing the billionaire of having a major conflict of interest concerning her proposal to eliminate state taxes on capital gains.
“Her so-called jobs plan, which is as phony as a three-dollar bill, is to give tax breaks to herself in one of grossest conflicts of interest I’ve ever seen in a campaign,” Brown said during his weekly interview on KGO radio in San Francisco.
The Senate approves Kagan, 63-37, as the nation’s 112th justice, with five Republicans crossing party lines to vote in her favor. For the first time in history, the court includes three female justices.
By James Oliphant, Tribune Washington Bureau
August 5, 2010|12:53 p.m.
WASHINGTON — The Senate confirmed Elena Kagan as the nation’s 112th justice of the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday in a largely partisan 63-37 vote.
Kagan, 50, the U.S. solicitor general, replaces the retired Justice John Paul Stevens. Once she is sworn into office, the Supreme Court will include for the first time in history three female justices. She will become the youngest justice to join the court since Clarence Thomas in 1991.
Published: Thursday, Aug. 5, 2010 – 12:00 am | Page 4A
Republican Senate hopeful Carly Fiorina announced Wednesday that she would not support President Barack Obama’s pick for U.S. Supreme Court.
Fiorina cited what she called U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan’s “lack of experience as a jurist” as she announced her position.
PolitiCal
On politics in the Golden State
August 4, 2010 | 2:11 pm
Republican Senate nominee Carly Fiorina said Wednesday she would oppose the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, citing concerns about her lack of judicial experience, which she said was a “key element” in determining whether a nominee is qualified for the high court.
“As a member of the Court, her duties would be to faithfully interpret the Constitution and, in many cases, to exercise judicial restraint,” Fiorina said in a statement. “Unfortunately, her complete lack of judicial experience coupled with a public record that sheds minimal light on how she would execute these duties gives me great pause about her qualifications to serve on the highest court in the land.”
10:00 PM PDT on Thursday, June 17, 2010
By RICHARD K. DE ATLEY
The Press-Enterprise
Ontario police officials did not violate the constitutional rights of an officer when they reviewed his personal messages to see if he was abusing privileges with his department-issued text pager, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
Some of those messages were sexually explicit.
If you’re a public employee, can your boss read your text messages sent from your work-issued telecommunications device?
And if your superiors can read your text messages, can they then discipline you for your action and charge you the cost associated with sending them?
Staff and Wire Reports
Posted: 04/19/2010 05:39:07 PM PDT
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court appears likely to rule against Ontario police officers who claimed the city violated their privacy by reading racy text messages they sent on their employers’ account.
Several justices said Monday that the Police Department acted reasonably in monitoring the text messages in view of its written policy warning employees they have no guarantee of privacy in the use of office computer and electronics equipment.
Joe Nelson, Staff Writer
Posted: 03/01/2010 02:58:28 PM PST
District Attorney Michael A. Ramos called for tighter regulation of political action committees as a way to combat corruption, but some county supervisors questioned whether they have the authority.
Supervisor Neil Derry said local governments cannot impose tighter restrictions on state-regulated PACs. He said a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that found it unconstitutional to place limits on how much corporations and unions can directly give to city elections has prompted the cities of San Diego and Los Angeles to lift contribution limits in their cities.
By GRIFF PALMER
Published: February 27, 2010
The Supreme Court decision last month allowing corporations to spend unlimited money on behalf of political candidates left a loophole that campaign finance lawyers say could allow companies to pay for extensive political advertising while avoiding the disclosure requirements the court appeared to leave intact.
Experts say the ruling, along with a pair of earlier Supreme Court cases, makes it possible for corporations and unions to donate anonymously to nonprofit civic leagues and trade associations. The groups can then use the money to finance the types of political advertisements that were at the heart of last month’s ruling, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
Capitol Journal
It “defies logic to presume that a corporation is entitled to the same constitutional rights as the people,” says Ross Johnson of the Fair Political Practices Commission. (Los Angeles Times)
How about tossing all limits and just fully disclosing?
By George Skelton Capitol Journal
January 28, 2010
From Sacramento
Maybe it’s time — time to junk all the political campaign contribution limits with their jumbo loopholes. Just give it up.
In many ways, the restrictions are useless and counterproductive, driving contributions underground and often through the laundry room.
When justices ruled to strike down laws limiting corporate political spending, they signaled a tough road ahead for Democrats’ regulatory measures.
By David G. Savage
January 24, 2010
Reporting from Washington – Five years ago, when John G. Roberts Jr. became the Supreme Court’s chief justice, he described the job as though he would be a minor functionary, more like an umpire behind the plate than the star of the game. He also said he favored minimal and narrow decisions, rather than broad but divisive rulings that would abruptly change the law.
Sen. Barbara Boxer’s reelection campaign will largely be the testing ground for the new rules in California.
By Shane Goldmacher
January 22, 2010
Reporting from Sacramento – The U.S. Supreme Court’s sweeping ruling Thursday to allow corporate spending in federal political campaigns could shift the playing field in Sen. Barbara Boxer’s reelection effort, congressional races across California and some municipal elections, notably in Los Angeles and San Diego.
The decision removes prohibitions on corporations and unions from spending their money to influence federal elections.
In a 5-4 decision that strikes down a 1907 law, the justices say the 1st Amendment gives corporations, just like individuals, a right to spend their own money on political ads for federal candidates.
By David G. Savage
January 21, 2010 | 9:28 a.m.
Reporting from Washington – The Supreme Court today overturned a century-old restriction on corporations using their money to sway federal elections and ruled that companies have a free-speech right to spend as much as they wish to persuade voters to elect or defeat candidates for Congress and the White House.
In a 5-4 decision, the court’s conservative bloc said corporations have the same 1st Amendment rights as individuals and, for that reason, the government may not stop corporations from spending freely to influence the outcome of federal elections.
Supreme Court to rule in case of employer access to workers’ text messages, privacy at issue
* On 10:28 am EST, Monday December 14, 2009
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Monday it will decide how much privacy workers have when they send text messages from company accounts.
The justices said they will review a federal appeals court ruling that sided with Ontario, Calif., police officers who complained that the department improperly snooped on their electronic exchanges. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco also faulted the text-messaging service for turning over transcripts of the messages without the officers’ consent.
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « May | ||||||
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | ||||||
| |