Courts Gone Wild
Three breathtakingly ignorant court decisions have been handed down this week in three very different areas of the law.
They’re “Kidding,” Right? Wrong
The homeschooling movement just received a shot in the arm from the Ninth Circuit Federal Appeals Court (bold is mine):
The (court) has now ruled that the Palmdale school district in California can ask first, third, and fifth graders intrusive questions about “touching my private parts too much,” “getting scared or upset when I think about sex,” “can’t stop thinking about sex,” etc. Parents in the Palmdale school district were not informed that such sexually offensive questions would be asked of their little children. When they brought suit, Judge Reinhardt brought down the gavel on them. “There is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children,” Reinhardt ruled. Further, he writes, “parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determinations of public schools…”
Telecommuters Get Taxed–Based on Where Headquarters Is!
Though it’s not a final decision, for now, if you work in Tennessee and headquarters is in New York, you get to pay New York income tax (bolds are mine):
A move by the Supreme Court means that many telecommuters could ultimately face higher income-tax bills.
The nation’s highest court yesterday declined to hear an appeal by a Tennessee man who telecommuted to New York and was charged by that state for taxes on all his income. Because the Supreme Court won’t review his appeal, New York’s decision stands.
Many telecommuters could face higher state income-tax bills if other states are emboldened by New York’s success and enact similar rules that tax out-of-state telecommuters. Some members of Congress already have introduced legislation to protect telecommuters from such taxes.
Some 9.9 million people work at home full- or part-time for employers other than themselves, according to the Telework Advisory Group at WorldatWork, an association for human-resources professionals. As telecommuting has become increasingly popular in recent years — and as higher gas prices make commuting even more expensive — millions of people are working in one state for employers in other states. Tax issues may arise over which state or states can tax a worker’s income.
New York, a high-tax state that’s home to many large corporations, has pursued out-of-state telecommuters aggressively. “By its silence, the Supreme Court permits other states to do the same,” says Nicole Belson Goluboff, an attorney who has written extensively on telecommuting law. “Any state might find this attractive and go ahead and start taxing nonresidents.”
A handful of other states, including Pennsylvania and Nebraska, already have rules similar to New York’s.
….. The Supreme Court announcement is not a decision on the case’s merits. The lower-court ruling stands and could, of course, lead other states to enact such rules. But it doesn’t mean that the court has decided the issue or that such laws will be upheld if appealed in the future.
What, a, joke.
Cities with income taxes and company headquarters locations will certainly be cheered by the Court’s refusal to hear this case. Legislative relief is being considered by Congress, and should be a high priority.
You Can File False Accusations Against the Police Without Consequence
The US Ninth Circuit Court is often referred to as the “Ninth Circus” for a host of reasons. Here’s one more (bolds are mine):
Federal Court: False Accusations Against Police Are Protected Speech
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A federal appeals court on Thursday nullified a California criminal law adopted after the Rodney King beating that made it unlawful for citizens to knowingly lodge false accusations against police officers.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the law was an unconstitutional infringement of speech because false statements in support of officers were not also criminalized.
….. The American Civil Liberties Union hailed the decision.
“To us, it was a clear example to cut off criticism of the government,” said ACLU attorney Alan Schlosser.
Michael Schwartz, a Ventura County prosecutor who on behalf of the California District Attorneys Association urged the appellate court to uphold (the) conviction, said he was disappointed with the outcome.
“It’s a controversial issue that people disagree about,” he said. He said the statute in question is used sparingly.
San Diego County prosecutors said they were considering asking the appeals court to reconsider or asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the decision.
I sure hope they appeal.
All of these cases make a mockery of common sense, let alone justice.
Too many judges in this country have totally lost touch with reality. At a minimum, they need to get out more and find out how their rulings are adversely affecting the economic and social fabric of America. Some, especially Judge Reinhardt in the first instance in this post, should be considered impeachment candidates.
