Archive for December, 2006

Just What Is A Bigot?

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
I'm a bigot. Or at least I've been told I am. Most likely by people who don't even know the meaning of the word. Or at least by people who have been trained to use the word to describe anyone who is "less tolerant" than they perceive themselves to be. Certainly by people who don't know me. If they knew any of these things they would know that I'm not a bigot. Noun: bigot 1.a person obstinately

Just What Is A Bigot?

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
I'm a bigot. Or at least I've been told I am. Most likely by people who don't even know the meaning of the word. Or at least by people who have been trained to use the word to describe anyone who is "less tolerant" than they perceive themselves to be. Certainly by people who don't know me. If they knew any of these things they would know that I'm not a bigot. Noun: bigot 1.a person obstinately

Decomposing Time

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
Well dad is safe and sound at home already. He got to his house before we even got back from the insanity of Valley View Mall. He did say that the cab ride home from LaGuardia to Bensonhurst cost him more than the actual flight price as he had a foreigner who kept getting lost and didn't understand my dad's directions. Heck, sometimes we have a hard time understanding him. As usual Roanoke's

Decomposing Time

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
Well dad is safe and sound at home already. He got to his house before we even got back from the insanity of Valley View Mall. He did say that the cab ride home from LaGuardia to Bensonhurst cost him more than the actual flight price as he had a foreigner who kept getting lost and didn't understand my dad's directions. Heck, sometimes we have a hard time understanding him. As usual Roanoke's

Closing the Year

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
When you have given nothing, ask for nothing.
Albanian Proverb

I still have a Christmas tree that needs undoing and laundry baskets running over with clean clothes that need to be put in their respective drawers.   I have left everything unattended this week to make time for more important things like lunch with friends and play dates with the kids.   My house and blog have paid the price!

My main goal for today was to get that Christmas banner down!  My second goal was to Frontline the Labs.  It is December in Virginia and our dogs are picking up more and more ticks...odd, small, freakishly white ticks.   Oh, but there is no such thing as global warming.  Yeah right.    We did get around to watching An Inconvenient Truth this week and I thought Al Gore did a great job of presenting the facts.   So my number one resolution for 2007 will be do more for saving my environment.  I want to actually help make a difference, not just talk about it.  I am going to start by adding some really great organizations on my side bar.  (That will be next week of course).

I said last year I do not do resolutions really.  I try to set realistic goals for myself that I should be doing anyway. 

But here are what I will call my resolutions for the coming year and future:

1.  Continue in charitable work.   Finding ways that I can make a difference for my community and our environment.

2.  More $ donations to groups like Trout Unlimited who actually go out and save streams or rivers in danger of losing their native fish.

3.  More time doing fun things with my mom.  I am going to plan a little mini-trip for us.

4.  Plan a big horse ride trip for us and all our horse riding friends.

5.  Get back into glamor.  I love clothes and makeup and I have just gotten a bit slack becoming a naturalist out here on this farm so I am planning on giving myself a subscription to Vogue, Vanity Fair etc. so I can't go too stale.   Granted I am thrilled my life isn't totally about that stuff anymore but still I kinda want to age like Sharon Stone....cool, comfy and natural most of the time but clean up like one hot diva when I want to!

_izzy

6.  Grow my nails back out...another consequence of this farm life!

7.  Cardio hard core 3 days a week, and 3 moderate exercise days.....and I have put off until the new year getting back into Pilate's. 

8  I have to start structuring my days.  I hate schedules but have a personality that needs them.  With my toes dipping in so many different pools now I will never prosper in anything if I don't manage my time.    Now that I am volunteering at the gallery and the clothes closet I am not going to have anything to put IN the gallery if I don't start setting aside days to actually work on photography and nothing else.

9.  Eat less meat and more veggies....Know any good veggie dishes?  Send them to me please!  I rarely eat red meat anyway but I am tired of all the hormones in chicken too.  And since I can't find "free-range" here, I am thinking of giving it up entirely.

10.  Keep having fun, enjoying life and being thankful to God for every single moment of it!

In summary:   The best of the year:

2006 meant turning 40!

2006 meant a new porch/deck on our house that has brought me unimaginable joy.   There isn't a morning I don't sit for just a few minutes and look out on it and the little birds.   (and squirrels) 

2006 meant bonding for me and Spirit....riding lessons was one of the smartest choices I've ever made.

2006 meant adventures all summer with my nephew Caleb.  2006 allowed me the time and energy and health to do so many fun things with all the kids....movies, concerts, fairs, vacations, shopping trips, sleepovers!

2006 meant watching my baby Labs, Earl and Eudora,  grow into the beautiful Thugs they are now. 

2006 has made me love, love, love marriage.  And appreciate and love Toonces even more.

This year I have traveled twice to Atlantic City, to the Bahamas, to Memphis for my 40th birthday, to Niagara, to Montana (2006 brought a trophy fish), to the beach, to the mountains.    I have enjoyed music, friends, love and laughter.   I have made friendships in the blog world that I treasure.  It was a good year.

The worst of 2006:

I turned 40!

I was humiliated by the Price is Right fiasco.

George W. Bush became an even worse president.

We lost one of our best friends..(she is still so dearly missed).

Img_3285 Img_1025_1

Happy New Year Everyone!  May 2007 be the year of your dreams!

Don't forget your black eyed peas and collard greens!!!

Closing the Year

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
When you have given nothing, ask for nothing.
Albanian Proverb

I still have a Christmas tree that needs undoing and laundry baskets running over with clean clothes that need to be put in their respective drawers.   I have left everything unattended this week to make time for more important things like lunch with friends and play dates with the kids.   My house and blog have paid the price!

My main goal for today was to get that Christmas banner down!  My second goal was to Frontline the Labs.  It is December in Virginia and our dogs are picking up more and more ticks...odd, small, freakishly white ticks.   Oh, but there is no such thing as global warming.  Yeah right.    We did get around to watching An Inconvenient Truth this week and I thought Al Gore did a great job of presenting the facts.   So my number one resolution for 2007 will be do more for saving my environment.  I want to actually help make a difference, not just talk about it.  I am going to start by adding some really great organizations on my side bar.  (That will be next week of course).

I said last year I do not do resolutions really.  I try to set realistic goals for myself that I should be doing anyway. 

But here are what I will call my resolutions for the coming year and future:

1.  Continue in charitable work.   Finding ways that I can make a difference for my community and our environment.

2.  More $ donations to groups like Trout Unlimited who actually go out and save streams or rivers in danger of losing their native fish.

3.  More time doing fun things with my mom.  I am going to plan a little mini-trip for us.

4.  Plan a big horse ride trip for us and all our horse riding friends.

5.  Get back into glamor.  I love clothes and makeup and I have just gotten a bit slack becoming a naturalist out here on this farm so I am planning on giving myself a subscription to Vogue, Vanity Fair etc. so I can't go too stale.   Granted I am thrilled my life isn't totally about that stuff anymore but still I kinda want to age like Sharon Stone....cool, comfy and natural most of the time but clean up like one hot diva when I want to!

_izzy

6.  Grow my nails back out...another consequence of this farm life!

7.  Cardio hard core 3 days a week, and 3 moderate exercise days.....and I have put off until the new year getting back into Pilate's. 

8  I have to start structuring my days.  I hate schedules but have a personality that needs them.  With my toes dipping in so many different pools now I will never prosper in anything if I don't manage my time.    Now that I am volunteering at the gallery and the clothes closet I am not going to have anything to put IN the gallery if I don't start setting aside days to actually work on photography and nothing else.

9.  Eat less meat and more veggies....Know any good veggie dishes?  Send them to me please!  I rarely eat red meat anyway but I am tired of all the hormones in chicken too.  And since I can't find "free-range" here, I am thinking of giving it up entirely.

10.  Keep having fun, enjoying life and being thankful to God for every single moment of it!

In summary:   The best of the year:

2006 meant turning 40!

2006 meant a new porch/deck on our house that has brought me unimaginable joy.   There isn't a morning I don't sit for just a few minutes and look out on it and the little birds.   (and squirrels) 

2006 meant bonding for me and Spirit....riding lessons was one of the smartest choices I've ever made.

2006 meant adventures all summer with my nephew Caleb.  2006 allowed me the time and energy and health to do so many fun things with all the kids....movies, concerts, fairs, vacations, shopping trips, sleepovers!

2006 meant watching my baby Labs, Earl and Eudora,  grow into the beautiful Thugs they are now. 

2006 has made me love, love, love marriage.  And appreciate and love Toonces even more.

This year I have traveled twice to Atlantic City, to the Bahamas, to Memphis for my 40th birthday, to Niagara, to Montana (2006 brought a trophy fish), to the beach, to the mountains.    I have enjoyed music, friends, love and laughter.   I have made friendships in the blog world that I treasure.  It was a good year.

The worst of 2006:

I turned 40!

I was humiliated by the Price is Right fiasco.

George W. Bush became an even worse president.

We lost one of our best friends..(she is still so dearly missed).

Img_3285 Img_1025_1

Happy New Year Everyone!  May 2007 be the year of your dreams!

Don't forget your black eyed peas and collard greens!!!

Fourth Circuit and RLUIPA

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
Loblaw has this post titled "Fourth Circuit Knocks the Teeth out of RLUIPA."

In Madison v. Virginia, on appeal from the W.D. Va., the Fourth Circuit in an opinion by Judge Wilkinson, joined by Judges Michael and Duncan, held that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act is constitutional as applied to the Commonwealth of Virginia except to the extent that it authorizes awards of money damages.

On the Spending Clause issue, the Court rejected Virginia's arguments, including the claim that the Supreme Court's decision in Rumsfeld v. FAIR somehow restricted the authority of Congress - since after all, that case "rejected a Spending Clause challenge."

On the money damages issue, the Court concluded "that RLUIPA's 'appropriate relief against a government' language falls short of the unequivocal textual expression necessary to waive State immunity from suits for damages." The Court went on to conclude that the Civil Rights Remedies Equalization Act was inapplicable to RLUIPA.

This outcome sounds like one of those Rehnquist-era federalism decisions, but since the panel included Judge Michael it seems unlikely that there would be a different outcome on rehearing by the en banc court.

In Lovelace v. Lee, Judges Michael and Wilkinson disagreed on the claims of a Muslim inmate at Keen Mountain against prison officials under RLUIPA and the First Amendment. Judge Kiser for the W.D. Va. granted summary judgment for all defendants on all claims.

Judge Michael, joined by Judge Motz, vacated summary judgment against a correctional officer in his individual capacity on the plaintiff's Free Exercise and RLUIPA claims, and vacated summary judgment against the warden in his official capacity. Judge Wilkinson agreed the claims against the individual officer should go forward, but dissented as to the official capacity claims against the warden.

In response to Judge Wilkinson's strongly-worded dissent, Judge Michael explained: "Today's remand provides nothing akin to a license for courts to plunge into prison policymaking or prison management. We merely require that the prison itself explain in a responsive fashion why the Ramadan policy's burdens on religious exercise are justified under RLUIPA's standard. It is our dissenting colleague who delves into prison policymaking by coming up with his own reasons as to why the policy's restrictions are necessary to insure safety and security. If a court could, as the dissent would have it, offer explanations on its own, then prisons would be effectively relieved of their responsibilities under RLUIPA. Or what is more fundamental, court-generated explanations would cut severely against Congress's intent to provide inmates with greater protections in the area of religious exercise."

Of the claim against the warden, Judge Wilkinson wrote: "Thus the majority's remand must be seen for precisely what it is: an invitation to finetune prison policy from the judicial perch. While a prison policy may well be called into question where it imposes a substantial burden on religious freedom, this is not such a case. It is plaintiff Lovelace who must prove under the statute that the policy, as opposed to Lester's violation of it, somehow imposed a substantial burden upon his religious exercise, and he has not even begun to do so. To enlarge a case involving an essentially individual act into a wholesale attack upon a sound prison policy, on no fewer than three different grounds, not only makes a mountain out of a molehill but also reinforces the old adage that no good deed goes unpunished. Under the majority's view, the most progressive and enlightened prison policy imaginable, a policy that accomodates every religion in every way, would be called into question by a single policy violation. Forcing prison officials to pay for their own progressive steps to protect religious liberty runs counter to the precise statutory and constitutional provisions that the majority purports to enforce. I therefore concur in the judgment remanding the case for further proceedings against defendant Lester, but I respectfully dissent from the majority's RLUIPA, free exercise, and due process determinations as to the prison policy itself."

Somewhat obscured by these fireworks, the Court's discussion about qualified immunity strikes me as wrong. Judge Kiser held that the individual was entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutionality of RLUIPA was clearly established. Judge Michael rejected this conclusion, because at the time of the events in question, no court had yet ruled one way or the other on the constitutionality of the new statute. RLUIPA was passed by Congress after the Supreme Court held that its predecessor was unconstitutional. To say that its constitutionality was clearly established in 2002, when it was an open and difficult question for the appeals courts when they made their decisions in 2003 and later, seems to turn the qualified immunity analysis upside down. RLUIPA was born of constitutional uncertainty, which is the very stuff of which the qualified immunity defense is made.

Fourth Circuit and RLUIPA

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
Loblaw has this post titled "Fourth Circuit Knocks the Teeth out of RLUIPA."

In Madison v. Virginia, on appeal from the W.D. Va., the Fourth Circuit in an opinion by Judge Wilkinson, joined by Judges Michael and Duncan, held that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act is constitutional as applied to the Commonwealth of Virginia except to the extent that it authorizes awards of money damages.

On the Spending Clause issue, the Court rejected Virginia's arguments, including the claim that the Supreme Court's decision in Rumsfeld v. FAIR somehow restricted the authority of Congress - since after all, that case "rejected a Spending Clause challenge."

On the money damages issue, the Court concluded "that RLUIPA's 'appropriate relief against a government' language falls short of the unequivocal textual expression necessary to waive State immunity from suits for damages." The Court went on to conclude that the Civil Rights Remedies Equalization Act was inapplicable to RLUIPA.

This outcome sounds like one of those Rehnquist-era federalism decisions, but since the panel included Judge Michael it seems unlikely that there would be a different outcome on rehearing by the en banc court.

In Lovelace v. Lee, Judges Michael and Wilkinson disagreed on the claims of a Muslim inmate at Keen Mountain against prison officials under RLUIPA and the First Amendment. Judge Kiser for the W.D. Va. granted summary judgment for all defendants on all claims.

Judge Michael, joined by Judge Motz, vacated summary judgment against a correctional officer in his individual capacity on the plaintiff's Free Exercise and RLUIPA claims, and vacated summary judgment against the warden in his official capacity. Judge Wilkinson agreed the claims against the individual officer should go forward, but dissented as to the official capacity claims against the warden.

In response to Judge Wilkinson's strongly-worded dissent, Judge Michael explained: "Today's remand provides nothing akin to a license for courts to plunge into prison policymaking or prison management. We merely require that the prison itself explain in a responsive fashion why the Ramadan policy's burdens on religious exercise are justified under RLUIPA's standard. It is our dissenting colleague who delves into prison policymaking by coming up with his own reasons as to why the policy's restrictions are necessary to insure safety and security. If a court could, as the dissent would have it, offer explanations on its own, then prisons would be effectively relieved of their responsibilities under RLUIPA. Or what is more fundamental, court-generated explanations would cut severely against Congress's intent to provide inmates with greater protections in the area of religious exercise."

Of the claim against the warden, Judge Wilkinson wrote: "Thus the majority's remand must be seen for precisely what it is: an invitation to finetune prison policy from the judicial perch. While a prison policy may well be called into question where it imposes a substantial burden on religious freedom, this is not such a case. It is plaintiff Lovelace who must prove under the statute that the policy, as opposed to Lester's violation of it, somehow imposed a substantial burden upon his religious exercise, and he has not even begun to do so. To enlarge a case involving an essentially individual act into a wholesale attack upon a sound prison policy, on no fewer than three different grounds, not only makes a mountain out of a molehill but also reinforces the old adage that no good deed goes unpunished. Under the majority's view, the most progressive and enlightened prison policy imaginable, a policy that accomodates every religion in every way, would be called into question by a single policy violation. Forcing prison officials to pay for their own progressive steps to protect religious liberty runs counter to the precise statutory and constitutional provisions that the majority purports to enforce. I therefore concur in the judgment remanding the case for further proceedings against defendant Lester, but I respectfully dissent from the majority's RLUIPA, free exercise, and due process determinations as to the prison policy itself."

Somewhat obscured by these fireworks, the Court's discussion about qualified immunity strikes me as wrong. Judge Kiser held that the individual was entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutionality of RLUIPA was clearly established. Judge Michael rejected this conclusion, because at the time of the events in question, no court had yet ruled one way or the other on the constitutionality of the new statute. RLUIPA was passed by Congress after the Supreme Court held that its predecessor was unconstitutional. To say that its constitutionality was clearly established in 2002, when it was an open and difficult question for the appeals courts when they made their decisions in 2003 and later, seems to turn the qualified immunity analysis upside down. RLUIPA was born of constitutional uncertainty, which is the very stuff of which the qualified immunity defense is made.

Fourth Circuit and RLUIPA

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
Loblaw has this post titled "Fourth Circuit Knocks the Teeth out of RLUIPA."

In Madison v. Virginia, on appeal from the W.D. Va., the Fourth Circuit in an opinion by Judge Wilkinson, joined by Judges Michael and Duncan, held that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act is constitutional as applied to the Commonwealth of Virginia except to the extent that it authorizes awards of money damages.

On the Spending Clause issue, the Court rejected Virginia's arguments, including the claim that the Supreme Court's decision in Rumsfeld v. FAIR somehow restricted the authority of Congress - since after all, that case "rejected a Spending Clause challenge."

On the money damages issue, the Court concluded "that RLUIPA's 'appropriate relief against a government' language falls short of the unequivocal textual expression necessary to waive State immunity from suits for damages." The Court went on to conclude that the Civil Rights Remedies Equalization Act was inapplicable to RLUIPA.

This outcome sounds like one of those Rehnquist-era federalism decisions, but since the panel included Judge Michael it seems unlikely that there would be a different outcome on rehearing by the en banc court.

In Lovelace v. Lee, Judges Michael and Wilkinson disagreed on the claims of a Muslim inmate at Keen Mountain against prison officials under RLUIPA and the First Amendment. Judge Kiser for the W.D. Va. granted summary judgment for all defendants on all claims.

Judge Michael, joined by Judge Motz, vacated summary judgment against a correctional officer in his individual capacity on the plaintiff's Free Exercise and RLUIPA claims, and vacated summary judgment against the warden in his official capacity. Judge Wilkinson agreed the claims against the individual officer should go forward, but dissented as to the official capacity claims against the warden.

In response to Judge Wilkinson's strongly-worded dissent, Judge Michael explained: "Today's remand provides nothing akin to a license for courts to plunge into prison policymaking or prison management. We merely require that the prison itself explain in a responsive fashion why the Ramadan policy's burdens on religious exercise are justified under RLUIPA's standard. It is our dissenting colleague who delves into prison policymaking by coming up with his own reasons as to why the policy's restrictions are necessary to insure safety and security. If a court could, as the dissent would have it, offer explanations on its own, then prisons would be effectively relieved of their responsibilities under RLUIPA. Or what is more fundamental, court-generated explanations would cut severely against Congress's intent to provide inmates with greater protections in the area of religious exercise."

Of the claim against the warden, Judge Wilkinson wrote: "Thus the majority's remand must be seen for precisely what it is: an invitation to finetune prison policy from the judicial perch. While a prison policy may well be called into question where it imposes a substantial burden on religious freedom, this is not such a case. It is plaintiff Lovelace who must prove under the statute that the policy, as opposed to Lester's violation of it, somehow imposed a substantial burden upon his religious exercise, and he has not even begun to do so. To enlarge a case involving an essentially individual act into a wholesale attack upon a sound prison policy, on no fewer than three different grounds, not only makes a mountain out of a molehill but also reinforces the old adage that no good deed goes unpunished. Under the majority's view, the most progressive and enlightened prison policy imaginable, a policy that accomodates every religion in every way, would be called into question by a single policy violation. Forcing prison officials to pay for their own progressive steps to protect religious liberty runs counter to the precise statutory and constitutional provisions that the majority purports to enforce. I therefore concur in the judgment remanding the case for further proceedings against defendant Lester, but I respectfully dissent from the majority's RLUIPA, free exercise, and due process determinations as to the prison policy itself."

Somewhat obscured by these fireworks, the Court's discussion about qualified immunity strikes me as wrong. Judge Kiser held that the individual was entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutionality of RLUIPA was clearly established. Judge Michael rejected this conclusion, because at the time of the events in question, no court had yet ruled one way or the other on the constitutionality of the new statute. RLUIPA was passed by Congress after the Supreme Court held that its predecessor was unconstitutional. To say that its constitutionality was clearly established in 2002, when it was an open and difficult question for the appeals courts when they made their decisions in 2003 and later, seems to turn the qualified immunity analysis upside down. RLUIPA was born of constitutional uncertainty, which is the very stuff of which the qualified immunity defense is made.

Fourth Circuit and RLUIPA

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
Loblaw has this post titled "Fourth Circuit Knocks the Teeth out of RLUIPA."

In Madison v. Virginia, on appeal from the W.D. Va., the Fourth Circuit in an opinion by Judge Wilkinson, joined by Judges Michael and Duncan, held that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act is constitutional as applied to the Commonwealth of Virginia except to the extent that it authorizes awards of money damages.

On the Spending Clause issue, the Court rejected Virginia's arguments, including the claim that the Supreme Court's decision in Rumsfeld v. FAIR somehow restricted the authority of Congress - since after all, that case "rejected a Spending Clause challenge."

On the money damages issue, the Court concluded "that RLUIPA's 'appropriate relief against a government' language falls short of the unequivocal textual expression necessary to waive State immunity from suits for damages." The Court went on to conclude that the Civil Rights Remedies Equalization Act was inapplicable to RLUIPA.

This outcome sounds like one of those Rehnquist-era federalism decisions, but since the panel included Judge Michael it seems unlikely that there would be a different outcome on rehearing by the en banc court.

In Lovelace v. Lee, Judges Michael and Wilkinson disagreed on the claims of a Muslim inmate at Keen Mountain against prison officials under RLUIPA and the First Amendment. Judge Kiser for the W.D. Va. granted summary judgment for all defendants on all claims.

Judge Michael, joined by Judge Motz, vacated summary judgment against a correctional officer in his individual capacity on the plaintiff's Free Exercise and RLUIPA claims, and vacated summary judgment against the warden in his official capacity. Judge Wilkinson agreed the claims against the individual officer should go forward, but dissented as to the official capacity claims against the warden.

In response to Judge Wilkinson's strongly-worded dissent, Judge Michael explained: "Today's remand provides nothing akin to a license for courts to plunge into prison policymaking or prison management. We merely require that the prison itself explain in a responsive fashion why the Ramadan policy's burdens on religious exercise are justified under RLUIPA's standard. It is our dissenting colleague who delves into prison policymaking by coming up with his own reasons as to why the policy's restrictions are necessary to insure safety and security. If a court could, as the dissent would have it, offer explanations on its own, then prisons would be effectively relieved of their responsibilities under RLUIPA. Or what is more fundamental, court-generated explanations would cut severely against Congress's intent to provide inmates with greater protections in the area of religious exercise."

Of the claim against the warden, Judge Wilkinson wrote: "Thus the majority's remand must be seen for precisely what it is: an invitation to finetune prison policy from the judicial perch. While a prison policy may well be called into question where it imposes a substantial burden on religious freedom, this is not such a case. It is plaintiff Lovelace who must prove under the statute that the policy, as opposed to Lester's violation of it, somehow imposed a substantial burden upon his religious exercise, and he has not even begun to do so. To enlarge a case involving an essentially individual act into a wholesale attack upon a sound prison policy, on no fewer than three different grounds, not only makes a mountain out of a molehill but also reinforces the old adage that no good deed goes unpunished. Under the majority's view, the most progressive and enlightened prison policy imaginable, a policy that accomodates every religion in every way, would be called into question by a single policy violation. Forcing prison officials to pay for their own progressive steps to protect religious liberty runs counter to the precise statutory and constitutional provisions that the majority purports to enforce. I therefore concur in the judgment remanding the case for further proceedings against defendant Lester, but I respectfully dissent from the majority's RLUIPA, free exercise, and due process determinations as to the prison policy itself."

Somewhat obscured by these fireworks, the Court's discussion about qualified immunity strikes me as wrong. Judge Kiser held that the individual was entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutionality of RLUIPA was clearly established. Judge Michael rejected this conclusion, because at the time of the events in question, no court had yet ruled one way or the other on the constitutionality of the new statute. RLUIPA was passed by Congress after the Supreme Court held that its predecessor was unconstitutional. To say that its constitutionality was clearly established in 2002, when it was an open and difficult question for the appeals courts when they made their decisions in 2003 and later, seems to turn the qualified immunity analysis upside down. RLUIPA was born of constitutional uncertainty, which is the very stuff of which the qualified immunity defense is made.

Rewriting Kaine History

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
In the heat of the gubernatorial race last year, Tim Kaine called for a modest tax increase to solve the commonwealth's ongoing transportation crisis, at the request of a clamoring public that made its wishes known at public transportation forums held around the commonwealth in those days leading up to the election. It was a recalcitrant legislature that later denied the will of the people.

Is that how you remember recent history?

Well, apparently there are those who would have you believe such nonsense:

Best & Worst Transportation: 2006
By NRVToday


When it comes to do-nothing legislative gridlock, the Virginia Legislature wins our “Jeer of the Year” hands down for its complete failure to act responsibly in funding transportation.

Virginia Governor Tim Kaine heard plenty from voters about the crisis in transportation and so he ran - and won - on a platform to improve mobility in the Commonwealth. That platform, informed by public transportation forums across the state that were standing room only, included increasing some taxes and fees to fund the necessary and long overdue transportation improvements.

So it was no surprise when he sent forward an aggressive, but reasonable transportation funding package to the General Assembly. When the Legislature ended up deadlocked over transportation funding during its regular session, it decided to postpone transportation funding for a special session. Adding insult to injury, lawmakers in the state abruptly ended a special session on transportation early after members failed to agree upon a $2.4 billion transportation plan that was on the
table. In the end, it approved another status quo budget that continues the starving of transportation in the Commonwealth, while gridlock builds and transportation infrastructure crumbles. (
link) [my emphasis]

Not even close to the truth.

The author of this jewel would have you believe that Governor Kaine held his public townhall meetings that dealt with transportation issues during his campaign. In fact, he held off the announcement of his plan until after he was elected and only held his first forum the following week. After he was elected.

During the campaign, he was utterly and intentionally ambiguous on the subject of taxes and transportation, except to say that he wouldn't consider raising taxes until a secure process of funding was in place to deal with ongoing needs. It was immediately after he was voted into office that he changed his tune and signed on to a whopping tax hike that was proposed by liberal Democrats and spineless Republican state senators.

"Virginia Governor Tim Kaine heard plenty from voters about the crisis in transportation and so he ran and won." Too slippery by half.

Oh Good. Another Trail.

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
For those of you who feel we just don't have enough hiking trails and bike paths in Southwest Virginia (current ratio: 1 trail for every thirteen citizens), you'll be happy to hear that a new trail has been authorized by the courts over in Saltville:

Judge puts Salt Trail on a path to fruition

Debra McCown, Washington County News




The trail will go through.



That’s what Saltville officials say will happen after a circuit court judge ruled earlier this month that the town owns the railroad bed through the Clinchburg community.



Some adjoining property owners challenged the town’s claim of ownership and its plans for a 13-mile trail from Saltville to Glade Spring on the old railroad bed, similar to the Virginia Creeper Trail.



In recent years, the idea of a hiking and biking trail similar to the Virginia Creeper Trail has caught on, and work already has begun on the Salt Trail.



"I’m pretty pleased with what we’ve accomplished at this point, just having the downtown area cleared and cleaned up," [John] Summitt said. ( link )
That last quote is rather telling. The downtown area has been cleared. As has much of Southwest Virginia as more and more citizens have moved out to find gainful employment.



Downtown Saltville cleared to make room for another trail. Consider me excited.

Oh Good. Another Trail.

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
For those of you who feel we just don't have enough hiking trails and bike paths in Southwest Virginia (current ratio: 1 trail for every thirteen citizens), you'll be happy to hear that a new trail has been authorized by the courts over in Saltville:

Judge puts Salt Trail on a path to fruition

Debra McCown, Washington County News




The trail will go through.



That’s what Saltville officials say will happen after a circuit court judge ruled earlier this month that the town owns the railroad bed through the Clinchburg community.



Some adjoining property owners challenged the town’s claim of ownership and its plans for a 13-mile trail from Saltville to Glade Spring on the old railroad bed, similar to the Virginia Creeper Trail.



In recent years, the idea of a hiking and biking trail similar to the Virginia Creeper Trail has caught on, and work already has begun on the Salt Trail.



"I’m pretty pleased with what we’ve accomplished at this point, just having the downtown area cleared and cleaned up," [John] Summitt said. ( link )
That last quote is rather telling. The downtown area has been cleared. As has much of Southwest Virginia as more and more citizens have moved out to find gainful employment.



Downtown Saltville cleared to make room for another trail. Consider me excited.

Another Trail?

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
To quote Loretta Castorini's elderly grandfather in the movie Moonstruck, "I'm so confused."

Is Saltville in the process of constructing two hiking/walking trails?

It seems so. In addition to the "Salt Trail" mentioned above, there's going to be a "bird trail" that will meander through the area:
New bird trail under construction
By Dan Kegley, Staff, Smyth County News


Saltville officials broke ground for construction of a long-awaited bird trail through the well fields last week. According to Mayor Jeff Campbell, Christine Helton of Saltville wrote a grant application for trail funding in 1998, and the contractor bid on the project in June.

The 3,000-foot path has trail heads at the Food Country parking lot and on Blake Avenue near the town shop and passes through some of the richest birding habitat in the Saltville Valley adjacent to the salt ponds. (link)
Shrewd move, guys. If, as Congressman Rick Boucher believes, a hiking trail or a bike path will bring economic prosperity to a local community, just think what two such paths/trails will bring.

The mind boggles.

Another Trail?

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
To quote Loretta Castorini's elderly grandfather in the movie Moonstruck, "I'm so confused."

Is Saltville in the process of constructing two hiking/walking trails?

It seems so. In addition to the "Salt Trail" mentioned above, there's going to be a "bird trail" that will meander through the area:
New bird trail under construction
By Dan Kegley, Staff, Smyth County News


Saltville officials broke ground for construction of a long-awaited bird trail through the well fields last week. According to Mayor Jeff Campbell, Christine Helton of Saltville wrote a grant application for trail funding in 1998, and the contractor bid on the project in June.

The 3,000-foot path has trail heads at the Food Country parking lot and on Blake Avenue near the town shop and passes through some of the richest birding habitat in the Saltville Valley adjacent to the salt ponds. (link)
Shrewd move, guys. If, as Congressman Rick Boucher believes, a hiking trail or a bike path will bring economic prosperity to a local community, just think what two such paths/trails will bring.

The mind boggles.

Where’s The Rest Of The Story?

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
Sometimes reporters can be so aggravating. Check out this (partial) story at TriCities.com:

Wise County judge suspended
News Channel 11 Staff Reports


The Wise County courthouse in Virginia is without a juvenile and domestic relations court judge.

Judge Mickey Shull was suspended for inappropriate behavior.

A complaint filed against Shull alleges he acted inappropriately with a female witness in the courtroom last week.

We know Virginia state police delivered the papers, and he's not allowed to return to work, pending a hearing. (link)


So what was the "inappropriate act" that got Shull suspended? Did her tell a joke? Did he fondle her? Did he ask about her sordid past? Comment on a zit on her chin? Call her names?

We'll never know because the reporter didn't get the job done.

Good grief.

Where’s The Rest Of The Story?

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
Sometimes reporters can be so aggravating. Check out this (partial) story at TriCities.com:

Wise County judge suspended
News Channel 11 Staff Reports


The Wise County courthouse in Virginia is without a juvenile and domestic relations court judge.

Judge Mickey Shull was suspended for inappropriate behavior.

A complaint filed against Shull alleges he acted inappropriately with a female witness in the courtroom last week.

We know Virginia state police delivered the papers, and he's not allowed to return to work, pending a hearing. (link)


So what was the "inappropriate act" that got Shull suspended? Did her tell a joke? Did he fondle her? Did he ask about her sordid past? Comment on a zit on her chin? Call her names?

We'll never know because the reporter didn't get the job done.

Good grief.

Quote Of The Day

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
On journalists, war, and their heroic place in it:

Should the Press Cut and Run?



Journalists are quite proud of their own profession's sacrifices, as evidenced by ... by this report from the
Canadian Press :



"The deteriorating situation in Iraq coupled with the targeted killings of reporters in several countries made 2006 the deadliest year on record for journalists, the Canadian Journalists for Free Expression report.



At least 82 journalists lost their lives as a direct result of their work--up from about 60 the previous year--with war zones proving the most dangerous locales, the group reports.



'A lot of those journalists were killed in war zones, particularly Iraq, where 39 journalists, at least, lost their lives this year,' said Julie Payne, manager of the Toronto-based group."



We don't ever remember a journalist saying that war reporting just isn't worth the risk--that the networks, wire services and newspapers should cut and run from Iraq or any other war zone.



Do journalists think theirs is a more noble calling than the liberation of a country?
James Taranto, Best of the Web Today , December 29, 2006

Quote Of The Day

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
On journalists, war, and their heroic place in it:

Should the Press Cut and Run?



Journalists are quite proud of their own profession's sacrifices, as evidenced by ... by this report from the
Canadian Press :



"The deteriorating situation in Iraq coupled with the targeted killings of reporters in several countries made 2006 the deadliest year on record for journalists, the Canadian Journalists for Free Expression report.



At least 82 journalists lost their lives as a direct result of their work--up from about 60 the previous year--with war zones proving the most dangerous locales, the group reports.



'A lot of those journalists were killed in war zones, particularly Iraq, where 39 journalists, at least, lost their lives this year,' said Julie Payne, manager of the Toronto-based group."



We don't ever remember a journalist saying that war reporting just isn't worth the risk--that the networks, wire services and newspapers should cut and run from Iraq or any other war zone.



Do journalists think theirs is a more noble calling than the liberation of a country?
James Taranto, Best of the Web Today , December 29, 2006

There’ll Be No Rat Hole Where He’s Going

Saturday, December 30th, 2006
It's a good day:

Dictator Who Ruled Iraq With Violence Is Hanged for Crimes Against Humanity

By Marc Santora, James Glanz, and Sabrina Tavernise, The New York Times




Baghdad, Saturday, Dec. 30 — Saddam Hussein, the dictator who led Iraq through three decades of brutality, war and bombast before American forces chased him from his capital city and captured him in a filthy pit near his hometown, was hanged just before dawn Saturday during the morning call to prayer.



The final stages for Mr. Hussein, 69, came with terrible swiftness after he lost the appeal, five days ago, of his death sentence for the killings of 148 men and boys in the northern town of Dujail in 1982. He had received the sentence less than two months before from a special court set up to judge his reign as the almost unchallenged dictator of Iraq. ( link )
"Hanged for Crimes Against Humanity ..." How powerful that message is. Too bad there is a host of Americans who fight the notion.



I expect the U.N. to respond with a call for more weapons inspectors and a resolution condemning ... something ...