Currently viewing the tag: “Order”

CBC.ca
Dodgers win — now to order those postseason tickets
Los Angeles Times
Opening day yields a victory over the Giants, just as the home team had begun to get that Clippers feel about it. By TJ Simers Golly gee whiz, this is so exciting, the Dodgers already having more wins this season than I thought possible.
Eighth-inning standoff enlivens Torres' openerMLB.com
Dodgers beat World Series champion Giants 2-1Dayton Daily News
Kershaw dominates World Series champsArizona Daily Star
CBSSports.com –TheReporter.com –OCRegister
all 810 news articles »

Sports – Google News

Tagged with:
 
NFL Players Seek Order Barring Owners From Accessing Lockout-Related Money
Bloomberg
National Football League players, as part of a lawsuit filed against the league in 1992, today asked a US judge to bar owners from accessing some labor lockout-related revenues until the current impasse
Players ask judge for damages in NFL TV caseThe Associated Press
Players to ask for “substantial” damages award in “lockout insurance” caseProFootballTalk
NFL Players Gain Victory Over League in Workers' Comp DisputeAdvisorOne
ClaimsJournal.com –Bizjournals.com –MarketWatch
all 130 news articles »

Sports – Google News

Tagged with:
 

As the Republican led House, and many Republicans, and some Democrats, in the Senate look to keep the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases, Mr. Obama has quietly implemented his own rules

On March 4th, in a move surely designed to side-step Congress, Obama’s Council on Environmental Quality issued instructions to all federal agencies on how to adapt to climate change. All agencies, from the Food and Drug Administration to the Department of Defense, will be required to analyze their vulnerabilities to the impacts from climate change and come up with a plan to adapt. Thousands of governmental employees will be trained on climate science, like it or not.

The changes aren’t limited to just federal agencies. Countless numbers of private businesses that sell, build, provide logistics or maintenance, or anything else to the government will be forced to comply with new Federal climate adaptation guidelines—all because of Presidential Executive Order 13514.

Got that? Any company that has dealings with the Federal government will have to implement all the requirements of EO 13514, which include things like

  • Appoint a Climate Adaptation specialist
  • Establish an Agency wide Climate Change Adaptation Policy and Mandate by June 2011
  • Participate in Climate Adaptation workshops and then educate all employees throughout 2011
  • Identify and analyze climate vulnerabilities that would interfere with accomplishing the Agency’s mission by March 2012
  • Implement the adaptation plan by September 2012

No wonder Obama has avoided most talk about “climate change”: he’s stealthily implemented the Warmist idiocy.

Say, I wonder if this would apply to anyone paying taxes?

It also “requires Federal Agencies to set a 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target within 90 days; increase energy efficiency; reduce fleet petroleum consumption; conserve water; reduce waste; support sustainable communities; and leverage Federal purchasing power to promote environmentally-responsible products and technologies.”

So, the power of the federal government will be used to push one product over another. So much for a fair and impartial government.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Post to Twitter Post to Plurk Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to Ping.fm Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

Stop The ACLU

Tagged with:
 

Reuters reports:

President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for rebel forces seeking to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, government officials told Reuters on Wednesday.

Obama signed the order, known as a presidential "finding", within the last two or three weeks, according to four U.S. government sources familiar with the matter.

Such findings are a principal form of presidential directive used to authorize secret operations by the Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA and the White House declined immediate comment.

News that Obama had given the authorization surfaced as the President and other U.S. and allied officials spoke openly about the possibility of sending arms supplies to Gaddafi’s opponents, who are fighting better-equipped government forces.





Add to Twitter
Add to Facebook
Email this Article
Add to digg
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Google
Add to StumbleUpon




Ben Smith’s Blog

Tagged with:
 

Reuters reports:

President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for rebel forces seeking to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, government officials told Reuters on Wednesday.

Obama signed the order, known as a presidential "finding", within the last two or three weeks, according to four U.S. government sources familiar with the matter.

Such findings are a principal form of presidential directive used to authorize secret operations by the Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA and the White House declined immediate comment.

News that Obama had given the authorization surfaced as the President and other U.S. and allied officials spoke openly about the possibility of sending arms supplies to Gaddafi’s opponents, who are fighting better-equipped government forces.





Add to Twitter
Add to Facebook
Email this Article
Add to digg
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Google
Add to StumbleUpon




Ben Smith’s Blog

Tagged with:
 

Reuters is reporting that the U.S. is now going to start arming the Libyan rebels:

(Reuters) – President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for rebel forces seeking to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, government officials told Reuters on Wednesday.

Obama signed the order, known as a presidential “finding”, within the last two or three weeks, according to four U.S. government sources familiar with the matter.

A few thoughts here.

First of  all, this “secret” order isn’t really a secret anymore, which makes one wonder who may have leaked it. There may be more dissension within the Administration over Libya than we’ve been led to beleive.

Second, this would seem to directly contradict the policy that the President announced in his speech on Monday.

Third, any action to arm the rebels would seem to clearly violate the arms embargo established in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970 (PDF), and strengthened in UNSCR 1973 (PDF).

 

 




Outside the Beltway

Tagged with:
 

I dig the track, a lot, but the video really hooked me.

Joe. My. God.

Tagged with:
 

(Eugene Volokh)

The case is In re Marriage of Mendlowitz. The alleged slanders were an e-mail and a letter to the estranged wife’s business associates that seemed likely to interfere with her business relationships. They might indeed have led to a successful defamation lawsuit, and a lawsuit for interference with business relations. But a trial court judge went so far as to issue a domestic restraining order against such comments:

[Y]ou are disturbing the peace of the petitioner…. You have, by your own testimony, admitted to the defaming comments that you have made in these emails. And so therefore, the court is going to grant a restraining order for the next five years. You are not to contact [the wife], [her] employers, [her] potential employers in regard to [her] … You are not to contact any third parties in regard to [the wife], her reputation, her past acts.

This meant that any prohibited speech about his wife would be a crime. And because the order included boilerplate language ordering the estranged husband not to “harass, attack, strike, threaten, assault (sexually or otherwise), hit, follow, stalk, molest, destroy personal property, disturb the peace, keep under surveillance, or block movements,” the federal ban on gun possession by people who are the targets of restraining orders kicked in. (See PDF pp. 61–65 of my Implementing the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Self-Defense article.)

Fortunately, the California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s decision, concluding that this sort of alleged defamation isn’t sufficient to justify issuing such an order. Unfortunately, for the nearly two years between the trial court decision and the appellate decision, defendant had been entirely deprived of his Second Amendment rights, and been subjected to a prior restraint in violation of his First Amendment rights.




The Volokh Conspiracy

Tagged with:
 

Last week, a Wisconsin judge issued an order “restrain[ing] and enjoin[ing] the further implementation” of Gov. Scott Walker’s (R) anti-worker law until she has time to fully consider a lawsuit claiming that the law was not validly enacted. Yet, despite this clear and unambiguous order, Walker and his allies have decided that they are not bound by the law:

In a stunning twist, Gov. Scott Walker’s legislation limiting collective bargaining for public workers was published Friday despite a judge’s hold on the measure, prompting a dispute over whether it takes effect Saturday. […]

“It’s published,” [Senate Majority Leader Scott] Fitzgerald said. “It’s law. That’s what I contend.” […]

Walker’s top cabinet official, Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch, gave only a brief statement reacting to Friday’s news.

“Today the administration was notified that the LRB published the budget-repair bill as required by law,” he said. “The administration will carry out the law as required.”

Under Wisconsin law, someone who intentionally defies a court order is in contempt of court, and can be fined up to $ 2,000 for each day that they disobey the court or imprisoned for up to six months.

ThinkProgress

Tagged with:
 

When a Wisconsin trial court judge struck down Wisconsin’s new collective bargaining law, she issued an injunction forbidding the state from both enforcing the law, and from publishing it as part of the official Code of Wisconsin. Despite the fact that the order is still in effect, the state has gone ahead and published the law:

In a stunning twist, Gov. Scott Walker’s legislation limiting collective bargaining for public workers was published Friday despite a judge’s hold on the measure, prompting a dispute over whether it takes effect Saturday.

The measure was published to the Legislature’s website with a footnote that acknowledges the restraining order by a Dane County judge. But the posting says state law “requires the Legislative Reference Bureau to publish every act within 10 working days after its date of enactment.”

The measure sparked protests at the Capitol and lawsuits by opponents because it would eliminate the ability of most public workers to bargain over anything but wages.

The restraining order was issued against Democratic Secretary of State Doug La Follette. But the bill was published by the reference bureau, which was not named in the restraining order.

Laws normally take effect a day after they are published, and a top GOP lawmaker said that meant it will become law Saturday. But nonpartisan legislative officials from two agencies, including the one who published the bill, disagreed.

“I think this is a ministerial act that forwards it to the secretary of state,” said Stephen Miller, director of the Legislative Reference Bureau. “I don’t think this act makes it become effective. My understanding is that the secretary of state has to publish it in the (official state) newspaper for it to become effective.”

Walker signed the bill March 11. Under state law, it must be published within 10 working days, which was Friday.

It hasn’t been printed in the Wisconsin State Journal, the official state newspaper, as other laws are. Late Friday, State Journal publisher Bill Johnston said in an e-mail that the notice for the law had been scheduled to run but had been canceled. He did not elaborate.

La Follette urged caution Friday, saying the measure has not been published yet by his office. He said he believes the law cannot go into effect until he directs the State Journal to publish it, which he has not done.

While I’m not familiar with Wisconsin law, I can’t imagine that the law could have any legal force and effect as long as this injunction is in place. Technically, it may not have been a violation for the reference bureau to publish the law since they weren’t parties to the injunction, but it most assuredly violates the spirit of the judge’s ruling. I would expect the parties to be back in court on Monday over this one.

And for those who may have wondered (I did), Secretary of State LaFollette is indeed distantly related to the famous Progressive Republican Robert LaFollette. His great-grandfather and “Fightin’ Bob’s” father were brothers.

 




Outside the Beltway

Tagged with:
 

In a “stunning twist,” Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s (R) legislation “limiting collective bargaining for public workers was published Friday despite a judge’s hold on the measure, prompting a dispute over whether it takes effect Saturday,” the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports.

Said Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R): “It’s published. It’s law. That’s what I contend.”

The New York Times notes the Walker administration issued a short statement: “The administration will carry out the law as required.”
Taegan Goddard’s Political Wire

Tagged with:
 


Curiouser and curiouser…

After a Democrat judge put a restraining order on the Wisconsin collective bargaining law passed by the State legislature that prohibiting it from being published as per state law, it looked like a court battle was upcoming.

But in an interesting twist, the legislation was published Friday to the Legislature’s website with a footnote that acknowledges the restraining order by a Dane County judge. But the posting says state law “requires the Legislative Reference Bureau to publish every act within 10 working days after its date of enactment.”

The Legislative Reference Bureau was not named in Judge Sumi’s restraining order!

Walker’s top cabinet official, Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch, gave only a brief statement:

“Today the administration was notified that the LRB published the budget-repair bill as required by law,” he said. “The administration will carry out the law as required.”

Bill Cosh, a spokesman for Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, said in a statement that no action is needed for the reference bureau to publish the law, and noted that Democratic Secretary of State Doug La Follette is not in violation of the restraining order ( which was actually issued against him) because he didn’t direct the reference bureau to publish the bill.

“The Wisconsin Department of Justice will evaluate how the lawful publication of Act 10 affects pending litigation. We have no further comment at this time,” Cosh said.

Needless top say, the Democrats and the public employee unions are going absolutely bananas over this.

It will certainly be interesting to see where this goes…and I predict the Obama Department of Justice will likely try to intervene to attempt to kill the law.


please donate…it helps me write more gooder!

J O S H U A P U N D I T

Tagged with:
 

might ensue, but…who knows what evil lurks in the actions of these bat shit crazy Republicans?

http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/03/25/w…

Senate Majority Leader decided court order only applied to Secty of State and ordered Legislative Reference Bureau to publish Walker’s End Run anti-union legislation.

Rules? Laws? Hey, they’re Republicans!

The Republican running to retain his seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court is also a fine speciment of a bat guano Republican. He voted with the rest of the conservative justices to allow judges to not recuse themselves in cases brought by their most generous donors.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/23/davi…

Recent quick hits

Tagged with:
 

In yet another twist in the controversy in Wisconsin swirling around Gov. Scott Walker’s bill that would deep-six collective bargaining for public unions, the legislation was published — ignoring a court restraining order. This is likely to further arouse passions and polarize Wisconsin as well as other parts of the country where labor unions are under being challenged by GOP governors:

In a stunning twist, controversial legislation limiting collective bargaining for public workers was published on Friday despite a judge’s hold on the measure, sparking a dispute over whether it takes effect Saturday.

The legislation was published Friday to the Legislature’s website with a footnote that acknowledges the restraining order by a Dane County judge. But the posting says state law “requires the Legislative Reference Bureau to publish every act within 10 working days after its date of enactment.”

The measure sparked massive protests at the Capitol and lawsuits by opponents because it would eliminate the ability of most public workers to bargain over anything but wages.

The restraining order was issued against Democratic Secretary of State Doug La Follette. But the bill was published by the reference bureau, which was not named in the restraining order.

This is basically “ends justify the means” politics: using a loophole.

Laws normally take effect a day after they are published, and a top GOP lawmaker said that meant it will become law Saturday. But the nonpartisan legislative official who published the law disagreed.

“I think this is a ministerial act that forwards it to the secretary of state,” said Stephen Miller, director of the Legislative Reference Bureau. “I don’t think this act makes it become effective. My understanding is that the secretary of state has to publish it in the (official state) newspaper for it to become effective.
Prediction: Walker will insist it is now valid and implement it where he can.
Walker signed the bill March 11. Under state law, it must be published within 10 working days, which was Friday.

The law has not been printed in the Wisconsin State Journal, the official state newspaper, as other laws are. Late Friday, State Journal publisher Bill Johnston said in an email that the notice for the law had been scheduled to run but had been canceled. He did not elaborate.

Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) claimed it didn’t matter that it hasn’t appeared in the paper.

“It’s published,” Fitzgerald said. “It’s law. That’s what I contend.”

The question is: how will independent voters react to this? Polls have shown that in Wisconsin and elsewhere Walker’s actions are not winning the argument. This move, at first blush, at least, seems a “whatever it takes” on this issue. But the problem for Walker and the GOP is that many Americans have clearly now concluded that it isn’t just the budget at play in Wisconsin and other states where Republican governors are slicing away rights that were considered a “given” in American life. There is an ineffable aroma of power politics — partially ideology and part an effort to remove a group that has traditionally supported Democrats, in the believe it’d hurt the Dems in 2012.

However you can now predict this: Wisconsin is likely to rally unions and many union members more than ever to the Democratic party and rally the party’s base, even if they are not totally pleased with Barack Obama.

A CROSS SECTION OF VIEWPOINTS ON THIS ISSUE

Firedog Lake:

We still don’t know if the state Supreme Court will take up the restraining order on the bill, which has been appealed by the state Attorney General. But the Walker Administration is acting like the restraining order didn’t exist.

The level of contempt for the law is astounding to me…

…Of course, the point is not necessarily whether the Secretary of State has the sole power to publish law – that looks clear to me. It’s whether the Walker Administration THINKS the bill is now published and law that’s the problem, and what will be the remedy for that.

Allahpundit:

….Democrats are surely on their way back to court even as you’re reading this to demand that the TRO be expanded to cover the LRB, Walker, the legislature, and everyone else under the sun. The judge did, after all, enjoin “further implementation” of the law generally before specifying a particular actor, so they’ll probably win and the scope of the order will be enlarged. In fact, according to the Journal-Sentinel story quoted above, there’s already a new court action pending that challenges the collective bargaining law on some sort of equal protection grounds (treating one group of workers differently from another by limiting their CB privileges) and argues that the state GOP should have needed a three-fifths quorum to pass it instead of the simple majority quorum they used. Nothing should change here, in other words, and since the state supreme court is probably going to deal with this sooner rather than later, even if the law is implemented immediately its ultimate fate should be decided in a few days anyway.

Freedom Eden:

Good grief.

The law is being followed: State law “requires the Legislative Reference Bureau to publish every act within 10 working days after its date of enactment..


The Moderate Voice

Tagged with:
 

(Jonathan H. Adler)

Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen appealed the decision by a county judge enjoining publication of legislation that would curtail collective bargaining rights for public employees.  The AG’s petition, filed with a state appellate court, seeks leave to appeal and a stay of the county judge’s temporary restraining order.  The Journal-Sentinel reports:

In its appeal Monday, the state made several arguments. First, the state argued that the court has no jurisdiction over GOP legislative leaders being sued or over La Follette because they all currently enjoy legal immunity.Second, the state argued that the court can’t block a bill that hasn’t yet been published into law because that amounts to interfering with the Legislature in its area of responsibility of passing laws.

Last, the state argued that the courts can’t block or strike down a law passed by the Legislature purely on the basis of lawmakers failing to follow the rules of the lawmaking process such as legislative rules or the open meetings law. State Supreme Court decisions have found that the courts can only strike down or block laws when the Legislature has failed to follow constitutional requirements, the state said in its appeal.




The Volokh Conspiracy

Tagged with: