courthousenews--2020-07-20--Roundup Cancer Trial Verdict Upheld, But Damages Slashed

SAN FRANCISCO ( CN ) — A California appellate court upheld a jury verdict finding popular weed killer Roundup caused a San Francisco Bay Area man ’ s lymphoma but slashed the amount its manufacturer will have to pay in damages to $ 20.4 million .
Three appellate justices took up Bayer-owned Monsanto ’ s appeal back in June after a jury awarded Dewayne Johnson $ 289 million in punitive damages , an amount later reduced by a trial judge to $ 78.5 million .
The panel ended up cutting the punitive damages award even further , but rejected Monsanto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t liable for Johnson ’ s cancer .
“ Monsanto argues that Johnson failed to prove liability , that insufficient evidence supports the jury ’ s findings on causation , and that Johnson ’ s causes of action were , in any event , pre-empted by federal law .
None of these arguments are persuasive , ” First Appellate Court Justice Jim Humes wrote .
He was joined by Justice Kathleen Banke and Justice Gabriel Sanchez .
Under the reduced award , Johnson will receive $ 10.2 million in punitive damages and $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson sued Monsanto in 2016 after he was diagnosed with mycosis fungoides , a skin-based non-Hodgkin lymphoma that caused cancerous lesions to form over most of his body .
Johnson , who goes by Lee , began working at the Benicia Unified School District in June 2012 , quickly becoming the district ’ s groundskeeper responsible for controlling weeds on school properties .
He used both Roundup Pro and Ranger Pro , containing 41 % and about 51 % , respectively , of the active ingredient glyphosate .
In April 2014 , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , soaking Johnson with Ranger Pro from head to toe and even penetrating his protective gear .
He began developing a rash a couple of months later and he was diagnosed with lymphoma that October .
Terrified , Johnson called a Monsanto hotline in November 2014 where he told “ a very nice lady ” about the hose incident and asked whether Roundup could cause cancer .
The woman took his statement and told him someone would call him back .
No one ever did .
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ glyphosate is safe , but the classification of glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen in 2015 by the World Health Organization ’ s International Agency for Research on Cancer spurred the filing of hundreds of lawsuits against Monsanto in the United States .
Johnson ’ s was the first to go to trial as he was not expected to live to see 2020.The jury ultimately awarded him $ 1 million for each year of the 33 years he might still live .
But the appellate panel found Johnson is unable to collect compensation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aspect of California law his attorney Brent Wisner said he plans to challenge .
“ The reduction in damages is a function of a deep flaw in California tort law , not the merits of the case , ” Wisner said in a statement Monday .
“ Basically , California law does not allow a plaintiff to recover for a shortened life expectancy .
This effectively rewards a defendant for killing a plaintiff , as opposed to just injuring him .
It is madness .
That Lee will not live an entire life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compensable .
Hopefully , when this issue gets before the California Supreme Court , we can change this irrational law.
” Though dissatisfied with the damages award , Wisner said he still takes it as a win for his Johnson .
“ This is another major victory for Lee and his family .
Nearly every argument by Monsanto was rejected , including Monsanto ’ s vaunted pre-emption defense , and the verdict was upheld.
” Bayer issued a statement also hinting at an appeal to the state ’ s high court , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeal court ’ s decision to reduce the compensatory and punitive damages is a step in the right direction , but we continue to believe that the jury ’ s verdict and damage awards are inconsistent with the evidence at trial and the law .
Monsanto will consider its legal options , including filing an appeal with the Supreme Court of California , ” the company said in a statement .
Humes , who questioned at oral argument whether $ 33 million wasn ’ t excessive given testimony at trial that Johnson only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , wrote that $ 4 million seemed more “ appropriate , ” and that his punitive award to be likewise reduced “ to correspond with our reduction of future noneconomic damages.
” But the appellate court ’ s ruling is still a major blow for Bayer , as the panel rejected its argument that the “ best ” available science showed no causal link between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin lymphoma at the time of Johnson ’ s exposure .
“ This claim simply ignores the testimony about the four studies dating back to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ toxicity , ” Humes wrote .
“ In our view , Johnson presented abundant — and certainly substantial — evidence that glyphosate , together with the other ingredients in Roundup products , caused his cancer .
Expert after expert provided evidence both that Roundup products are capable of causing non-Hodgkin lymphoma ( general causation ) and caused Johnson ’ s cancer in particular ( specific causation ) .
” The justices also found the jury was presented with enough evidence to infer that Monsanto was more concerned about promoting and selling Roundup than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the evidence that the company discounted questions about glyphosate ’ s safety and failed to adequately test its products , other evidence was presented upon which the jury could have inferred that Monsanto acted with a conscious disregard for public safety .
This included evidence that Monsanto employees surreptitiously contributed to articles reporting that glyphosate was non-carcinogenic , ” Humes wrote .
The court also noted that Monsanto ’ s failure to return Johnson ’ s calls warranted punitive damages , at least in part , adding to the substantial pile of evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The jury could have believed that Monsanto ’ s disinterest in Johnson ’ s specific concerns aligned with the lack of evidence showing that Monsanto employees cared about the public safety , ” Humes wrote .
“ Taken together , the evidence amounted to substantial evidence that Monsanto acted with a willful and conscious disregard of others ’ safety.
” There have been two more major jury verdicts against Monsanto since Johnson ’ s .
In March 2019 , a San Francisco federal jury awarded Sonoma County resident Ed Hardeman $ 80 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely caused his non-Hodgkin lymphoma .
U.S District Judge Vincent Chhabria later reduced the award to $ 20 million , finding it excessive .
A jury in Alameda County Superior Court awarded a California couple $ 2 billion in punitive damages in May 2019 after finding Monsanto failed to warn them about the hazards of the popular weed killer Roundup .
On June 24 , Bayer announced it would pay $ 10 billion to resolve thousands more claims brought by plaintiffs who attribute their non-Hodgkin lymphoma to Roundup use under an agreement that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of experts to determine whether , and to what extent , Roundup causes cancer .
Future claims would be bound by the panel ’ s findings .
Chhabria , who is overseeing the multidistrict litigation , roundly criticized that proposition , and Bayer subsequently withdrew that portion of the plan , vowing to reconsider in light of Chhabria ’ s concerns .

A California appellate court upheld a jury verdict finding popular weed killer Roundup caused a San Francisco Bay Area man’s lymphoma but slashed the amount its manufacturer will have to pay in damages to $20.4 million.
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — A California appellate court upheld a jury verdict finding popular weed killer Roundup caused a San Francisco Bay Area man’s lymphoma but slashed the amount its manufacturer will have to pay in damages to $20.4 million.
Three appellate justices took up Bayer-owned Monsanto’s appeal back in June after a jury awarded Dewayne Johnson $289 million in punitive damages, an amount later reduced by a trial judge to $78.5 million.
Johnson’s lawyers wanted the full amount reinstated.
The panel ended up cutting the punitive damages award even further, but rejected Monsanto’s arguments that it wasn’t liable for Johnson’s cancer.
“Monsanto argues that Johnson failed to prove liability, that insufficient evidence supports the jury’s findings on causation, and that Johnson’s causes of action were, in any event, pre-empted by federal law. None of these arguments are persuasive,” First Appellate Court Justice Jim Humes wrote. He was joined by Justice Kathleen Banke and Justice Gabriel Sanchez.
Under the reduced award, Johnson will receive $10.2 million in punitive damages and $10.2 in future noneconomic compensatory damages.
Johnson sued Monsanto in 2016 after he was diagnosed with mycosis fungoides, a skin-based non-Hodgkin lymphoma that caused cancerous lesions to form over most of his body. Johnson, who goes by Lee, began working at the Benicia Unified School District in June 2012, quickly becoming the district’s groundskeeper responsible for controlling weeds on school properties. He used both Roundup Pro and Ranger Pro, containing 41% and about 51%, respectively, of the active ingredient glyphosate.
In April 2014, the hose to Johnson’s truck broke, soaking Johnson with Ranger Pro from head to toe and even penetrating his protective gear. He began developing a rash a couple of months later and he was diagnosed with lymphoma that October.
Terrified, Johnson called a Monsanto hotline in November 2014 where he told “a very nice lady” about the hose incident and asked whether Roundup could cause cancer. The woman took his statement and told him someone would call him back. No one ever did.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other regulators around the world have concluded that glyphosate is safe, but the classification of glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen in 2015 by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer spurred the filing of hundreds of lawsuits against Monsanto in the United States.
Johnson’s was the first to go to trial as he was not expected to live to see 2020. The jury ultimately awarded him $1 million for each year of the 33 years he might still live.
But the appellate panel found Johnson is unable to collect compensation for his shortened life expectancy, an aspect of California law his attorney Brent Wisner said he plans to challenge.
“The reduction in damages is a function of a deep flaw in California tort law, not the merits of the case,” Wisner said in a statement Monday. “Basically, California law does not allow a plaintiff to recover for a shortened life expectancy. This effectively rewards a defendant for killing a plaintiff, as opposed to just injuring him. It is madness. That Lee will not live an entire life with his wife and children should be compensable. Hopefully, when this issue gets before the California Supreme Court, we can change this irrational law.”
Though dissatisfied with the damages award, Wisner said he still takes it as a win for Johnson. “This is another major victory for Lee and his family. Nearly every argument by Monsanto was rejected, including Monsanto’s vaunted pre-emption defense, and the verdict was upheld.”
Bayer issued a statement also hinting at an appeal to the state’s high court, while praising the reduced damages.
“The appeal court’s decision to reduce the compensatory and punitive damages is a step in the right direction, but we continue to believe that the jury’s verdict and damage awards are inconsistent with the evidence at trial and the law. Monsanto will consider its legal options, including filing an appeal with the Supreme Court of California,” the company said in a statement.
Humes, who questioned at oral argument whether $33 million wasn’t excessive given testimony at trial that Johnson only had two years at most to live, wrote that $4 million seemed more “appropriate,” and that his punitive award to be likewise reduced “to correspond with our reduction of future noneconomic damages.”
But the appellate court’s ruling is still a major blow for Bayer, as the panel rejected its argument that the “best” available science showed no causal link between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin lymphoma at the time of Johnson’s exposure. “This claim simply ignores the testimony about the four studies dating back to the 1990s finding evidence of glyphosate’s toxicity,” Humes wrote.
“In our view, Johnson presented abundant — and certainly substantial — evidence that glyphosate, together with the other ingredients in Roundup products, caused his cancer. Expert after expert provided evidence both that Roundup products are capable of causing non-Hodgkin lymphoma (general causation) and caused Johnson’s cancer in particular (specific causation)."
The justices also found the jury was presented with enough evidence to infer that Monsanto was more concerned about promoting and selling Roundup than public health.
"In addition to the evidence that the company discounted questions about glyphosate’s safety and failed to adequately test its products, other evidence was presented upon which the jury could have inferred that Monsanto acted with a conscious disregard for public safety. This included evidence that Monsanto employees surreptitiously contributed to articles reporting that glyphosate was non-carcinogenic,” Humes wrote.
The court also noted that Monsanto’s failure to return Johnson’s calls warranted punitive damages, at least in part, adding to the substantial pile of evidence that Monsanto willfully disregarded safety concerns.
“The jury could have believed that Monsanto’s disinterest in Johnson’s specific concerns aligned with the lack of evidence showing that Monsanto employees cared about the public safety,” Humes wrote. “Taken together, the evidence amounted to substantial evidence that Monsanto acted with a willful and conscious disregard of others’ safety.”
There have been two more major jury verdicts against Monsanto since Johnson’s. In March 2019, a San Francisco federal jury awarded Sonoma County resident Ed Hardeman $80 million in punitive damages, finding Roundup likely caused his non-Hodgkin lymphoma. U.S District Judge Vincent Chhabria later reduced the award to $20 million, finding it excessive.
A jury in Alameda County Superior Court awarded a California couple $2 billion in punitive damages in May 2019 after finding Monsanto failed to warn them about the hazards of the popular weed killer Roundup.
On June 24, Bayer announced it would pay $10 billion to resolve thousands more claims brought by plaintiffs who attribute their non-Hodgkin lymphoma to Roundup use under an agreement that includes the establishment of an independent panel of experts to determine whether, and to what extent, Roundup causes cancer. Future claims would be bound by the panel’s findings.
Chhabria, who is overseeing the multidistrict litigation, roundly criticized that proposition, and Bayer subsequently withdrew that portion of the plan, vowing to reconsider in light of Chhabria’s concerns.


Health Insurance

NEW YORK — An emergency regulation in New York limiting “ risk adjustment funding ” for health care insurers was @ @ @ @ @ Act , the Second Circuit ruled .

The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.


Race-Based Harassment

AUSTIN , Texas — Two former correctional officers may pursue part of their civil rights lawsuit against the Texas Department @ @ @ @ @ they were unjustifiably fired after they complained about “ race-based police harassment ” they experienced @ @ @ @ @ they were on their way to work , a federal court in the state ruled @ @ @ @ @ jail where the former officers worked allegedly told one of them that she had “ @ @ @ @ @ officer ” and had put the department in a negative light “ with everything that @ @ @ @ @ with the media and police officers and all these shootings .
”

Two former correctional officers may pursue part of their civil rights lawsuit against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice over claims they were unjustifiably fired after they complained about “race-based police harassment” they experienced during back-to-back traffic stops while they were on their way to work, a federal court in the state ruled.
AUSTIN, Texas — Two former correctional officers may pursue part of their civil rights lawsuit against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice over claims they were unjustifiably fired after they complained about “race-based police harassment” they experienced during back-to-back traffic stops while they were on their way to work, a federal court in the state ruled.
The warden at the jail where the former officers worked allegedly told one of them that she had “no right to question the officer” and had put the department in a negative light “with everything that’s going on today with the media and police officers and all these shootings."


Ballot Access

SAN ANTONIO — A federal court in Texas denied a request for a preliminary injunction from an independent candidate for @ @ @ @ @ state ’ s ballot-access requirements for independent candidates violate his constitutional rights due to the @ @ @ @ @ .


Wells Fargo Settlement

SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit rejected challenges to a $ 142 million settlement in a nationwide class action against @ @ @ @ @ accounts scandal , finding the class satisfied the predominance requirement and the settlement was fair @


courthousenews--2020-07-21--Michael Cohen Claims Remand to Prison Was Retaliation for Plan to Publish Trump Book

( CN ) — Former Trump fixer Michael Cohen , who was recently sent back to prison after being released to home confinement due to Covid-19 , claims in a lawsuit filed Monday that he is being punished for writing — and intending to publish — a book critical of the president .
Cohen , a former personal attorney for President Donald Trump sentenced to three years in prison for tax fraud , lying to Congress and violating campaign-finance law , brought a free speech lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against Attorney General William Barr and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confinement , the president ’ s former attorney was photographed dining at a sidewalk table outside of a restaurant around the corner from his Park Avenue apartment .
A week later , he was remanded to prison and the Bureau of Prisons confirmed he had refused to comply with the terms of his placement in the US Probation Office ’ s Federal Location Monitoring program .
In the 21-page lawsuit , Cohen alleges that he is being retaliated against by the Trump administration over his decision to write and publish a memoir Cohen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the president , but will contain detailed depictions of Trump ’ s behavior behind closed doors — including , according to the complaint , stories of the president using anti-Semitic and racist remarks against prominent leaders , such as Barack Obama and Nelson Mandela .
Cohen largely takes issue with one specific requirement he was forced to agree to when he was released from prison to house arrest regarding his book .
Cohen claims that in order for him to procure a home release — something the complaint says was critical for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hypertension — he had to sign an agreement that would relinquish his First Amendment right to speak through any media format , including books .
The suit claims that Cohen did not actually object to these restrictions , but instead asked for clarification on some of the finer points on what he could or could not do .
Cohen alleges that rather than offer clarity , he was instead cuffed and remanded back to prison where he is currently in solitary confinement .
Danya Perry , partner at the Perry Guha , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suit on behalf of Cohen .
“ This case is about a brazen assault on the First Amendment and the rule of law .
It is not about politics or personalities , ” Perry said in a statement .
“ We trust that our Constitution will prevail and that free speech will continue to be protected , for our client and for all others by extension.
” Cohen claims in his suit that these restrictions would not only prevent him from continuing to work on his book — which he began to work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but were also put in place to silence him during an election year .
He also alleges that this is not the first time that he was pressured to be quiet regarding his book .
The complaint claims that on April 30 , Trump Organization attorney Charles Harder sent a cease and desist letter to Cohen ’ s attorney with claims that Cohen ’ s book was barred by a nondisclosure agreement .
Cohen claims that he does not believe he ever signed such an NDA and that no such letter was actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Harder used the same claim in an attempt to block a memoir by Mary Trump — which was ultimately published despite efforts to quash it .
There was also a heated and lengthy legal battle over the publication of former Trump advisor John Bolton ’ s book recently , but that book eventually made it onto shelves as well .
Ben Wizner , director of the ACLU ’ s Speech , Privacy , and Technology Project , said that these restrictions on Cohen serve as just another example of the Trump administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The government can not imprison Michael Cohen for writing a book about President Trump , ” Wizner said in a press statement .
“ The gag order that the government sought to impose on Mr. Cohen was an unconstitutional prior restraint , and his continued imprisonment is part of a dangerous pattern of retaliation against Trump critics.
” Cohen ’ s complaint concludes with a request to be immediately released from prison and be allowed to resume his home confinement .
Representatives from the Bureau of Prisons did not immediately respond @ @ @ @ @

Former Trump fixer Michael Cohen, who was recently sent back to prison after being released to home confinement due to Covid-19, claims in a lawsuit filed Monday that he is being punished for writing — and intending to publish — a book critical of the president.
(CN) — Former Trump fixer Michael Cohen, who was recently sent back to prison after being released to home confinement due to Covid-19, claims in a lawsuit filed Monday that he is being punished for writing — and intending to publish — a book critical of the president.
Cohen, a former personal attorney for President Donald Trump sentenced to three years in prison for tax fraud, lying to Congress and violating campaign-finance law, brought a free speech lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against Attorney General William Barr and other justice officials.
While released to home confinement, the president’s former attorney was photographed dining at a sidewalk table outside of a restaurant around the corner from his Park Avenue apartment. A week later, he was remanded to prison and the Bureau of Prisons confirmed he had refused to comply with the terms of his placement in the US Probation Office’s Federal Location Monitoring program.
In the 21-page lawsuit, Cohen alleges that he is being retaliated against by the Trump administration over his decision to write and publish a memoir Cohen claims will not only be critical of the president, but will contain detailed depictions of Trump’s behavior behind closed doors — including, according to the complaint, stories of the president using anti-Semitic and racist remarks against prominent leaders, such as Barack Obama and Nelson Mandela.
Cohen largely takes issue with one specific requirement he was forced to agree to when he was released from prison to house arrest regarding his book. Cohen claims that in order for him to procure a home release — something the complaint says was critical for Cohen given his medical history with severe hypertension — he had to sign an agreement that would relinquish his First Amendment right to speak through any media format, including books.
The suit claims that Cohen did not actually object to these restrictions, but instead asked for clarification on some of the finer points on what he could or could not do. Cohen alleges that rather than offer clarity, he was instead cuffed and remanded back to prison where he is currently in solitary confinement.
Danya Perry, partner at the Perry Guha, and the American Civil Liberties Union brought the suit on behalf of Cohen.
“This case is about a brazen assault on the First Amendment and the rule of law. It is not about politics or personalities,” Perry said in a statement. “We trust that our Constitution will prevail and that free speech will continue to be protected, for our client and for all others by extension.”
Cohen claims in his suit that these restrictions would not only prevent him from continuing to work on his book — which he began to work on after being sent to prison — but were also put in place to silence him during an election year.
He also alleges that this is not the first time that he was pressured to be quiet regarding his book. The complaint claims that on April 30, Trump Organization attorney Charles Harder sent a cease and desist letter to Cohen’s attorney with claims that Cohen’s book was barred by a nondisclosure agreement.
Cohen claims that he does not believe he ever signed such an NDA and that no such letter was actually attached to the cease and desist letter.
Harder used the same claim in an attempt to block a memoir by Mary Trump — which was ultimately published despite efforts to quash it.
There was also a heated and lengthy legal battle over the publication of former Trump advisor John Bolton’s book recently, but that book eventually made it onto shelves as well.
Ben Wizner, director of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, said that these restrictions on Cohen serve as just another example of the Trump administration attempting to silence Trump’s critics.
“The government cannot imprison Michael Cohen for writing a book about President Trump,” Wizner said in a press statement. “The gag order that the government sought to impose on Mr. Cohen was an unconstitutional prior restraint, and his continued imprisonment is part of a dangerous pattern of retaliation against Trump critics.”
Cohen’s complaint concludes with a request to be immediately released from prison and be allowed to resume his home confinement.
Representatives from the Bureau of Prisons did not immediately respond to requests for comment.


Surveillance

SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for rehearing of unlawful search and discrimination claims brought by three @ @ @ @ @ alleged the FBI used an informant to infiltrate several Los Angeles and Orange County mosques @ @ @ @ @ surveillance program that gathered information about Muslims based solely on their religious identity .
”


courthousenews--2020-07-21--States Claim EPA Illegally Eased Off Mercury Pollution Standards

WASHINGTON ( CN ) — A coalition of 20 states asked the D.C .
Circuit Monday to review the Environmental Protection Agency ’ s determination that it is not necessary to limit mercury and other hazardous air pollutants emitted from power plants .
The states plan to argue in the D.C .
Circuit that the Trump administration undermined the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards and exceeded its authority when it determined limits on mercury and other pollutants emitted from coal-and-oil-fired power plants were not “ appropriate.
” The standards helped reduce power-plant mercury emissions by 86 % between 2006 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tens of thousands of premature deaths related to air pollutants , the states argued , contending the Trump administration violated the Clean Air Act by disregarding the life-saving benefits .
The decision in May to change course on the regulations comes after an original conclusion that the standards were critical .
That conclusion , made in 2016 , was backed by detailed findings that massive benefits outweighed estimated costs , the states claim .
The downturn in public health problems was matched by more than $ 1 billion in economic activity , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study on the Clean Air Act .
The EPA ’ s reversal relied on outdated cost estimates , while ignoring the risk to public health if the fossil fuel-fired power plants operate under loosened regulations , the states further allege .
“ The Trump Administration is turning a blind eye to the massive benefits of limiting air pollution at a time when our country can least afford it , ” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement Tuesday .
Published May 22 , the new rule is titled : “ National @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units—Reconsideration of Supplemental Finding and Residual Risk and Technology Review.
” In the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic , Becerra argued that the Trump administration has rigged the rulemaking process to prop up the fossil-fuel industry .
“ With respiratory illness on the rise , the Trump Administration should be battening down the hatches to ensure that these life-saving standards continue to protect the communities hit first and worst by air pollution , ” the attorney general said .
The lawsuit comes as the Trump administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rollbacks during the coronavirus pandemic .
The Department of Justice said the EPA does not comment on pending litigation .
Becerra joined the attorneys general of Massachusetts , Connecticut , Delaware , Illinois , Maine , Maryland , Michigan , Minnesota , New Jersey , New Mexico , New York , North Carolina , Oregon , Pennsylvania , Rhode Island , Vermont , Virginia , Washington and Wisconsin and the District of Columbia in the lawsuit .
The cities of Baltimore , Chicago , and New York and Erie County also joined in @ @ @ @ @ @

A coalition of 20 states asked the D.C. Circuit Monday to review the Environmental Protection Agency’s determination that it is not necessary to limit mercury and other hazardous air pollutants emitted from power plants.
WASHINGTON (CN) — A coalition of 20 states asked the D.C. Circuit Monday to review the Environmental Protection Agency’s determination that it is not necessary to limit mercury and other hazardous air pollutants emitted from power plants.
The states plan to argue in the D.C. Circuit that the Trump administration undermined the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards and exceeded its authority when it determined limits on mercury and other pollutants emitted from coal-and-oil-fired power plants were not “appropriate.”
The standards helped reduce power-plant mercury emissions by 86% between 2006 and 2017 and resulted in a drop of tens of thousands of premature deaths related to air pollutants, the states argued, contending the Trump administration violated the Clean Air Act by disregarding the life-saving benefits.
The decision in May to change course on the regulations comes after an original conclusion that the standards were critical. That conclusion, made in 2016, was backed by detailed findings that massive benefits outweighed estimated costs, the states claim.
The downturn in public health problems was matched by more than $1 billion in economic activity, the states argue, citing a recent EPA study on the Clean Air Act.
The EPA’s reversal relied on outdated cost estimates, while ignoring the risk to public health if the fossil fuel-fired power plants operate under loosened regulations, the states further allege.
"The Trump Administration is turning a blind eye to the massive benefits of limiting air pollution at a time when our country can least afford it,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement Tuesday.
Published May 22, the new rule is titled: “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units—Reconsideration of Supplemental Finding and Residual Risk and Technology Review.”
In the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, Becerra argued that the Trump administration has rigged the rulemaking process to prop up the fossil-fuel industry.
“With respiratory illness on the rise, the Trump Administration should be battening down the hatches to ensure that these life-saving standards continue to protect the communities hit first and worst by air pollution,” the attorney general said.
The lawsuit comes as the Trump administration fights other legal battles over pollution regulation rollbacks during the coronavirus pandemic. The Department of Justice said the EPA does not comment on pending litigation.
Becerra joined the attorneys general of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin and the District of Columbia in the lawsuit. The cities of Baltimore, Chicago, and New York and Erie County also joined in filing the petition on Tuesday.


courthousenews--2020-07-21--Hotels Sue to Block San Francisco’s Daily Cleaning Mandate

SAN FRANCISCO ( CN ) — Claiming a new city law requiring daily cleanings of hotel rooms will financially strain already struggling businesses , hotel industry groups sued San Francisco in state court Monday .
The lawsuit filed by the Hotel Council of San Francisco , California Hotel & Lodging Association and the American Hotel & Lodging Association seeks to block the “ Healthy Buildings ” ordinance passed by the city ’ s Board of Supervisors on July 7 .
The law requires daily cleanings of guest rooms unless a guest specifically requests otherwise .
Rather than making buildings safer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will endanger guests and employees by increasing the frequency of cleaning staff in guest rooms , creating more opportunities to catch and spread the Covid-19 virus in a confined space .
“ Most of the guidelines we ’ ve seen and common sense have said that less interaction is less risky , ” said Kevin Carroll , CEO of the Hotel Council of San Francisco .
“ If you are mandating that someone comes into the room to clean it , that creates a higher risk.
” The law also forbids hotels from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of daily cleaning .
Carroll said that runs counter to the city and hotel industry ’ s sustainability goals to reduce the use of water and energy required to wash sheets and towels every day .
Aside from mandating daily cleanings of guest rooms , the ordinance also requires hotels and large office buildings to clean and disinfect “ high-contact ” areas — including lobbies , hallways , restrooms and elevators , multiple times per day .
The industry groups say hotels already have systems in place to make sure common spaces are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and industry health guidelines .
San Francisco ’ s mandate goes beyond what is required by those standards , they argue .
“ We have enough guidelines we ’ ve worked on both locally , statewide and nationally for hotels , ” Carroll said .
“ This ordinance developed through the Board of Supervisors is redundant and isn ’ t necessary.
” The groups also complain of a provision in the law that requires employees be provided adequate protective gear , including gloves , masks and cleaning equipment .
The ordinance forbids hotels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complain about health risks or refuse to do work that they feel poses a risk to their health or safety .
It empowers workers to sue their employers for $ 1,000 per violation or actual damages for lost wages and benefits , whichever is higher .
Carroll called this another unnecessary provision because the state already has systems in place for workers to file complaints about unsafe working conditions .
“ There ’ s multiple ways they can do that already , ” Carroll said .
Anand Singh , president of the union @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers , said stronger standards are necessary .
He cited an outbreak that infected 22 workers and their families after hotels reopened in Las Vegas without adequate standards in place .
“ We don ’ t think any traveler wants to hear that San Francisco hotels are trying to lower their cleaning standards right now , ” Singh said , adding that hotels have walked away from discussions with employees about health and safety protocols like personal protective equipment and testing .
A statement by the hotel groups Monday claimed the ordinance “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with no consideration of the employee harm it mandates.
” The industry groups estimate the law will cost San Francisco ’ s 215 hotels $ 220,000 each on average , adding up to $ 47 million per year .
That ’ s on top of an extra $ 498,000 that an average 250-room hotel will incur to adopt “ the best practices for cleaning and social distancing ” as recommended by the state , federal and industry guidelines , according to the groups .
San Francisco Supervisor Aaron Peskin spearheaded the push to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , arguing it was necessary to recharge the city ’ s tourism industry and give visitors confidence that San Francisco is a safe place to visit .
Peskin said the law would “ send a message to the country and our world that San Francisco is at the forefront of having the safest , cleanest Covid-19-free hotel rooms in the United States of America ” during a July 7 meeting .
Peskin ’ s office declined to comment Monday because it had not yet seen the lawsuit .
San Francisco City Attorney ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office would “ review the lawsuit once we ’ ve actually been served with it , and we ’ ll address it in court.
” San Francisco hotels can not host regular guests at this time .
They will remain closed to tourists until the city starts Phase 3 of its reopening plan , currently scheduled to start sometime in August .
The city is still in the early stages of Phase 2 after delaying the reopening of certain businesses , including hair salons and museums , that were supposed to reopen on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contracting with the city to provide rooms for homeless people and essential workers .

Claiming a new city law requiring daily cleanings of hotel rooms will financially strain already struggling businesses, hotel industry groups sued San Francisco in state court Monday.
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Claiming a new city law requiring daily cleanings of hotel rooms will financially strain already struggling businesses, hotel industry groups sued San Francisco in state court Monday.
The lawsuit filed by the Hotel Council of San Francisco, California Hotel & Lodging Association and the American Hotel & Lodging Association seeks to block the “Healthy Buildings” ordinance passed by the city’s Board of Supervisors on July 7. The law requires daily cleanings of guest rooms unless a guest specifically requests otherwise.
Rather than making buildings safer, the industry groups say the law will endanger guests and employees by increasing the frequency of cleaning staff in guest rooms, creating more opportunities to catch and spread the Covid-19 virus in a confined space.
“Most of the guidelines we’ve seen and common sense have said that less interaction is less risky,” said Kevin Carroll, CEO of the Hotel Council of San Francisco. “If you are mandating that someone comes into the room to clean it, that creates a higher risk.”
The law also forbids hotels from offering incentives for guests to opt out of daily cleaning. Carroll said that runs counter to the city and hotel industry’s sustainability goals to reduce the use of water and energy required to wash sheets and towels every day.
Aside from mandating daily cleanings of guest rooms, the ordinance also requires hotels and large office buildings to clean and disinfect “high-contact” areas — including lobbies, hallways, restrooms and elevators, multiple times per day.
The industry groups say hotels already have systems in place to make sure common spaces are cleaned in accordance with state, federal and industry health guidelines. San Francisco’s mandate goes beyond what is required by those standards, they argue.
“We have enough guidelines we’ve worked on both locally, statewide and nationally for hotels,” Carroll said. “This ordinance developed through the Board of Supervisors is redundant and isn’t necessary.”
The groups also complain of a provision in the law that requires employees be provided adequate protective gear, including gloves, masks and cleaning equipment. The ordinance forbids hotels from firing or retaliating against workers who complain about health risks or refuse to do work that they feel poses a risk to their health or safety. It empowers workers to sue their employers for $1,000 per violation or actual damages for lost wages and benefits, whichever is higher.
Carroll called this another unnecessary provision because the state already has systems in place for workers to file complaints about unsafe working conditions.
“There’s multiple ways they can do that already,” Carroll said.
Anand Singh, president of the union Unite Here Local 2 that represents hotel workers, said stronger standards are necessary. He cited an outbreak that infected 22 workers and their families after hotels reopened in Las Vegas without adequate standards in place.
“We don’t think any traveler wants to hear that San Francisco hotels are trying to lower their cleaning standards right now,” Singh said, adding that hotels have walked away from discussions with employees about health and safety protocols like personal protective equipment and testing.
A statement by the hotel groups Monday claimed the ordinance “serves the selfish interests of a union with no consideration of the employee harm it mandates.”
The industry groups estimate the law will cost San Francisco’s 215 hotels $220,000 each on average, adding up to $47 million per year. That’s on top of an extra $498,000 that an average 250-room hotel will incur to adopt “the best practices for cleaning and social distancing” as recommended by the state, federal and industry guidelines, according to the groups.
San Francisco Supervisor Aaron Peskin spearheaded the push to pass the “Healthy Buildings” law, arguing it was necessary to recharge the city’s tourism industry and give visitors confidence that San Francisco is a safe place to visit.
Peskin said the law would “send a message to the country and our world that San Francisco is at the forefront of having the safest, cleanest Covid-19-free hotel rooms in the United States of America” during a July 7 meeting.
Peskin’s office declined to comment Monday because it had not yet seen the lawsuit.
San Francisco City Attorney’s Office spokesman John Coté said his office would “review the lawsuit once we've actually been served with it, and we'll address it in court.”
San Francisco hotels cannot host regular guests at this time. They will remain closed to tourists until the city starts Phase 3 of its reopening plan, currently scheduled to start sometime in August. The city is still in the early stages of Phase 2 after delaying the reopening of certain businesses, including hair salons and museums, that were supposed to reopen on June 29. Some hotels are currently contracting with the city to provide rooms for homeless people and essential workers.


courthousenews--2020-07-21--City Dodges Lawsuit Over Chromium 6-Tainted Water Wells

SACRAMENTO , Calif. ( CN ) — A federal judge on Monday squashed environmentalists ’ bid to punish a Northern California city for delivering drinking water tainted with the carcinogen that prompted the film “ Erin Brockovich.
” The environmental group California River Watch sued the city of Vacaville over its water supply in 2017 , claiming it was violating federal hazardous waste laws by providing its 92,000 residents with water containing hexavalent chromium .
The city , located 55 miles northeast of San Francisco , has known about its dirty drinking water for almost 20 years as nearly half @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the carcinogen known as chromium 6 .
But city officials contend chromium 6 occurs naturally in their wells and that their drinking water is safe for consumption nonetheless .
Issuing her ruling over 15 months after oral arguments took place in a Sacramento federal courtroom , U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller labeled the plaintiff ’ s case as “ ambiguous ” and ruled the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act isn ’ t intended to regulate the city ’ s water production process .
She dashed the group ’ s motion for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s and ordered the case closed .
“ While it can not be disputed that hexavalent chromium itself presents a risk to human health , plaintiff here attempts to stretch the RCRA statute well beyond its application , seeking to force a square peg into a round hole , ” Mueller wrote .
Featured in the 2000 film starring Julie Roberts , the contaminant occurs naturally in rocks and soils and is used to make stainless steel , paints and plastics .
Prolonged exposure to chromium 6 increases the risk of lung cancer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s inhaled .
In 2014 , California regulators set strict new standards for chromium 6 in drinking water , but upon review a state judge said officials didn ’ t “ properly consider ” the financial impacts of their decision and ordered the creation of a new plan .
The state ’ s current cap on total chromium in drinking water is 50 parts per billion , twice as strict as the federal limit .
Vacaville sources approximately 35 % of its water from 11 groundwater wells , with the rest coming from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Project .
The city says it plans to spend millions installing treatment systems at the problematic wells .
In briefs and in court hearings , California River Watch accused the city of knowingly spreading chromium 6 by combining clean surface water with supplies from the tainted wells .
It urged Mueller to broadly interpret the RCRA — which regulates the disposal of hazardous waste — and order the city to pay civil penalties and pursue new potable water sources .
But Mueller , appointed by President Barack Obama in 2010 and the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ District of California , decided the chromium 6 that survives the city ’ s water treatment and delivery process doesn ’ t fit the definition of solid waste .
“ The court finds no material question of law or fact remains such that a factfinder is needed to resolve whether Vacaville ’ s collection , treatment and dissemination of potable water containing detectable levels of hexavalent chromium renders its water supply subject to the statutory definition of “ solid waste , ” Mueller wrote in the 20-page order .
Mueller was careful to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city , she isn ’ t concluding that chromium 6 “ poses no threat to Vacaville citizens.
” California River Watch said it was disappointed in Monday ’ s ruling as it does nothing to prevent residents from continuing to buy and use unsafe drinking water .
“ California River Watch is reviewing the court ’ s decision as to the merits of an appeal , but takes this opportunity to request the city once again take swift action to reduce the level of hexavalent chromium in its drinking water to protect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this extremely dangerous chemical , ” said plaintiff ’ s lawyer David Weinsoff .

A federal judge on Monday squashed environmentalists’ bid to punish a Northern California city for delivering drinking water tainted with the carcinogen that prompted the film “Erin Brockovich.”
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — A federal judge on Monday squashed environmentalists’ bid to punish a Northern California city for delivering drinking water tainted with the carcinogen that prompted the film “Erin Brockovich.”
The environmental group California River Watch sued the city of Vacaville over its water supply in 2017, claiming it was violating federal hazardous waste laws by providing its 92,000 residents with water containing hexavalent chromium.
The city, located 55 miles northeast of San Francisco, has known about its dirty drinking water for almost 20 years as nearly half of its groundwater wells have tested positive for the carcinogen known as chromium 6. But city officials contend chromium 6 occurs naturally in their wells and that their drinking water is safe for consumption nonetheless.
Issuing her ruling over 15 months after oral arguments took place in a Sacramento federal courtroom, U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller labeled the plaintiff’s case as “ambiguous” and ruled the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act isn’t intended to regulate the city’s water production process. She dashed the group’s motion for summary judgment, granted the city’s and ordered the case closed.
“While it cannot be disputed that hexavalent chromium itself presents a risk to human health, plaintiff here attempts to stretch the RCRA statute well beyond its application, seeking to force a square peg into a round hole,” Mueller wrote.
Featured in the 2000 film starring Julie Roberts, the contaminant occurs naturally in rocks and soils and is used to make stainless steel, paints and plastics. Prolonged exposure to chromium 6 increases the risk of lung cancer and asthma, particularly when it’s inhaled.
In 2014, California regulators set strict new standards for chromium 6 in drinking water, but upon review a state judge said officials didn’t “properly consider” the financial impacts of their decision and ordered the creation of a new plan. The state’s current cap on total chromium in drinking water is 50 parts per billion, twice as strict as the federal limit.
Vacaville sources approximately 35% of its water from 11 groundwater wells, with the rest coming from nearby Lake Berryessa and the State Water Project. The city says it plans to spend millions installing treatment systems at the problematic wells.
In briefs and in court hearings, California River Watch accused the city of knowingly spreading chromium 6 by combining clean surface water with supplies from the tainted wells. It urged Mueller to broadly interpret the RCRA — which regulates the disposal of hazardous waste — and order the city to pay civil penalties and pursue new potable water sources.
But Mueller, appointed by President Barack Obama in 2010 and the first female judge to serve in the Eastern District of California, decided the chromium 6 that survives the city’s water treatment and delivery process doesn’t fit the definition of solid waste.
“The court finds no material question of law or fact remains such that a factfinder is needed to resolve whether Vacaville’s collection, treatment and dissemination of potable water containing detectable levels of hexavalent chromium renders its water supply subject to the statutory definition of “solid waste,” Mueller wrote in the 20-page order.
Mueller was careful to note that though she is siding with the city, she isn’t concluding that chromium 6 “poses no threat to Vacaville citizens.”
California River Watch said it was disappointed in Monday’s ruling as it does nothing to prevent residents from continuing to buy and use unsafe drinking water.
“California River Watch is reviewing the court’s decision as to the merits of an appeal, but takes this opportunity to request the city once again take swift action to reduce the level of hexavalent chromium in its drinking water to protect the young, elderly and infirm from this extremely dangerous chemical,” said plaintiff’s lawyer David Weinsoff.


courthousenews--2020-07-21--California Courts Covid Update

California Courts Covid Update

July 13 , 2020 : Emergency use of video and telephonic conference technology in some criminal proceedings during pandemic July @ @ @ @ @ order regarding safety measures and face coverings required in court July 16 , 2020 : @ @ @ @ @ of process in unlimited civil cases July 20 , 2020 : Council to consider allocation @ @ @ @ @ trial courts


courthousenews--2020-07-22--Plan to Break Up San Francisco Agency Rocked by Corruption Advances

SAN FRANCISCO ( CN ) — Weighing the need to address city corruption against a staggering budget shortfall , San Francisco lawmakers rejected an anti-corruption initiative Tuesday while advancing a separate proposal to break up a city department tainted by scandal .
In the shadow of a corruption scandal that took down one of the city ’ s highest-ranking public officials earlier this year , the Board of Supervisors narrowly shot down plans to create a new elected Office of the Public Advocate to investigate corruption and wasteful spending .
The proposed charter amendment would have gone to voters in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A similar proposal made it to the ballot in 2016 but was narrowly rejected by 52 % of voters .
Proponents thought they would fare better this year with public confidence in city government shaken by the arrest and prosecution of former Public Works Director Mohammed Nuru in January .
Supervisor Gordon Mar , who represents the Sunset District and was lead sponsor of the measure , cited recent polls that found overwhelming support for a public advocate among San Francisco voters .
The charter amendment would create a four-person office with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and testimony , hold hearings and recommend legislation .
It would cost up to $ 925,000 , according to a legislative analysis .
Opponents said it would dilute precious dollars as the city faces a $ 1.7 billion budget shortfall and duplicate existing city functions .
Supervisor Catherine Stefani , who represents the city ’ s Marina and Pacific Heights neighborhoods , argued the City Attorney ’ s Office , Controller ’ s Office , Ethics Commission , District Attorney ’ s Office and the Board of Supervisors itself already possess the power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spending .
“ In all my years of public service , I ’ ve never heard anyone seriously suggest that the answer to San Francisco ’ s problems is more politicians , ” Stefani said .
Proponents of the measure , including Supervisor Hillary Ronen who represents the Mission District , insisted that existing systems have failed , as evidenced by the FBI ’ s widening corruption probe into multiple city departments going back decades .
“ The systems that we have in place to identify and root out corruption are clearly not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impassioned advocacy in favor of the reform effort , it was voted down in a 6-5 vote .
Board President Norman Yee joined Supervisors Stefani , Sandra Lee Fewer , Rafael Mandelman , Aaron Peskin and Ahsha Safai in voting against it .
A proposition to split up a city department that was rocked by scandal earlier this year fared better Tuesday .
The proposal pitched by Supervisor Matt Haney , representing the Tenderloin and South of Market neighborhoods , would break up the Public Works Department and create a new city department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and sidewalks .
The measure was initially expected to cost up to $ 10 million per year , but that estimate was lowered to a range of $ 2.5 to $ 6 million after changes were made requiring other city departments to provide administrative services for the new department in the first few years of its existence .
The proposed charter amendment , which must be approved by voters this November , requires the new department be established no later than July 2022 .
Supporters of the proposal say the Public Works Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city properties , sewer systems and tree trimming and removal , to be focused on the essential work of keeping streets and sidewalks clean in a city struggling with unsightly scenes of feces , used needles and other debris littering public walkways .
“ We have an opportunity with this charter amendment to make a real tangible difference on the streets of San Francisco , ” Haney said .
The measure would also create two five-member commissions to oversee each department , approve city contracts and provide enhanced accountability and transparency .
Opponents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would do little more than create duplicative bureaucracies that will cost more money during an economic recession when the city has limited resources .
“ A second department and second commission will not make our streets cleaner , ” Stefani said .
“ I find it hard to believe that what we need is more managers , [ information technology ] , [ human resources ] or financial professionals.
” Despite some opposition , the board advanced the proposal in a 7-4 vote .
Yee , Fewer and Mandelman joined Stefani in voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Nuru , the former Public Works director , this past January set off sprawling federal and internal city investigations into multiple city departments , including the City Administrator ’ s Office , Department of Building Inspection , Planning Department , Department of Public Health and the San Francisco International Airport Commission .
The head of the city ’ s Public Utilities Commission is also being investigated for his financial ties to a city contractor .
Nuru served as deputy director of the Public Works Department for 11 years before becoming department head @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 323,000 salary to oversee the 1,600-employee department before he resigned in February following his arrest .
The former Public Works chief is accused of attempting to bribe an airport commissioner , using his positions to helped alleged co-conspirators win city contracts , receiving gifts from city contractors and developers in exchange for special treatment , and lying to the FBI Two defendants implicated in the scandal , permit expediter Walter Wong and restaurant owner Nick Bovis , both agreed to plead guilty and cooperate with federal investigators .
Federal prosecutors say the investigation @ @ @

Weighing the need to address city corruption against a staggering budget shortfall, San Francisco lawmakers rejected an anti-corruption initiative Tuesday while advancing a separate proposal to break up a city department tainted by scandal.
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Weighing the need to address city corruption against a staggering budget shortfall, San Francisco lawmakers rejected an anti-corruption initiative Tuesday while advancing a separate proposal to break up a city department tainted by scandal.
In the shadow of a corruption scandal that took down one of the city’s highest-ranking public officials earlier this year, the Board of Supervisors narrowly shot down plans to create a new elected Office of the Public Advocate to investigate corruption and wasteful spending. The proposed charter amendment would have gone to voters in the upcoming November election if approved.
A similar proposal made it to the ballot in 2016 but was narrowly rejected by 52% of voters. Proponents thought they would fare better this year with public confidence in city government shaken by the arrest and prosecution of former Public Works Director Mohammed Nuru in January. Supervisor Gordon Mar, who represents the Sunset District and was lead sponsor of the measure, cited recent polls that found overwhelming support for a public advocate among San Francisco voters.
The charter amendment would create a four-person office with the power to investigate complaints, subpoena records and testimony, hold hearings and recommend legislation. It would cost up to $925,000, according to a legislative analysis.
Opponents said it would dilute precious dollars as the city faces a $1.7 billion budget shortfall and duplicate existing city functions.
Supervisor Catherine Stefani, who represents the city’s Marina and Pacific Heights neighborhoods, argued the City Attorney’s Office, Controller’s Office, Ethics Commission, District Attorney’s Office and the Board of Supervisors itself already possess the power to investigate and address corruption and wasteful spending.
“In all my years of public service, I’ve never heard anyone seriously suggest that the answer to San Francisco’s problems is more politicians,” Stefani said.
Proponents of the measure, including Supervisor Hillary Ronen who represents the Mission District, insisted that existing systems have failed, as evidenced by the FBI’s widening corruption probe into multiple city departments going back decades.
“The systems that we have in place to identify and root out corruption are clearly not working,” Ronen said.
Despite impassioned advocacy in favor of the reform effort, it was voted down in a 6-5 vote. Board President Norman Yee joined Supervisors Stefani, Sandra Lee Fewer, Rafael Mandelman, Aaron Peskin and Ahsha Safai in voting against it.
A proposition to split up a city department that was rocked by scandal earlier this year fared better Tuesday. The proposal pitched by Supervisor Matt Haney, representing the Tenderloin and South of Market neighborhoods, would break up the Public Works Department and create a new city department focused entirely on cleaning and maintaining streets and sidewalks.
The measure was initially expected to cost up to $10 million per year, but that estimate was lowered to a range of $2.5 to $6 million after changes were made requiring other city departments to provide administrative services for the new department in the first few years of its existence. The proposed charter amendment, which must be approved by voters this November, requires the new department be established no later than July 2022.
Supporters of the proposal say the Public Works Department has too many responsibilities, including maintaining city properties, sewer systems and tree trimming and removal, to be focused on the essential work of keeping streets and sidewalks clean in a city struggling with unsightly scenes of feces, used needles and other debris littering public walkways.
“We have an opportunity with this charter amendment to make a real tangible difference on the streets of San Francisco,” Haney said.
The measure would also create two five-member commissions to oversee each department, approve city contracts and provide enhanced accountability and transparency.
Opponents, including Stefani, argued the measure would do little more than create duplicative bureaucracies that will cost more money during an economic recession when the city has limited resources.
“A second department and second commission will not make our streets cleaner,” Stefani said. “I find it hard to believe that what we need is more managers, [information technology], [human resources] or financial professionals.”
Despite some opposition, the board advanced the proposal in a 7-4 vote. Yee, Fewer and Mandelman joined Stefani in voting against it.
The arrest and prosecution of Nuru, the former Public Works director, this past January set off sprawling federal and internal city investigations into multiple city departments, including the City Administrator’s Office, Department of Building Inspection, Planning Department, Department of Public Health and the San Francisco International Airport Commission. The head of the city’s Public Utilities Commission is also being investigated for his financial ties to a city contractor.
Nuru served as deputy director of the Public Works Department for 11 years before becoming department head in 2011, eventually earning a $323,000 salary to oversee the 1,600-employee department before he resigned in February following his arrest.
The former Public Works chief is accused of attempting to bribe an airport commissioner, using his positions to help alleged co-conspirators win city contracts, receiving gifts from city contractors and developers in exchange for special treatment, and lying to the FBI
Two defendants implicated in the scandal, permit expediter Walter Wong and restaurant owner Nick Bovis, both agreed to plead guilty and cooperate with federal investigators. Federal prosecutors say the investigation remains ongoing.


courthousenews--2020-07-22--I Know How to Cover a Portland Protest. So Why Am I Shaking?

There ’ s a joke that ’ s not a joke that you ’ ll hear if you hang out at Portland ’ s protests , as of Tuesday in their 54th consecutive day since police in Minneapolis killed George Floyd over a possibly fake $ 20 bill by kneeling on his neck while he begged for his life .
“ We ’ re all gon na have some serious PTSD from this shit one day , ” a dude standing nearby said Friday night with a laugh .
He ’ d just seen me jolt when someone threw the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it hit the side of my neck .
I was edgy from an earlier round of flash bangs and tear gas .
I ’ ve been covering protests since Donald Trump was elected .
Mostly in Portland , but I also went to Washington in 2017 because I felt like I had to witness his inauguration and the Women ’ s March that followed firsthand .
I needed to understand what was happening in our country .
And way before I was a journalist , I participated as a 20-something activist alongside tens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ labor and religious leaders , kids and parents and grandparents .
Protest is pretty normal here .
A staffer in the George H.W .
Bush administration didn ’ t nickname us Little Beirut for nothing .
On one memorable May Day march downtown , a friend was trampled by a Portland police officer on horseback .
Another time , I marched around the circular interior of the mall just blocks from the Multnomah County Justice Center where the protests are centered now .
It was October 2001 and the Afghanistan war had just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shopping , bombs are dropping ” echoed through the cavernous five-story interior , my chanting voice dissolving into those around me .
And there were the marches and rallies after Portland police shot and killed 21-year-old Kendra James in 2003 as she tried to drive away from a traffic stop .
I ’ d been sporadically covering the recent protests against systemic racism and police brutality for Courthouse News Service when Oregon Public Broadcasting revealed that federal police in combat fatigues were whisking protesters off the streets into unmarked minivans without probable cause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I knew I needed to take another turn offering a set of journalistic eyeballs to watch the streets .
So I went out this past Friday .
But I was surprised when the days that followed were marked by unexplained crying jags , forgetfulness and depression .
I ’ d open a cupboard door and not know why — and then do it again .
Painting and ballet class — my normal non-news decompression activities — seemed utterly pointless .
Suddenly , everything did .
And I was growing increasingly angry at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that night , as they chased and scattered ever-dwindling groups of protesters around downtown .
After hours of peaceful protest , Portland police and federal officers with the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S .
Marshals Service rushed a crowd of a few hundred demonstrators , shooting off deafening flash bangs and round after round of tear gas .
They lined up across the street , running shoulder to shoulder at the crowd .
Their batons were aloft , ready for anyone who couldn ’ t run fast enough .
Some held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bullets , pepper balls , or tear gas canisters — which a federal cop used on June 11 to shoot a protester in the face , putting him in critical care after facial reconstructive surgery .
At one point Friday night , a line of cops sprinted behind the protesters I was following for five or six blocks straight .
They didn ’ t stop until well past the street they ’ d announced earlier was the boundary of the part of downtown they ’ d just deemed “ closed.
” I was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call out “ Press !
” when police lines advanced toward me .
Sometimes they would yell “ move !
” and point in the direction they wanted me to go .
Other times , they would pass by and let me keep doing my job , as a recent federal court order requires .
That lawsuit was filed by Portland journalists and legal observers who say police target them for violence and arrests .
Unlike press , who must be clearly identified , both federal and local police in Portland put wide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from being individually identified .
And while federal police are usually the ones in the desert camo , both local and federal police wear black uniforms , with badges that are small and hard to see in the night .
So on Friday night , during hours of cat-and-mouse , I was often unsure which police force was on our tails .
After a while I was with a handful of others near the MAX light-rail tracks .
It was 3 a.m. and I was tired .
A police van appeared , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a dozen riot cops riding , ready to leap off and arrest , beat or pepper spray anyone who doesn ’ t run .
My group split and veered around different corners near I-405 , where downtown turns more residential , as the van pursued and I fell behind .
Momentarily alone , I ran as I heard the van accelerate behind me .
“ We ’ re gon na get you , ” a couple of them yelled in singsong voices .
I hid behind a big concrete pillar .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yelled as the van sped past .
That ’ s it .
They didn ’ t hurt me or arrest me .
But 36 hours later , I was still shaking .
That ’ s about how long it took me to connect that moment to another night where I ran from someone who thought my fear was funny .
When I was a teenager , my best friend ’ s dad drove me to an industrial building and raped me .
I don ’ t remember a ton of the night but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back of the building , sobbing , wondering if he might try to kill me .
That night I squeezed my body into the corner of a loading dock to hide .
He chased me and when he came around the corner , he was laughing , his stupid face frozen in a smile that I can still see , 26 years later .
I ’ ve done a lot in my life to be okay with having that happen to me .
I ’ ve had long bouts of feeling like everything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should just give up and never get out of bed ever again .
Sometimes it feels like the destructive will of the world will never be overcome .
But I battle that feeling with an aggressive pursuit of beauty and connection .
And I mostly feel like my voice matters — that ’ s why I ’ m a journalist .
So it was weird to feel that pointlessness so strongly again over the last few days .
And I think the reason it came back was the reason it was there in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ ve never been able to understand one thing : how could he have done that to me ?
To ME ?
As if I don ’ t matter at all .
As if his whim , or compulsion was all that mattered and I was worthless .
The cops who taunted me as I ran from them were an echo of that trauma .
Over the weekend , as I grew angrier , I kept circling back to one thought : don ’ t those fuckers know I ’ m sacred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is ?
There was a boy in the therapy group I attended as a teen who chose a song from Rage Against the Machine on the night we were all asked to bring in music that best portrayed our feelings .
I don ’ t remember the song I picked , but it was for sure the total opposite .
I had no rage then , just a dredge of grief that felt like it went on forever .
But the drums were an awakening on the rainy Portland night when I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cracks before the lyrics “ fuck you I won ’ t do what you tell me.
” It was bracing to hear that drum beat and those lyrics from the lips of protesters as police shot pepper balls out of a tiny horizontal window above the boarded-up doors of the federal courthouse on Friday night .
I know .
I ’ m supposed to be objective .
I ’ m not supposed to say my personal feelings about what I ’ m covering in public — ideally in the minds of some , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about what I cover .
But to me , objectivity in journalism creates a disembodied voice .
It fails to come from both everywhere and nowhere and instead encapsulates the perspective of the powerful rather than afflicting it .
I come from somewhere .
I come from right here .
I ’ ve watched police treat protesters and regular citizens with violent brutality for my entire adult life .
Despite the work of generations of activists , we still entrust police with the resources , political power and legitimacy to use violence as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one should be beaten with batons , tear gassed or pepper sprayed because they won ’ t do what police tell them to .
This is something it took me decades to learn : We are all sacred .
Even me .
And yes , you .
It ’ s the unlearned lesson in front of our nation ’ s eyes right now .
Who do we allow to hurt others ?
Who do we allow to be hurt ?
After police zoomed by and left me hiding behind that concrete pillar on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group of protesters I ’ d lost .
Together , we wound our way through downtown back toward the justice center , where the protest had begun and near where I was parked .
As we walked , one of the activists , a young Black woman with a bullhorn , called out periodically to others wandering alone after being chased by police .
“ Join us !
” she ’ d yell .
“ We ’ re over here !
” And the group ’ s size grew with each block .

I was wearing my press badge and would often call out “Press!” when police lines advanced toward me. Sometimes they would yell “move!” and point in the direction they wanted me to go. Other times, they would pass by and let me keep doing my job, as a recent federal court order requires. That lawsuit was filed by Portland journalists and legal observers who say police target them for violence and arrests.
Unlike press, who must be clearly identified, both federal and local police in Portland put wide rubber bands over their badges to keep from being individually identified. And while federal police are usually the ones in the desert camo, both local and federal police wear black uniforms, with badges that are small and hard to see in the night.
So on Friday night, during hours of cat-and-mouse, I was often unsure which police force was on our tails. After a while I was with a handful of others near the MAX light-rail tracks. It was 3 a.m. and I was tired. A police van appeared, the kind with runner boards on either side and a dozen riot cops riding, ready to leap off and arrest, beat or pepper spray anyone who doesn’t run. My group split and veered around different corners near I-405, where downtown turns more residential, as the van pursued and I fell behind. Momentarily alone, I ran as I heard the van accelerate behind me.
“We’re gonna get you,” a couple of them yelled in singsong voices. I hid behind a big concrete pillar. “We still see you!” another yelled as the van sped past.
That’s it. They didn’t hurt me or arrest me. But 36 hours later, I was still shaking. That’s about how long it took me to connect that moment to another night where I ran from someone who thought my fear was funny. When I was a teenager, my best friend’s dad drove me to an industrial building and raped me. I don’t remember a ton of the night but I very much remember running to the back of the building, sobbing, wondering if he might try to kill me. That night I squeezed my body into the corner of a loading dock to hide. He chased me and when he came around the corner, he was laughing, his stupid face frozen in a smile that I can still see, 26 years later.
I’ve done a lot in my life to be okay with having that happen to me. I’ve had long bouts of feeling like everything I do is beyond pointless and I should just give up and never get out of bed ever again. Sometimes it feels like the destructive will of the world will never be overcome. But I battle that feeling with an aggressive pursuit of beauty and connection. And I mostly feel like my voice matters — that’s why I’m a journalist. So it was weird to feel that pointlessness so strongly again over the last few days. And I think the reason it came back was the reason it was there in the first place, decades ago. I’ve never been able to understand one thing: how could he have done that to me? To ME? As if I don’t matter at all. As if his whim, or compulsion was all that mattered and I was worthless.
The cops who taunted me as I ran from them were an echo of that trauma. Over the weekend, as I grew angrier, I kept circling back to one thought: don’t those fuckers know I’m sacred? That every one of us out there is?
There was a boy in the therapy group I attended as a teen who chose a song from Rage Against the Machine on the night we were all asked to bring in music that best portrayed our feelings.
I don’t remember the song I picked, but it was for sure the total opposite. I had no rage then, just a dredge of grief that felt like it went on forever. But the drums were an awakening on the rainy Portland night when I first heard them — those three syncopated cracks before the lyrics “fuck you I won’t do what you tell me.” It was bracing to hear that drum beat and those lyrics from the lips of protesters as police shot pepper balls out of a tiny horizontal window above the boarded-up doors of the federal courthouse on Friday night.
I know. I’m supposed to be objective. I’m not supposed to say my personal feelings about what I’m covering in public — ideally in the minds of some, I wouldn’t even have feelings about what I cover. But to me, objectivity in journalism creates a disembodied voice. It fails to come from both everywhere and nowhere and instead encapsulates the perspective of the powerful rather than afflicting it. I come from somewhere. I come from right here.
I’ve watched police treat protesters and regular citizens with violent brutality for my entire adult life. Despite the work of generations of activists, we still entrust police with the resources, political power and legitimacy to use violence as a behavior modification tool. But no one should be beaten with batons, tear gassed or pepper sprayed because they won’t do what police tell them to.
This is something it took me decades to learn: We are all sacred. Even me. And yes, you. It’s the unlearned lesson in front of our nation’s eyes right now. Who do we allow to hurt others? Who do we allow to be hurt?
After police zoomed by and left me hiding behind that concrete pillar on Friday night, I found the small group of protesters I’d lost. Together, we wound our way through downtown back toward the justice center, where the protest had begun and near where I was parked. As we walked, one of the activists, a young Black woman with a bullhorn, called out periodically to others wandering alone after being chased by police. “Join us!” she’d yell. “We’re over here!”
And the group’s size grew with each block.


courthousenews--2020-07-21--Minnesota Judge Overseeing George Floyd Cases Lifts Gag Order

MINNEAPOLIS ( CN ) — The judge presiding over criminal cases against four former Minneapolis police officers charged in George Floyd ’ s death vacated a gag order Tuesday afternoon during a contentious hearing in which he addressed several other publicity issues .
“ Is there anybody who wants the gag order to stay in place ?
” Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill asked .
“ Speak now or forever hold your peace.
” No one spoke up .
Cahill elaborated that he agreed with the former officers ’ attorneys that the gag order had unfairly silenced them without an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could have been drawn more narrowly .
“ Finally , and most importantly , the gag order didn ’ t work , ” he said , noting that media outlets had turned to anonymous sources on the case and attorneys had been finding ways to “ tiptoe ” around the order .
The judge also declined to hold Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison or his Deputy Chief of Staff John Stiles in contempt of court for a press release announcing the addition of four prominent attorneys to the prosecution team pro bono .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thomas Lane , and Eric Paule , representing Derek Chauvin , filed motions for contempt against Ellison after Stiles issued the press release , with Gray going as far as to call for Ellison to be thrown in jail .
Cahill gave Gray little time to speak on the matter Tuesday , instead focusing his questions on Paule .
“ When there ’ s a court order , the lawyer ’ s duty is to follow it .
And Mr. Ellison is a lawyer .
He is more than a lawyer .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minnesota , ” Paule said .
“ To me , the brazenness and the hubris to go and issue a press statement , four days after the court issued a gag order , was unfathomable.
” Cahill asked Paule if he thought the release was an attempt to intimidate the judiciary .
When Paule responded in the affirmative , the judge expressed skepticism .
“ Mr .
Paule , I respect your argument , but I don ’ t think it was an attempt to intimidate the court .
In fact , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
The ex-officers ’ attorneys and a coalition of news outlets found common cause in asking the judge to toss the gag order .
Gray , Paule and the attorneys representing former officers Tou Thao and J. Alexander Kueng all made filings opposing the order shortly after it was put in place , and the media coalition – comprised of local outlets along with national news organizations such as CNN and the publishers of the Wall Street Journal – followed suit shortly afterward .
Ellison ’ s office , which is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Assistant Attorney General Matthew Frank called a “ tepid ” defense of the gag order .
Frank filed a response to the motions to overturn it and for contempt late Monday afternoon .
“ The state does not object to a narrowly tailored gag order , ” Frank wrote , adding a request that the court review and make a finding on the proper procedures for publication of body-camera footage .
The motions for contempt , he wrote , were baseless .
“ The fact that these attorneys are working on a pro @ @ @ @ @ @ @ merits of the underlying matters , ” the brief states .
The media coalition and defendants also pushed for a wider release of Lane and Kueng ’ s body camera footage , which Gray filed as an exhibit July 7 in support of a motion to dismiss .
Media coalition attorney Leita Walker advocated at Tuesday ’ s hearing for the release of the footage , which was viewed by reporters and members of the public last week by reservation .
“ I don ’ t mean to be flip with my phrasing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the bag .
We have seen it , ” she told Cahill .
The widespread dissemination of bystander video of Floyd ’ s Memorial Day arrest meant that any jury pool would likely have seen some version of the event , she said , and the publication of transcripts and reporters ’ accounts of the video meant that keeping the video restricted wasn ’ t stopping that information from getting out either .
“ There ’ s going to be prejudice to the potential jurors .
It ’ s happened , your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happening for the last several weeks , ” Walker said .
Gray came at the same objective from a different angle .
He claimed that the media had completely ignored what he saw in the video – namely , that Floyd was stuffing counterfeit bills in the seat of the car he was sitting in before Lane pulled a gun on him , and that Floyd had swallowed drugs on the scene .
“ The media is substantially unfair against my client .
And I feel that the court has seen this , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an editorial published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune on “ excited delirium , ” which Lane had expressed concerns about at the scene .
The editorial disputed that such a condition exists , and Gray suggested it demonstrated the paper ’ s opinion on his client ’ s case .
Frank took issue with that characterization , calling it an attempt by Gray to conduct trial by media .
“ If these things were coming out in court , during trial , there would be testimony explaining them , not an attorney standing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s what Mr. Floyd was doing , ’ ” the state ’ s attorney said .
While the gag order and access to the exhibits were the procedural focus of the hearing , emotions were highest when Cahill asked the media coalition ’ s attorney about the inclusion of his state legislators on a list of public officials potentially impacted under the gag order .
“ I sense , counsel , that your media coalition is trying to dox me , personally , ” Cahill said to Walker , his voice rising as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone ’ s private identifying information online .
The districts of the two state legislators named , Democratic Representative Ginny Klevorn and Republican Senator Paul Anderson , include Cahill ’ s home in the northwestern Minneapolis suburb of Plymouth , he said .
Neither represents any part of Minneapolis proper .
“ Reading between the lines , I saw no reason other than that why they would pick these two specific legislators , ” he continued .
“ Where I ’ m from , that ’ s a threat.
” Cahill made reference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jersey home of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas , in which a man dressed as a FedEx driver killed Salas ’ son and shot her husband .
Law enforcement identified attorney Roy Den Hollander as the primary suspect in the case shortly after Den Hollander ’ s death , apparently from a self-inflicted gunshot wound .
Walker denied any intent to dox Cahill and apologized for causing him distress .
The list , she said , had been compiled by one of her associates in Washington and added without further question to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ satisfied , Cahill let Walker off the hook on that line of questioning for the remainder of the hearing .
He demanded , however , a supplemental brief explaining the coalition ’ s reasons for listing Klevorn and Anderson .

The judge presiding over criminal cases against four former Minneapolis police officers charged in George Floyd's death vacated a gag order Tuesday afternoon during a contentious hearing in which he addressed several other publicity issues.
MINNEAPOLIS (CN) — The judge presiding over criminal cases against four former Minneapolis police officers charged in George Floyd's death vacated a gag order Tuesday afternoon during a contentious hearing in which he addressed several other publicity issues.
“Is there anybody who wants the gag order to stay in place?” Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill asked. "Speak now or forever hold your peace."
No one spoke up. Cahill elaborated that he agreed with the former officers' attorneys that the gag order had unfairly silenced them without an opportunity to respond and that the order could have been drawn more narrowly.
“Finally, and most importantly, the gag order didn’t work," he said, noting that media outlets had turned to anonymous sources on the case and attorneys had been finding ways to “tiptoe” around the order.
The judge also declined to hold Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison or his Deputy Chief of Staff John Stiles in contempt of court for a press release announcing the addition of four prominent attorneys to the prosecution team pro bono.
Attorneys Earl Gray, representing former officer Thomas Lane, and Eric Paule, representing Derek Chauvin, filed motions for contempt against Ellison after Stiles issued the press release, with Gray going as far as to call for Ellison to be thrown in jail.
Cahill gave Gray little time to speak on the matter Tuesday, instead focusing his questions on Paule.
“When there’s a court order, the lawyer’s duty is to follow it. And Mr. Ellison is a lawyer. He is more than a lawyer. He is attorney general of the state of Minnesota,” Paule said. “To me, the brazenness and the hubris to go and issue a press statement, four days after the court issued a gag order, was unfathomable.”
Cahill asked Paule if he thought the release was an attempt to intimidate the judiciary. When Paule responded in the affirmative, the judge expressed skepticism.
“Mr. Paule, I respect your argument, but I don’t think it was an attempt to intimidate the court. In fact, I think it was… fairly innocuous,” he said.
The ex-officers’ attorneys and a coalition of news outlets found common cause in asking the judge to toss the gag order.
Gray, Paule and the attorneys representing former officers Tou Thao and J. Alexander Kueng all made filings opposing the order shortly after it was put in place, and the media coalition – comprised of local outlets along with national news organizations such as CNN and the publishers of the Wall Street Journal – followed suit shortly afterward.
Ellison’s office, which is prosecuting the case, has maintained what Assistant Attorney General Matthew Frank called a “tepid” defense of the gag order. Frank filed a response to the motions to overturn it and for contempt late Monday afternoon.
“The state does not object to a narrowly tailored gag order,” Frank wrote, adding a request that the court review and make a finding on the proper procedures for publication of body-camera footage.
The motions for contempt, he wrote, were baseless.
“The fact that these attorneys are working on a pro bono basis says absolutely nothing about the merits of the underlying matters,” the brief states.
The media coalition and defendants also pushed for a wider release of Lane and Kueng’s body camera footage, which Gray filed as an exhibit July 7 in support of a motion to dismiss.
From left: Former Minneapolis police officers Derek Chauvin, J. Alexander Kueng, Thomas Lane and Tou Thao. (Hennepin County Sheriff's Office via AP)
Media coalition attorney Leita Walker advocated at Tuesday’s hearing for the release of the footage, which was viewed by reporters and members of the public last week by reservation.
“I don’t mean to be flip with my phrasing here, but the cat is out of the bag. We have seen it,” she told Cahill.
The widespread dissemination of bystander video of Floyd’s Memorial Day arrest meant that any jury pool would likely have seen some version of the event, she said, and the publication of transcripts and reporters’ accounts of the video meant that keeping the video restricted wasn’t stopping that information from getting out either.
“There’s going to be prejudice to the potential jurors. It’s happened, your honor, and it’s been happening for the last several weeks,” Walker said.
Gray came at the same objective from a different angle. He claimed that the media had completely ignored what he saw in the video – namely, that Floyd was stuffing counterfeit bills in the seat of the car he was sitting in before Lane pulled a gun on him, and that Floyd had swallowed drugs on the scene.
“The media is substantially unfair against my client. And I feel that the court has seen this,” he said.
He also cited an editorial published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune on “excited delirium,” which Lane had expressed concerns about at the scene. The editorial disputed that such a condition exists, and Gray suggested it demonstrated the paper’s opinion on his client’s case.
Frank took issue with that characterization, calling it an attempt by Gray to conduct trial by media.
“If these things were coming out in court, during trial, there would be testimony explaining them, not an attorney standing up and saying, ‘Here’s what Mr. Floyd was doing,’” the state’s attorney said.
While the gag order and access to the exhibits were the procedural focus of the hearing, emotions were highest when Cahill asked the media coalition’s attorney about the inclusion of his state legislators on a list of public officials potentially impacted under the gag order.
"I sense, counsel, that your media coalition is trying to dox me, personally," Cahill said to Walker, his voice rising as he referred to the act of publishing someone’s private identifying information online.
The districts of the two state legislators named, Democratic Representative Ginny Klevorn and Republican Senator Paul Anderson, include Cahill’s home in the northwestern Minneapolis suburb of Plymouth, he said. Neither represents any part of Minneapolis proper.
“Reading between the lines, I saw no reason other than that why they would pick these two specific legislators," he continued. “Where I’m from, that’s a threat.”
Cahill made reference to a Sunday attack on the New Jersey home of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas, in which a man dressed as a FedEx driver killed Salas’ son and shot her husband. Law enforcement identified attorney Roy Den Hollander as the primary suspect in the case shortly after Den Hollander’s death, apparently from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
Walker denied any intent to dox Cahill and apologized for causing him distress. The list, she said, had been compiled by one of her associates in Washington and added without further question to the memorandum supporting her motion.
Not completely satisfied, Cahill let Walker off the hook on that line of questioning for the remainder of the hearing. He demanded, however, a supplemental brief explaining the coalition’s reasons for listing Klevorn and Anderson.