Author: Lee Ross

Where are the opinions?  There appears to be a bottleneck of opinions coming from the Supreme Court this term.  Today’s two rulings makes 14 cases resolved from this term. But two of those don’t really count because one was summarily decided and the other settled before the justices had a chance to send out an opinion.  So for the term that started October 5 they’ve really only resolved 12 cases even though they’ve now heard arguments in 50 cases.

 

At this date in the last two years the justices had resolved 17 cases with 15 full length opinions.  While a difference of three is hardly a major development, is does show that the Court is somewhat behind the pace.

 

Of course, the most likely reason for this is the attention the justices gave to the big campaign finance case which was argued (for the second time) in a special session in September before the current term started. And that’s why I don’t factor it into my counts above. I also don’t think the recent snowfall that shutdown most of Washington for nearly a week is likely to have a significant impact because the Court didn’t miss any of its important scheduled days. 

 

Justices Ginsburg (4) and Breyer (3) have been the most active in getting their opinions out while Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Sotomayor have each handed down two opinions.  Justice Alito is the only other justice who has released an opinion for a case that’s been argued this term.  That leaves Justices Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas with none so far and that fact may provide a hint as to what cases they are working on.

 

No offense to the justices who’ve already written opinions this term or to the parties involved in those cases but they’ve all been of minor significance or interest.  We are still waiting on rulings in higher-profile cases involving animal cruelty, the display of a cross on public lands, the costs associated with managing mutual funds and if life sentences for juveniles violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

 

Maybe tomorrow?

The Supreme Court announced Monday it will hear two cases but most likely not until the start of their next term in the fall.

The first case they granted comes from Los Angeles and stems from a father and mother who were accused of abuse by their rebellious child.  After obtaining court judgments that they were “factually innocent” of the charges with orders that their arrest record be sealed and destroyed the parents were nonetheless placed on California’s Child Abuse Central Index database of known or suspected child abusers.

A panel of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals concluded that California offers no mechanism for people to get off the database list even if they were placed there in error. The database is accessible to a wide array of state and private entities. The Ninth Circuit ruled that state violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause because people like Craig and Wendy Humphries are not given a fair opportunity to challenge their placement on the database.

Here is the question the Court will consider in Los Angeles County v. Humphries:  “Are claims for declaratory relief against a local public entity subject to the requirement of Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) that the plaintiff demonstrate that the constitutional violation was the result of a policy, custom or practice attributable to the local public entity as determined by the First, Second, Fourth and Eleventh Circuits, or are such claims exempt from Monell’s requirement as determined by the Ninth Circuit?”

The other granted case, Harrington v. Richter, also comes from California and features a convicted murderer who claims his lawyer did shoddy work in his defense. The justices have been asked to determine if:  “In granting habeas corpus relief to a state prisoner, did the Ninth Circuit deny the state court judgment the deference mandated by 28 U.S.C. section 2254(d) and impermissibly enlarge the Sixth Amendment right to effective counsel by elevating the value of expert-opinion testimony in a manner that would virtually always require defense counsel to produce such testimony rather than allowing him to rely instead on cross-examination or other methods designed to create reasonable doubt about the defendant’s guilt?”   The justices have also asked the parties to address: “Does AEDPA deference apply to a state court’s summary disposition of a claim, including a claim under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)?”

Here’s a quick look at the cases that will be argued in front of the Supreme Court this week:

Case: Astrue v. Ratliff

Date: Monday February 22, 2010

Issue: Whether an “award of fees and other expenses” under the Equal Access to Justice Act, is payable to the “prevailing party” rather than to the prevailing party’s attorney, and therefore is subject to an offset for a pre-existing debt owed by the prevailing party to the United States.

 

Case: Lewis v. City of Chicago

Date: Monday February 22, 2010

Issue: Under federal civil rights laws, a plaintiff seeking to bring suit for employment discrimination must do so within 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred. In this case, does that rule apply within 300 days after the announcement of the practice, or may a plaintiff file a charge within 300 days after the employer’s use of the discriminatory practice? Click here for my write up when the justices announced they would hear the case.

 

 

Case: Holder v Humanitarian Law Project & Humanitarian Law Project v. Holder (consolidated)

Date: Tuesday February 23, 2010

Issue: Is a law that prohibits the “material support” of a foreign terrorist organization unconstitutional? This is a challenge to a 1996 antiterrorism law (later amended by the Patriot Act) by people who support separatist groups in Turkey and Sri Lanka. These are groups identified by the State Department as foreign terrorist organizations. The law prohibits American citizens from knowingly providing “material support or resources” to terrorist groups.

Two Americans and some non-profit groups contend the law is too broad and filed suit saying they have no interest in helping terrorists but want to move forward with their human rights agenda. Since 2001, about 150 people have been charged under this law including people who’ve allegedly helped al Qaeda and Hezbollah.

 

Case: United States v. O’Brien

Date: Tuesday February 23, 2010

Issue: Federal sentencing laws allow criminals to receive enhanced sentences if their crimes involve certain aggravating factors. Sentencing enhancements are often part of cases where criminals use firearms during the commission of their bad acts. In this case, Martin O’Brien and Arthur Burgess entered guilty pleas after they were busted for trying to rob an armored car in Boston. Because the men used a machine gun during their crime, prosecutors wanted an enhanced sentence of 30 years behind bars. But that didn’t happen because the trial court judge determined that only a jury can rule on a sentence enhancement. The ruling was later upheld by an appellate court and now the government is appealing to the Supreme Court.

 

Case: Carr v. United States

Date: Wednesday February 24, 2010

Issue: A 2006 federal sex offender registration law requires newly convicted offenders to register in an updated national database. In 2007, the Justice Department issued a requirement that people convicted of sex offenses before 2006 also register in the new database. Earlier in the decade, Thomas Carr was convicted in Alabama of improperly touching a 14 year old girl. He then moved to Indiana where after getting into a fight (with no sexual connection) Carr was arrested and convicted for failing to register under the new law. He has appealed the conviction claiming the after-the-fact requirement violates the Constitution’s Ex Post Facto Clause.

 

Case: United States v. Marcus

Date: Wednesday February 24, 2010

Issue: Glenn Marcus, aka the S&M Svengali, was convicted of sex trafficking and sentenced to nine years in prison. But an appellate court that included now Justice Sonia Sotomayor set aside the verdict saying some of the alleged bad acts took place before the 2000 Trafficking Victims Protection Act went into effect. Marcus encouraged women to participate in what the government describes as “violent sexual activity” and used images from the encounters on a for-profit website called “Slavespace.”

In her brief to the high court, Solicitor General Elena Kagan says the conviction should be reinstated because Marcus never objected at trial to the admission of evidence presented against him and failed to show any plain error affecting his right to a fair trial. As noted, Sotomayor agreed with the decision to overturn the conviction but did so in fealty to Second Circuit precedent. In her concurring opinion in the case she cautioned that “where there is no reasonable possibility that an error not objected to at trial had an effect on the judgment, the Supreme Court counsels us against exercising our discretion to notice that error.” Because of her prior involvement in the case, Sotomayor is not expected to take part in this review. 

This is from my colleague Julie Kirtz

 

President’s Proposal Set to Hit the Web on Monday

BY: Julie Kirtz

 

The big question, unanswered by the White House this weekend, is  just what President Barack Obama’s own health care proposal will look like.

 

The White House plans to post the President’s proposal on the White House website on Monday, in advance of Thursday’s health care summit with Republicans.  In the words of one key administration official,  Obama is expected to combine “the best parts” of the House and Senate bills. 

 

But not even Obama’s Democratic allies know what that means for huge issues like abortion language and a government run health care plan, or so called “public option.”  

 

In his Saturday address, the President called on Democrats and Republicans to keep an open mind. “I don’t want to see this meeting turn into political theater with each side simply reciting talking points and trying to score political points,” he said. “Instead, I ask members of both parties to seek common ground.”

 

With the bi-partisan summit set for Thursday, Obama is trying to breathe new life into health care reform — not easy.  Speaking for  Republicans in their weekly address, Michigan Rep. Dave Camp said people just want the White House and congressional Democrats to scrap “their misguided government takeover of health care.” Camp accused Democrats of writing the newest health care bill in secret. “For those families and small businesses looking for a sign that Washington is ready to wake up and find common sense on this issue, next week’s White House health care summit may not be it,” Camp said.

 

 

White house officials will post the President’s own health care proposal on whitehouse.gov on Monday — so get ready for some heavy-duty reading. It’s going to be very long. It’s not expected to be in legislative language; instead, aides say, it will serve more as the President’s opening bid on health care.

 

The summit on Thursday between Republicans and Democrats will also go high-tech. It will also stream live on the White House website.  

 

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell (D) took a break from this weekend’s meeting of the National Governor’s Association to make an appearance on Fox News Channel and he talked about the issues he and his fellow governors are focusing on.  “Health care predominates but also jobs. We understand that the first and foremost task for us or anyone in government is to get out people back to work.”  In the interview with Fox’s Brian Wilson–click here— Rendell also expressed concern about the repercussions of any attempt by Democratic leaders in Washington to force a vote on health care by using a procedural maneuver that allows for a simple majority vote in the Senate instead of overcoming a 3/5 threshold. “Whether reconciliation works or doesn’t work, it’s going to leave a bitter taste in this place. No question about it. And it’s going to have a  deleterious effect on other things.”

 

 

Attention criminals: When you have your hand in the cookie jar you might as well grab all of the cookies because when you get caught that’s exactly what will be the basis your sentence. Of course, I’m not talking cookie theft but rather credit card fraud.  A pair of recent federal court rulings hold that criminals will be sentenced based on the limit of the cards they’ve stolen and not the actual amount of money ripped off.  Because the length of federal sentences increase with the amount of money involved; these rulings will often lead to longer sentences but also give criminals little incentive to limit the amount of money they spend from boosted cards.

 

In the case of Andrea Renee Harris, Citibank, N.A., hired her as a customer service representative in November 2002. But within a few months Harris began accessing customer accounts without authorization. She compromised eight accounts, six of which were drained of $11,812.41 in fraudulent charges. The eight accounts had an aggregate credit limit of $89,770.00. The trial judge used the greater figure as the basis for an 18 month sentence.

 

In the other case, DeMarquis Williams worked as a tollbooth operator at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport and admitted to skimming more than 500 credit card numbers from travelers. Williams unsuccessfully argued that his sentence should be based on the $157,138.22 that was ripped off and not the aggregate total of the credit limits for the cards which totaled $2,545,287.25. He was sentenced to 5 years in the pokey.

 

Here is a link to the 34 page opinion:

 http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/08/08-11121-CR0.wpd.pdf

A sign in front of Michael Kleinman’s San Marcos, Texas store saying “make love not war” would have been protected by the First Amendment’s guarantee of Free Speech, but that same message painted on a junked Oldsmobile 88 doesn’t get the same protection.

 

Earlier this month, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that Kleinman’s wrecked Oldsmobile 88 that he turned into a cactus planter with colorful painting and adorned with the familiar peace slogan is subject to a local ordinance designed to eliminate public eyesores.  A three judge panel dismissed Kleinman’s claim that his clunker doubled as expressive artwork protected by the First Amendment.

 

Kleinman operates the Planet K chain of stores throughout the San Antonio and Austin areas. The stores are described as “funky establishments” that sell novelty items.  Part of the kitschiness to the stores is for each new opening Kleinman invites the public to take a sledgehammer to a car and then uses the wrecked vehicle as a planter which doubles as a “unique advertising device.”

 

The city of San Marcos doesn’t think too much of the lemon turned planter/artwork and cited Kleinman under its junked vehicle ordinance.  The judges ruled that the junked vehicle “objectively dominates” any comparison to the artistic component of its exterior painting and that the city was within its rights to enforce the ordinance.

 

Here is a link to the 11 page opinion:

 http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/08/08-50960-CV0.wpd.pdf

The location of Today’s announcement or whatever you want to call it is very significant. It is difficult to envision the PGA Tour (the most visible golf organization today) opening its headquarters to any other golfer for something like this.  It is a HUGE sign of institutional support for Woods.  Of course, the reason for the support is entirely financial.  PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem (a lawyer and official in the Carter Administration) knows how much money Woods has made for the Tour and is likely to make for the Tour in the decades to come.  Woods is hardly the first Tour golfer to find himself in a public relations bind.  Yet, it is hard to think the Tour would open up its door to, say, John Daly to talk about his latest excess or lost fortune.  The PGA Tour is very much an insular community of players and support personnel where candor is rare and controversy is to be avoided at all costs.

 

I will highlight in the AP article below that Woods is soon expected to return to therapy. This will inevitably lead to speculation about when Woods will next enter a tournament.  Unless he makes a definitive declaration today (i.e. no golf this year) it is impossible to predict when he’d come back.  The first of golf’s four professional majors is The Masters which starts April 8.  Woods has played in every Masters tournament since 1995. Interestingly, Woods qualified for that event by winning the previous year’s U.S. Amateur golf tournament at the T.P.C. Sawgrass golf course where he makes his announcement today.

 

By DOUG FERGUSON

AP Golf Writer

   PONTE VEDRA BEACH, Florida (AP) — Tiger Woods is to return to therapy after he speaks publicly for the first time about his infidelity, according to a letter from PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem that was obtained by The Associated Press.

   Finchem’s letter to the PGA Tour policy board and other officials explained why Woods chose Friday to make his first public comments, which are to be televised live by the major networks.

   Woods’ statement comes during the Match Play Championship, sponsored by Accenture, the first company to drop Woods as a pitchman.

   “As we understand it, Tiger’s therapy called for a week’s break at this time during which he has spent a few days with his children and then will make his statement before returning,” Finchem said in a letter Thursday. “Accordingly, there was very little flexibility in the date for the announcement.”

   Woods is to speak at 1600 GMT from the clubhouse at TPC Sawgrass, home of the PGA Tour. It will be his first time to speak publicly since his car accident Nov. 27 that sparked sordid revelations of extramarital affairs.

   The letter shed no light on whether Woods plans to return to the tour anytime soon.

   Ernie Els was among players who were upset to learn that Woods had chosen the week of a World Golf Championship for a public appearance that was sure to take attention away from the tournament. “It’s selfish,” Els told Golfweek magazine.

   Finchem told reporters in Marana, Arizona earlier this week that he didn’t think Woods’ appearance would undermine Accenture, and that Woods’ handlers “have their own reasons for their schedule.”

   In the letter, he said the tour discussed the situation with Accenture and “they understand that the PGA Tour was not involved in determining the timing of the statement.” Finchem also noted that Woods’ comments would be over well before television coverage of the third round from Dove Mountain.

   The PGA Tour made available its sprawling, Mediterranean-styled clubhouse for the announcement, and is helping set up adjacent ballrooms at the nearby Sawgrass Marriott for media, where they can watch Woods on closed-circuit TV.

   Finchem said in the letter that Woods’ management asked for the facilities, and “we agreed as we would for any member of the PGA Tour.”

   No other PGA Tour player could command this kind of attention, though.

   Woods is one of the most recognized athletes in the world. Television ratings double when he is in contention, which has happened a lot on his way to winning 71 times on the PGA Tour and 14 majors, four short of the record held by Jack Nicklaus.

   No other athlete had such a spectacular fall, either. Accenture and AT&T have ended their endorsement contracts with him, and Woods has become the butt of jokes everywhere from late shows to Disney performances.

   In the hours leading up to his appearance, it already was shaping up as a major event.

   Seven satellite trucks already had set up shop in the Marriott parking lot and tight security restricted access on the road that leads past PGA Tour headquarters to the TPC Sawgrass clubhouse, where Woods has a locker in a special room reserved for past winners of The Players Championship.

   Woods is to speak in the Sunset Room on the second floor to a small group of “friends, colleagues and close associates,” along with limited media.

   “This is not a press conference,” Mark Steinberg, Woods’ agent, said on Wednesday.

   Three wire services — the AP, Reuters and Bloomberg — were invited. The Golf Writers Association of America was offered a pool of three reporters, negotiated for six reporters, then its board of directors voted overwhelmingly not to participate.

   “I cannot stress how strongly our board felt that this should be open to all media and also for the opportunity to question Woods,” said Vartan Kupelian, president of the 950-member group. “The position, simply put, is all or none. This is a major story of international scope. To limit the ability of journalists to attend, listen, see and question Woods goes against the grain of everything we believe.”

   The public hasn’t had a clean look at Woods’ face since photos Wednesday of him jogging in his neighborhood outside Orlando.

   More pool photos were released on Thursday showing him hitting balls on the practice range; Woods never allowed his picture taken on the range last year when returning from knee surgery.

   Far more compelling, however, will be the sound of his voice. Woods has not been heard in the 78 days since a magazine released a voicemail he allegedly left one of the women to whom he has been romantically linked, warning that Woods’ wife might be calling.

   Instead of going on a national television show to break the ice, Woods essentially will be speaking to the lone camera allowed in the room. The event will be televised via satellite.

   Woods has always been about control, even in better times. He refused to go into the media center before a PGA Tour event if he was not the defending champion. If he agreed to a 10-minute interview to pitch a product he endorses, it was common for a company employee to be in the room making sure it didn’t go one second beyond that.

   But having not heard from Woods in three months — except for three statements on his Web site — this event has taken on a life of its own.

   Conversation raged online, as many took glee in speculating on what Woods will say Friday.

   One of the most popular threads on Twitter carried the tag “tigershouldsay.” Suggestions were predominantly sarcastic, such as: “At least I didn’t use steroids.”

   A British bookmaker has set odds at 4-to-7 that Woods’ wife, Elin, will be with him. William Hill didn’t stop there, however. It offers 8-to-1 odds that Woods will announce he is getting a divorce, 12-to-1 odds that his wife is pregnant and 100-to-1 odds that he is retiring.

   (Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press.  All Rights Reserved.)

   APTV 02-19-10 0002EST

Not satisfied with the seemingly stalled health care reform efforts in Washington, state lawmakers in Richmond, Virginia want to make sure residents of the Old Dominion State aren’t subject to a federal mandate requiring citizens to buy health insurance.  This week the Virginia House of Delegates passed legislation that would make it illegal to do just that.

Saturday, in an interview on Fox News Channel, State Delegate Bob Marshall (R) of Prince William County, VA, wonders “how can someone compel you to enter a contract? They can’t.”

Many Democrats on Capitol Hill want a reform plan that would force citizens to buy health care or face severe penalties. Republicans in their near total rejection of the Democratic reforms have objected. The election of Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) and the apparent retreat of the White House and Congressional leaders on health care reform would appear to make a mandate unlikely. But Virginia lawmakers pushed ahead nonetheless.  It isn’t clear what actual impact the Virginia legislation (which according to the Richmond Times Dispatch is expected to be signed into law by Governor Bob McDonnell-R)  would have if federal lawmakers are able to pass a law with the mandate.  If the federal law preempted state prerogatives, lawsuits would certainly follow.

The Richmond Times Dispatch says Del, Terry Kilgore took to the House floor to say the measure sends a message to Congress about what he called a federal intrusion.  The paper also quoted a Democratic lawmaker who said the bill had zero legislative value and that if nothing happens in Congress then the Virginia bill is meaningless.

Marshall, in his appearance on Fox News, says he’s been in touch with lawmakers from other states about enacting similar legislation. He says, “the states are responding to the usurpation of power in Washington.”

The Supreme Court announced Friday that it wants additional briefs from lawyers in the case involving Chinese Muslims who’ve been locked up at Guantanamo Bay for the past eight years. Their case is set for oral arguments before the Court in March. But the recent announcement by the Obama Administration that some of the men are being relocated to Switzerland prompted a letter to the Court from Solicitor General Elena Kagan asking the justices to reconsider hearing the case. It is an issue the justices now want to hear more about.

The handful of remaining Uighur detainees are at Guantanamo even though the U.S. Government no longer considers them a threat. But efforts to find other countries to take them have proven to be very difficult. The island nations of Bermuda and Palau have taken some. A federal judge in Washington D.C., concluding that the government no longer had grounds to hold the men, ordered them released into the United States. But that decision was immediately stayed and then overruled on appellate review. The Uighurs appealed to the Supreme Court. Last year the justices appeared to delay consideration of the case to give the government more time to relocate the men but finally announced they were going to take the case and set arguments for March. Below is the actual order from the Court:

08-1234 KIYEMBA, JAMAL, ET AL. V. OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF U.S., ET AL.

The parties are directed to file letter briefs addressing the following question: What should be the effect, if any, of the developments discussed in the letters submitted by the parties on February 3 and 5 on the Court’s grant of certiorari in this case? The briefs, limited to 8 pages, are to be filed simultaneously with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Friday, February 19, 2010.

It’s a record few Washingtonians really wanted to break: 54.9 inches of snow has now fallen at Reagan National Airport. That’s an all-time record. WOO HOO!

Setting aside the usual dispute between snow lovers and those who are happy to live life without the snow, there’s a controversy to this record that is unique to this area. Reagan National Airport isn’t in Washington, DC. The airport is on the banks of the Potomac River but is actually in Virginia and that distinction is one that really sticks with some people.

Last weekend’s blast of snow resulted in an official tally of 18.4 inches at the airport. But most (unofficial) measurements from Washington D.C. proper, just a few miles from the airport, were well in excess of 20 inches. Why the difference? Some say the airport’s river location tends to reduce the snow tally. Others point to a warmer air flow along the river that typically comes from the south.

In a press conference with reporters, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley (D) said he expects his state will see more than  300,000 power customers lose service in the near future because of high winds.

He says power outages from high winds, drifting snow and falling tree limbs are responsible for lots of power outages and will be for some time to come. He says at the peak of the weekend storm, there were 160,000 outages. He says that number will double in the hours to come. Because of that, O’Malley expects more emergency shelters to open up.

Road crews have been instructed to plow roads only good enough for emergency crews and humvees to pass. He adds that bare pavement won’t be visible on many roads for several days. He further expresses concern that road crews will have to be diverted to create paths for power crews to get to downed lines.

O’Malley says that it’s “pretty remarkable” that no one in Maryland has died because of the storm but is very concerned about roofs caving in. He says poultry houses on Maryland’s Eastern Shore are collapsing under the snow’s weight and that one roof collapse resulted in the destruction of a brand new fire truck inside that damaged building.

Several ships have entered the port of Baltimore with tons of road salt but getting that salt from the port to depots throughout Maryland has proven to be difficult.

The storm and its ability to pick up moisture from Chesapeake Bay is something O’Malley calls a “swirling double buzz” of a system.

The governor also asks for his citizens not put their hands into snow blowers and not to strain themselves too much shoveling the snow.

O’Malley echoes the praise that other state officials have given to federal officials for helping them obtain federal emergency disaster money.

Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell held a conference call earlier today to brief media on the ongoing response to the current winter storm.  Below are some of the highlights:

*Three people have died in past week as direct result of snowstorms

*Shelters are open throughout the state, especially in Northern Virginia. People are urged to call 211 for info on that.

* This storm is expected to bring 7-14 inches of snow BUT it is the wind gusts of up to 54mph that is making this storm a “real risk to human life” and a “very dangerous situation.”

*There have been 709 crashes reported to the Virginia State Police (VSP) in the past 24 hours but no deaths. Also more than 4,000 calls for VSP police assistance.

*McDonnell says he spoke with DHS Secretary Napolitano and says an application for $50M in federal assistance for dealing with the December snowstorm is being viewed “favorably” and that last weekend’s storm and this one will be considered one event for purposes of getting additional federal assistance.

*He says the forecast for continued cold temperatures is good for controlling flooding but does cause other problems. He is specifically concerned with an increase in the number of people who lose electricity. Over the weekend that number hit 200,000 customers and was down to just 8,000 this morning but is back on the rise.

* “We strongly urge people to stay inside even if the sun comes out so we can plow.”

WASHINGTON: The advice for air travelers is ubiquitous: check your flight status before going to the airport. And that’s for good reason this week because it might not be until Saturday when you can comfortably count on your flight taking off as scheduled.

“Flights won’t be running at full capacity until the weekend,” says David Castelveter, vice president of communications for the Air Transport Association of America. And that projection assumes this latest storm ends as forecasted on Wednesday and workers are then able clean up the tons of snow that’s been dumped on airports across the country.

“When you have weather of this magnitude the unfortunate recognition is that there will be cancelled flights,” but Castelveter says airlines are very careful to prepare for the storm before the snow starts to fall.

Preparation is also key for the people who run the airports that are crippled by the snow. Plows, blowers and heavy duty brooms will be in constant motion in the days ahead as workers putting in 12+ hour shifts will be busy keeping runways, taxi areas, gates and parking lots open.

“The biggest problem you have at airports like Reagan National (outside Washington D.C.) and LaGuardia (in New York City) is where to stockpile the snow. You need trucks to come in and dump it off elsewhere,” says Jerry Fitzgerald, a 50 year veteran of airport operations and former director of aviation of the major New York City airports. He agrees with the assessment that normal flight service will not return until the weekend.

Fitzgerald says airports start thinking about snowstorms in the summer as they plan their budgets and make sure they have access to the equipment necessary to best get their facilities back on line. Some heavy duty plows cost nearly a million dollars and can be found at some snow belt airports where snow is a part of life.

From his days at New York’s JFK airport, Fitzgerald says he’d have 100 workers busy for several days after a storm to keep the runways and taxi areas clear. FAA regulations mandate that certain favorable ground conditions exist before flight operations can resume. Once the first flights land and take off, the pilots communicate back to the airport their thoughts on the shape of the runway. Since a missed icy patch could lead to disaster, Fitzgerald believes snow removal is “the most dangerous thing airports have to deal with.”

In other less sensitive parts of the airport, Fitzgerald says there could be several thousand airport and contract workers busy clearing snow from gate and baggage areas and in the parking lots for airport employees and passengers. “Even if the runway is clear, it makes no sense to bring planes in if you have nowhere to park.”

Well before the snow starts to fall, most airlines try to get as many people out of impacted areas and in the process leave as few planes behind to get stuck in snow-packed hangars. This allows the airlines to redirect their planes to other routes that are still operational.

Once airports are able to open for some flights the real chaos of air travel begins. Airlines will have varying capacities for accommodating the backlog passengers who are anxious to get off the ground. Castelveter explains that most air carriers have long standing agreements with competitors to move ticketed passengers regardless of which company’s plane they board.

Some airlines have also put into effect special emergency weather policies allowing passengers to change their bookings without normal fees. But not everyone who was trying to fly will end up taking off. Castelveter explains that many ticketholders are business travelers who don’t rebook or vacation travelers who end up missing important connections on other flights or cruise ships that have left port. These people simply give up.

Getting into work the past few days hasn’t been easy but with a good temperament it wasn’t too much of a bother. But today was anything but fun. And it’s because of the wind. Anytime it’s cold, the wind makes it more unpleasant. Add snow to the mix and now you’ve got a white-out and frustrations over the cold and wet conditions. Yet as I saw there were some brave souls outside just like me making their way to work. Even though the Federal government has closed for a third day in a row there are plenty of people in Washington who have to go to work. The only improvement on this morning’s commute is that the METRO stations weren’t nearly as crowded as in the past four-five days. With decreased service and continued demand, the trains running 30 minutes apart were jammed full and some people were left waiting on the platform for another 30 minutes when they couldn’t get on board. Thankfully, today that wasn’t the case.

Change often leads to controversy and that is certainly the case in North Carolina where an effort to revamp the state’s education system has some people outraged that high school students will not learn enough American history.

The formula for teaching American history has been pretty simple. Start at the beginning and go forward.  But a new proposal under review in North Carolina threatens to disrupt that standard teaching philosophy.

“If our students don’t know what happened in world history, and if they don’t know what happened in U.S. history from George Washington’s presidency all the way up through the Civil War, then they will not be able to grasp the big picture,” said Mike Belter, a Social Studies teacher in North Carolina.

The state’s on-going curriculum review hits all subjects but it’s the proposed changes for high school students learning social studies that have provoked fears. Under the new guidelines, students will graduate without learning enough about world history and key parts of American history including Abraham Lincoln, westward expansion or much else that happened before 1877 when Reconstruction ended, critics say.

“We are certainly not trying to go away from American history. What we are trying to do is figure out a way to teach it where students are connected to it. Where they see the big idea. Where they are able to make connections and draw relationships between parts of our history and the present day so the students who see it as relevant,” said Rebecca Garland of the N.C. Department of Public Instruction.

Right now, high school students learn world history in the ninth grade, civics and economics in the tenth and the entirety of U.S. history in the eleventh grade. Under the proposed change, all ninth graders wouldn’t study world history. Instead, they”ll have to take a course called Global Studies focusing on the modern issues like the environment.

Tenth graders will still get Civics and Economics, while the junior year U.S. history class would start in 1877.  State officials say events prior to that year will be taught before high school and also incorporated into the sophomore year Civics class.

Education officials acknowledge this is a big change but believe it will allow them to connect with a standard of teaching based on a new national initiative called called Common Core which emphasizes standards to help prepare students with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in college and careers and to be prepared to compete globally.

“The whole notion of the common core is fewer, clearer and more in depth standards. So that our students remember what’s important,” Garland said.

” I’m all for a global outlook but it should not be at the expense of American history and learning about American institutions and ideas. And unfortunately this curriculum does just that,” said Terry Stoops, an Education Expert and member of the John Locke Foundation.

North Carolina officials are quick to emphasize that the proposal is just that–a proposal. And they are encouraging feedback from teachers and the public about the plan.