Nebrasks must be even sorrier about its poorly-crafted Safe Haven law: now people are coming from out of state to drop their children off.
"An Iowa teenager who was abandoned at an Omaha hospital under Nebraska's safe-haven law is back home after her grandparents dropped her off to teach her a lesson but soon changed their minds, officials said Thursday.
The 14-year-old girl from across the Missouri River in Council Bluffs, Iowa, was left at Creighton University Medical Center on Tuesday. She was the 17th child left under a state law that took effect in July but was the first from out of state.
Her abandonment set off concerns that Nebraska's broadly written law could make the state a dumping ground for unwanted children. The law absolves anyone of abandonment charges for leaving a child of any age at a state-licensed hospital."
See the rest of the article at http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/09/safe.haven.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
In response, the Nebraska Legislature has "scheduled a hearing." http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/08/nebraska.safe.haven/index.html
Really? It doesn't think that it's obvious what to do? Curious....
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Monday, October 6, 2008
United States Supreme Court agrees to hear Hawai`i case
As mentioned in class, thousands of cases are appealed to the United Satates Supreme Court every year, and less than 100 are heard (with about 50-60 decided without oral argument). Four of the nine justices must agree to have the case taken up by the Court. Simply put, the US Supreme Court only takes significant cases, which is why whenever they agree to take up a Hawai`i case, we should sit up and take notice. The case they're taking up this session is Hawaii v. OHA.
Here's a summary of the issue from the certiorari petition by the attorney general's office:
"In 1993, Congress marked the 100th anniversary of
the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy by enacting a
joint resolution--the Apology Resolution--that expresses
the federal government’s regret for its role in
that incident. In this case, the Supreme Court of Hawaii
held that this symbolic Resolution tacitly, but materially,
impairs the State’s sovereign authority over its
own lands. Specifically, the court held that the Resolution
should be read to prohibit the State from selling,
exchanging, or transferring approximately 1.2 million
acres of State land almost all of the land owned by the
State and about 29 percent of the total land area of the
State--until it has struck a political settlement with
native Hawaiians who assert aboriginal rights to that
land."
To be fully informed on the issue, here are links from the Hawai`i Supreme Court's blog to news releases by the parties:
http://hisupremecourt.blogspot.com/
Here are links to the court documents in the case:
http://planetkauai.blogspot.com/2008/09/this-is-it-will-supremes-hear-hawaii-v.html
Here's a summary of the issue from the certiorari petition by the attorney general's office:
"In 1993, Congress marked the 100th anniversary of
the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy by enacting a
joint resolution--the Apology Resolution--that expresses
the federal government’s regret for its role in
that incident. In this case, the Supreme Court of Hawaii
held that this symbolic Resolution tacitly, but materially,
impairs the State’s sovereign authority over its
own lands. Specifically, the court held that the Resolution
should be read to prohibit the State from selling,
exchanging, or transferring approximately 1.2 million
acres of State land almost all of the land owned by the
State and about 29 percent of the total land area of the
State--until it has struck a political settlement with
native Hawaiians who assert aboriginal rights to that
land."
To be fully informed on the issue, here are links from the Hawai`i Supreme Court's blog to news releases by the parties:
http://hisupremecourt.blogspot.com/
Here are links to the court documents in the case:
http://planetkauai.blogspot.com/2008/09/this-is-it-will-supremes-hear-hawaii-v.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
