Radley Balko calls attention to the sad case of Kelley Williams-Bolar:

The Summit County judge who sent an Akron mother to jail after she was convicted of falsifying records so her children could attend Copley-Fairlawn schools said considerable efforts were made to resolve the case before it went to trial.

Common Pleas Judge Patricia A. Cosgrove spoke out after becoming the target of public outcry over the case, which threatens the mother’s job and her hopes to become a school teacher.

Cosgrove said the county prosecutor’s office refused to consider reducing the charges to misdemeanors, and that all closed-door talks to resolve the case — outside of court — met with failure.

Kelley Williams-Bolar, 40, was sentenced Tuesday to 10 days in jail after a jury convicted her of two felony counts of tampering with records.

Cosgrove said numerous pretrial hearings were held since last summer.

”The state would not move, would not budge, and offer Ms. Williams-Bolar to plead to a misdemeanor,” the judge said in an interview Wednesday.

”Of course, I can’t put a gun to anybody’s head and force the state to offer a plea bargain.”

Radley notes the additional indignity that, “Williams-Bolar was also attending night school to obtain her teaching certificate. Her felony record could now bar her from teaching. Cosgrove has said she’d consider expunging the felonies if Williams-Bolar completes six months of probation.”

Obviously, this woman is sympathetic:  Who doesn’t want their kids to get a better education?  And, by going for absurdly inflated charges, the prosecutors overreached here.

Still, this is indeed fraud that costs real taxpayers real money.  Her kids don’t in fact live with grandma.  Nor does she pay property taxes on grandma’s house.  She’s not entitled to send her kids to school on those people’s property tax dime.

We’ve got real problems with inequity of educational funding in this country that we ought to address. Theft and fraud, however, is not an acceptable stopgap.

He’d best be hoping that Pelosi doesn’t retain her Speaker’s role.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has just upheld lower court findings that reject a causal connection between childhood vaccines and the onset of autism.

The ruling came in Cedillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, which was the first of a series of test cases heard by special masters for the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in 2007. The claims court picked several such cases to test different theories of causation advanced in the roughly 5,000 cases alleging a link to autism filed under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

“We see no legal error in the standards applied by the special master” in determining there was no causal connection between the mercury-based preservative in the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine administered to Michelle Cedillo in 1995 and the autism and retardation symptoms she began to show afterward.The claims court upheld the special master’s findings last year, and the federal circuit decision today affirmed that ruling.

The pseudo-scientific belief that vaccines were tied to autism and other health problems has been around for a long time, causing untold parents to forgo immunizing their children.  This, in turn, has led to the return of diseases that had been relegated to developing world status decades ago.

It’s bizarre to see a medical question resolved in court rather than by a group of medical experts.  But this is America.

Today’s Saudi Gazette nicely translates a piece from the Arabic daily Al-Watan. It’s about a Saudi woman who doesn’t think much of the way cultural preferences seem to get translated into pseudo-law. She’s been happily playing by ‘the rules’ while creating consternation among the enforcers. Nothing she does is outright illegal; everything she does is with a pretty amazing sense of humor, I think.

She also seems to be winning her argument and an audience. Do read the entire article.

Moudhi riding on a donkey
Abdullah Nasser Al-Fouzan

MOUDHI, a noted Riyadh secondary school headmistress, is continuing in her five-year quest to persuade the relevant folk that women have as much right to drive a car as men, furnishing them with the evidence piece by piece, showing that the benefits outweigh the perils. The persistent failure of her previous efforts, however, led her to turn to more practical methods, and so it was that she recently got behind the wheel of a car and drove off into the streets of the capital.

When stopped by police Moudhi produced her international driving license, but the failure of officers to be persuaded by such a document led to a lengthy exchange during which Moudhi showed them that their reasoning was more fragile than a spider’s web. Unmoved, the police told her that she was required to have a driver to protect her and help her should she find herself in difficulties, such as her car breaking down.

“Okay…,” Moudhi said. “We’ll see…”

A few days later Moudhi got behind the wheel again, only this time, seated in the back of the car, was her foreign driver. When the police stopped her — along with the young men who had been pursuing her down the street — officers believed the man in the back to be her bodyguard, and so were taken aback along with the rest of the gathering crowd when Moudhi told them he was her driver, there to “protect her and help her if the car broke down.”

“Isn’t that what you told me I had to do when you stopped me last time?” Moudhi said as perplexed officers glanced at each other.
…

The next episode of OTB Radio, our BlogTalkRadio program, will record and air live from 7-8 Eastern Wednesday night as per usual. The special Tueday Night Marvel Team-Up with League of Ordinary Gentlemen, Conor Friedersdorf, and Dan Riehl was waylaid by technical concerns and they will instead run it solo on Thursday at 2 Eastern using a different mechanism.

Instead, Dave Schuler and John Burgess will join me to discuss the Holocaust Musuem shooting, President Obama’s Middle East trip, the European Parliament elections, and the latest Supreme Court decisions.  Please join us.

We’ll also be taking calls at (646) 716-7030.  Owing to a high trolls to legit callers ratio, however, we’ll be using the BTR chat feature to screen for legit calls.

You can play the show, subscribe to its feed, or share it with your friends via the widget below:

(Note: The playback automatically updates to the most recent show available. Older shows can be accessed at the show archives.)

Indian car company readies Sarasota showroom
Toni Whitt

SARASOTA COUNTY – While working for General Motors in the 1980s and early 1990s, Pawan Goenka discovered Americans’ passion for trucks and SUVs.

As president of the automotive sector for Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., based in Mumbai, India, Goenka is using that knowledge to bring India’s first trucks to the United States this year.

But Mahindra is not off-loading the stereotypical gas guzzler. The Mahindra trucks benefit from advanced emissions technology, making them more environmentally friendly. They also run on diesel and get about 30 miles per gallon.

A new brand — coming out just as GM struggles with solvency and Chrysler declares bankruptcy — and that new technology should create enough excitement to overcome dealers’ problems selling trucks and sports utility vehicles amid a recession and on the heels of last year’s gasoline spike, Goenka said.
…

EDITORIAL: Barack takes a bow

In a shocking display of fealty to a foreign potentate, President Obama bowed to Saudi King Abdullah at the Group of 20 summit in London last week.

Mr. Obama later said in Strasbourg, France, “We have to change our behavior in showing the Muslim world greater respect.” Symbolism is important in world affairs. By bending over to show greater respect to Islam, the U.S. president belittled the power and independence of the United States.

The bow was an extraordinary protocol violation. Such an act is a traditional obeisance befitting a king’s subjects, not his peer. There is no precedent for U.S. presidents bowing to Saudi or any other royals. Former President Franklin D. Roosevelt shook hands with Saudi King Abdulaziz in February 1945. Granted, Mr. Roosevelt was wheelchair-bound, but former President Dwight D. Eisenhower shook hands when he first met King Saud in January 1957. Mr. Obama’s bow to the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques does not help his image with those who believe he is secretly a Muslim, and why he chose to bow only to the Saudi King and not to any other royals remains unexplained.
…

The fact is that Obama made a mistake. It is US diplomatic usage, dating from the days in which American broke away from the crowns of Europe, that Americans do not bow (or curtsy, as the case may be) to royalty, no matter who the American, no matter who the royalty. The thinking behind this is that an American, as a member of the Republic, is equal to any crowned or ennobled figure. It’s a custom; it’s a tradition; it’s a political statement. It is not a law, however.

Not bowing, however, does not mean that showing signs of respect are inappropriate. A ‘head bow’, inclining the head in the direction of the person being honored, is appropriate and is the norm in diplomacy. Obama over did it, perhaps, but he did not put the US in fealty to Saudi Arabia!

I’ll leave to the discerning student to analyze why a bow from the waist to, let’s say, a Japanese businessman is deemed perfectly okay while opprobrium and disdain are being heaped on Obama here. Correct answers should include hysteria, Islamophobia, and just plain loony-tunes thinking. Frank Gaffney, I’m looking at you…

Cross-posted at Crossroads Arabia.

More interesting–and important–were changes he made in the galaxy of the religious establishment. The most far-reaching change was to re-establish the Grand Ulema Council, the body intended to offer consensus opinion and advice on the religious aspects of law and regulation. Not only does the opening of this office deprecate the power of individual clerics, but its membership was expanded to include representatives of all Sunni schools of law, taking away the monopoly power of the Hanbali School, the foundation of Saudi Arabia’s conservative, ‘Wahhabi’ establishment. The expansion does not, unfortunately, include any of the schools of Shi’ism. That, however, might come in the future.

The ultra-conservative head of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice—aka, the religious police–was replaced by a more moderate individual who has already noted that his approach to the mission of the organization will be “innocent until proven guilty” and more forgiveness than punishment. Just how that plays out is yet to be known, of course, but it’s a marked change from past practice.

As conservative was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Council who most recently achieved notoriety through his statement that satellite TV broadcasters deserved to be tried and executed for the irreligious content of their programming. He was bounced from his position and replaced by Saleh bin Humaid, formerly head of the Saudi Shoura Council where he played an active role in promoting laws to protect women. Bin Humaid is himself a conservative cleric. Given his demonstrated moderation (as always, the term is used within a Saudi context), his religious authority should make it easier for him to force change.

The Supreme Judicial Council itself is about to undergo major changes. It is planned that it will be replaced by a Supreme Court that will serve to rule on the soon-to-be-codified new Saudi legal system.

It should be noted that the former head of the Supreme Judicial Council has been moved to head the Shoura Council. That’s not an unimportant position, but it holds considerably less power.

Longer-lasting changes–which will take longer to implement–were made in the Ministry of Education. A new Minister was named, this one a member of the ruling family with a long background in anti-extremist security operations. He has the clout to finally root out the extremist who have burrowed deep within the Saudi educational system, as well as having the resources to identify them. He has a new Deputy Minister, one who has led the King’s program for “National Dialogue”, intended to get Saudis publicly talking about things that had heretofore been relegated to private discussions. Top among these topics have been tolerance; dealing with differences in opinions, background, and sex; and facing up to the unexamined cultural issues that color politics and law.

Of course, the naming of a woman as a Deputy Minister of Education was something that has been highlighted in media reports. It is a big step and the first breach in a gender wall. Her remit is somewhat limited to Girls’ Education, but it is well past time that women had a say in how they were educating their daughters.

There’s no denying that Saudi Arabia has a lot of ground to cover just to catch up with international standards of human rights in the 21st C. These steps, however, do mark a clean break with the past and point to a different future. While the deficits should not be minimized, I think it important to recognize positive change as well.

You can find more information about the changes at Crossroads Arabia.

The bismillah is the prayer that is used to start nearly anything done by a pious Muslim, even appearing at the top of the page for official documents or personal letters and school work, even as a blessing before meals or the sacrifice of an animal. In full, it reads, ‘In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate’: B’Ism Allah, Al-Rahman, Al-Rahim.

And no, I don’t think Warren is a ‘crypto-Muslim’…

“Prostitution Free Zone” During Inauguration

Some headlines just scream for attention…

UPDATE (James Joyner): The story itself is rather amusing:

District police have placed signs along 5th and I Streets. They read, “Warning, Prostitution Free Zone.” Those who disobey could be fined 300 dollars, and even jailed. But will the city’s plan work?

DC City Councilman Jim Graham said officers cannot enforce loitering laws, which is the reason for these signs. “Because this is focused, its limited in time, its aimed at a very specific issue, if you don’t move along, well put you in the car,” he said.

[...]

A woman who calls herself Tamira and advertises her services on Craigslist, said otherwise. She said prostitutes who work the streets may ignore the signs. However, she said, some prostitutes may move elsewhere. “If I saw a sign that said, ‘Prostitution Free Zone’ I would feel a little uncomfortable that there would be a house next store where police are at,” she said. Tamira also believes some visitors will come to the inauguration for legitimate business, but prostitute on the side to make extra money.

Pretty sweet: No prostitutes or homeless people for a day! I guess that Obama guy is a miracle worker after all!

Gov. Rod Blagojevich's decision to appoint former state attorney general Roland Burris to the U.S. Senate has sparked controversial reaction throughout the political world. (Getty Images/AP Photos)

While it may be galling for Rod Blagojevich to get to appoint someone to fill Barack Obama’s Senate seat while he’s under federal indictment for trying to sell said seat, Jane Hamsher argues that he’s perfectly entitled to do so.

Then fifty members of the Democratic Caucus signed a letter saying they would oppose any Blagojevich appointment from being seated — without due consideration as to whether the Senate had the right to do so. Although there is considerable disagreement on that front, it is not at all certain that they can.

Now Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White says that he will not sign the appointment of Roland Burris, and it isn’t clear he has the legal authority to do that, either

[...]

Is any of this legal or ethical? That isn’t a question Reid seems to be asking.

Laurence Tribe disagrees.

In its landmark 1969 ruling in Powell v. McCormack, the Supreme Court held that Article I, Section 5, which makes “[e]ach House…the Judge of the Elections…and Qualifications of its own Members,” represents “a textually demonstrable commitment” to Congress of the power to judge, without interference by any court, whether a duly elected individual meets the age, citizenship and other objective qualifications for office set forth in Article I, Section 2, but not any power to deny membership through the discretionary addition of ideological or other “qualifications” to those carefully laid out in the Constitution itself.

[...]

That Roland Burris, the man appointed by the Illinois governor in late December, was never “elected” is beside the point inasmuch as the 17th Amendment specifies that, whenever there is a vacancy in any state’s Senate representation, the state’s legislature “may empower [its] executive . . . to make temporary appointments until the people fill the [vacancy] by election as the legislature may direct.”

Steven Taylor agrees that “the focus on process, not candidate, gives the Senate a constitutional argument to stand on” while Jack Balkin notes that “temporal and political factors” are at play, too:

a complicated process of bargaining and playing for time. And even if the Senate lacks the authority to refuse to seat Burris, the debate over whether it does (and the need for Burris to bring litigation to establish his right) also gives the Senate and the Illinois legislature room for maneuver.

The Senate may ultimately seat Burris, but for the moment, it probably wants to delay decision by referring the matter to a committee to consider whether or not there was anything problematic in the circumstances of the appointment (Many commentators doubt that there is anything problematic with the appointment, but it’s worth recalling that only a few weeks back the Governor was caught on tape boasting he would sell the seat and certainly wouldn’t let it go without getting something valuable for it. Even if there is no present evidence of misconduct in this appointment, the Senate might insist that it deserves a little time to look a little closer into the circumstances).

It seems self-evident to me that Blagojevich has every right to appoint whomever he wants to the Senate (providing that they meet eligibility thresholds) for just about any reason and that the Senate has every right to refuse to seat that person for most any reason, which creates a stalemate.  As a matter of reasonablenesss, however, absent evidence that the Roland Burris appointment itself was tainted, he should be seated.   Like it or not, Blagojevich is the governor of Illinois.  And the state deserves representation in the Senate.

Sad news:

Robin Toner, who was the first woman to be the national political correspondent of The New York Times and who had a significant hand in the coverage of five presidential elections, innumerable Congressional and gubernatorial campaigns and the great legislative debates of the day, died early Friday at her home in Washington. She was 54.

The cause was complications of colon cancer, her family said.

via memeorandum

The issue is not actually whether Saudi law applies in Texas (or other states as the article notes), but whether people can, in the course of making contracts, require that Sharia law be applied as the rule for arbitration. It’s a bit complicated, but the courts’ decisions are worth reading. And certainly read the entirety of the Volokh post. The comments, particularly about how Jewish laws can be enforced through arbitration in US courts are also worth while.

Sharia Law Enforced in Texas!

Read all about this (and Osama is even involved). But wait, it’s also in Minnesota. And in New Jersey (Nat’l Group for Communications & Computers Ltd. v. Lucent Technologies Int’l, Inc., 331 F. Supp. 2d 290 (D.N.J. 2004)).

Oddly enough, the American courts treat this as a perfectly normal matter. In the first two cases I cited, the parties entered into a contract that provided for Sharia arbitration; the courts considered challenges to the arbitral process, and upheld the awards. The third case involved a contractual provision expressly stating that disputes about the contract would be resolved under Saudi Arabian law; the court then dutifully investigated what the Saudi rules (which are built on Sharia) would call for, and rendered judgment “based upon this Court’s review of various academic texts, the testimony of the experts, the submissions of the parties, and the Court’s understanding of the fundamental principles of Islamic law as they would be interpreted by a court in Saudi Arabia.”
…

Cross posted at Crossroads Arabia

Better sourced is a story on Reuters about the Saudi government’s also permitting women to register in hotels, without a guardian. This has been an issue with Saudi businesswomen who find it difficult to do business in cities in which they have no personal infrastructure–family or residential property.

Both issues are sure to raise hell with the religious conservatives who seem to believe that a woman alone is merely an opportunity for profligate sex. I’m confident that the Saudi religious police will be kept busy scouring the hotel registries and cruising the streets—just like all the hormonally ramped up adolescents—on the look-out for available women.

And since non-driving women are already being accused of causing most traffic accidents, there’s sure to be a flood of stories about how bad women drive.

But baby steps are welcome in a country that’s trying to pull itself out of the hole it’s created for itself.

Dave Schuler and John Burgess will be joining me to talk about the recent Saudi rape case, the rioting in France, the Annapolis Conference and whatever other topics come up.

We’ll also be taking your calls at (646) 716-7030.