Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel states unequivocally in a conference call organized by People For the American Way that the SCOTUS "made new law" today in Ricci. McDaniel argued that the Ricci decision made it difficult if not impossible for states and localities to attempt to address discrimination in the workplace, their own and private workplaces.

Marge Baker of PFAW states flatly that the Court engaged in "judicial activism" today.

More . . .

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) just held a press conference on the SCOTUS' Ricci decision announced today. The major points:

SCOTUS sets forth a NEW interpretation, overturning 38 years of understanding of the law.

Sotomayor unaffected by this. (This is an obvious point imo. But I guess it needs to be said.) You know all the talking points.

Andy Pincus, counsel for the National League of Cities spoke and made the strong point that today's Ricci decision makes the position of municipalities virtually untenable. The conflict created by Ricci puts municipalities (and States) in a position where it will be sued by one group or another. In short, the decision is a disaster for States and municipalities. So much for the "dignity" that once so concerned Justice Kennedy.

More . . .

Bump and Update: Bernie Madoff has been sentenced to 150 years in prison. The probation report had recommended 50 years. He is likely to do his time in a medium security prison. Possibilities, according to prison expert Alan Ellis: "FCI Otisville or FCI Ray Brook, both in upstate New York, FCI Fairton in New Jersey or FCI McKean in Pennsylvania."

***

Sentencing Day for Bernie Madoff

Bernard Madoff will be sentenced today. The government is seeking 150 years. The defense is seeking 12 years, arguing that considering his age, it's an effective life sentence. Ruth Madoff has agreed to forfeit around $80 million (including the Park Ave coop, the Montauk home and the Palm Beach home) in exchange for $2.5 million.

Here are the relevant pleadings:

• Bernie's response to Government sentencing position
  
• Government Sentencing Position
• Bernie's Sentencing Position
• Ruth Madoff Forfeiture Agreement

[More....]

Earlier this month, I cited Ian Millheiser on Wards Cove:

In 1989, the Supreme Court in Wards Cove Packing v. Antonio significantly weakened the ban on disparate impact discrimination. Congress responded almost immediately by overturning Wards Cove with the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Right-wing justices tried their best to roll back civil rights law, but they were rebuffed by elected representatives.

In light of the SCOTUS' decision in Ricci, Congress must again act to rebuff the efforts of extreme right wing judicially activist Justices to roll back civil rights law. In dissent in Ricci, Justice Ginsburg wrote:

It was 5-4, as expected. Justice Kennedy and his conservative brethren prove yet again that when it comes to discrimination, their main concern is that white males not "suffer." More after I read the opinion.

The opinions (PDF). Justice Ginsburg in dissent, joined by Stevens, Souter and Breyer:

The white firefighters who scored high on New Haven’s promotional exams understandably attract this Court’s sympathy. But they had no vested right to promotion. Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them. New Haven maintains that it refused to certify the test results because it believed, for good cause, that it would be vulnerable to a Title VII disparate-impact suit if it relied on those results. The Court today holds that New Haven has not demonstrated “a strong basis in evidence” for its plea. Ante, at 2. In so holding, the Court pretends that “[t]he City rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white.” Ante, at 20. That pretension, essential to the Court’s disposition, ignores substantial evidence of multiple flaws in the tests New Haven used. The Court similarly fails to acknowledge the better tests used in other cities, which have yielded less racially skewed outcomes.

More as I read on the flip.

I know very little about health care delivery. But one thing I do know -- health care delivery is not a normal market and applying the standard free market platitudes to it is just plain silly. Greg Mankiw does that today and Paul Krugman has the appropriate response:

[E]conomists have known for 45 years — ever since Kenneth Arrow’s seminal paper — that the standard competitive market model just doesn’t work for health care: adverse selection and moral hazard are so central to the enterprise that nobody, nobody expects free-market principles to be enough. To act all wide-eyed and innocent about these problems at this late date is either remarkably ignorant or simply disingenuous.

I say disingenuous.

Speaking for me only

Gooooooool! USA! Clint Dempsey! USA 1, Brazil 0. Just 10 minutes in though. Big save by Tim Howard.

Watching this game reminds me of the late Steve Gilliard. Gilly and I "talked" soccer (by e-mail) all the time.

25 minutes, still 1-0 US. But US giving up way too much space. They have stopped going forward. Don't like it. Howard having to make save after save.

GOOOOOL!!! Donovan on a brilliant counter!! US 2, Brazil 0. At the Half - US 2, Brazil 0. Howard has been brilliant in goal.

Brazil scores in the first minute of the 2nd - 2- 1 USA, 30 minutes of regular time left. Brazil threatening to equalize almost constantly. In fact, Us gets a break, ball was across the line but goal for Brazil not signalled. US completely on their heels.

Howard saves the day again at the 70 minute mark. Still 2-1 US. Equalizer. Kaka on a great run. Rebound knocked in.It seemed inevitable. 2-2.

The collapse is complete. Brazil scores off a corner. 3-2 Brazil. FINAL.

Ceci Connolly's silly article boo hooing about Left pressure on Democrats on health care was notable for only one reason (Faux News Ceci predictably churns out this type of silly drivel), this quote from a self proclaimed "Democratic strategist:"

One Democratic strategist who is working full-time on health reform was apoplectic over what he called wasted time, energy and resources by the organizations. The strategist, who asked for anonymity because he was criticizing colleagues, said: "These are friends of ours. I would much rather see a quiet call placed by [Obama chief of staff] Rahm Emanuel saying this isn't helpful. Instead, we try to decimate them?"

(Emphasis supplied.) When an "activist" thinks a pol, ANY pol, is his friend, he proves he has no idea what he is doing. My bet is this is some Third Way shill. Matt Bennett possibly? Sounds like him.

Speaking for me only

I do not watch the Sunday Talk shows anymore. Do any of you?

This is an Open Thread.

In its article today on President Obama's consideration of an executive order authorizing indefinite detention of terror suspects without charges or trial, The Washington Post quotes an unnamed Adminsitration official as saying:

"Civil liberties groups have encouraged the administration, that if a prolonged detention system were to be sought, to do it through executive order," the official said. Such an order could be rescinded and would not block later efforts to write legislation, but civil liberties groups generally oppose long-term detention, arguing that detainees should be prosecuted or released.

The civil liberties groups I'm familiar with have all issued unequivocal opposition to indefinite detention. [More...]

The 7th Circuit ruled Thursday that a death row inmate has no right to be interviewed by the media. The majority opinion is here (pdf).

The majority opinion in Hammer v. Ashcroft, written by Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook, based its decision heavily upon the concept that the news media has "no constitutional right of access to prisons or their inmates beyond that afforded to the general public," citing Pell v. Procunier. However, in Hammer it was not a reporter, but a prisoner, who asserted a right to interview.

BOP instituted the ban in 2000 after Timothy McVeigh gave an interview to 60 Minutes. Hammer has quite an interesting history.

Since all federal death row inmates are housed at Terre Haute which is in the 7th Circuit, this ruling will apply to all of them.

Your turn.

This is an Open Thread.