Law

Steve Tucker ended a ten-year federal prison sentence last year. He served his time for selling light bulbs–specifically grow lights–that, while themselves legal, were sold to some customers that were using them to grow marijuana. Even though he and his brother asked any customers who so much as mentioned marijuana to leave and refused to sell any products which had any visible references to marijuana, they were successfully prosecuted on conspiracy charges because they had knowledge that some of their customers were using their products to grow marijuana. His brother Gary, who was given a fifteen-year sentence that was reduced to ten after a successful petition to apply a change in policy from the U.S. Sentencing Commission, died of cancer at about the time his sentence was served. ...

Stuart Pivar, an “eccentric collector and inventor," has filed a $15 million libel lawsuit in New York against P.Z. Myers of the Pharyngula blog and Seed Media Group, publisher of Seed magazine and owner of ScienceBlogs, for referring to him as “a classic crackpot” in reviews of his book Lifecode. The complaint identifies Pivar as “an industrialist, inventor, and scientist,” the founder and chairman of the board of Chem-tainer Industries, and co-founder (with Andy Warhol) and original funder of the New York Academy of Art, “a classical graduate school for painting and sculpture, whose current patron is H.R.H. Charles, Prince of Wales.” It claims that Pivar regularly discussed his book with Stephen Jay Gould, who “was working on a refutation of the fundamentalist Darwinian theory of evolution." The complaint claims that Myers’ remarks led to Neil de Grasse Tyson withdrawing a review of the book and causing “considerable mental and emotional distress,” tortious interference with the plaintiff’s business relationships as a “scientist and scientific editor,” and “loss of book sales and diminished returns on ten years of funded scientific research in special damages” exceeding $5 million. The three claims of the complaint are, first, for declaratory relief in removing defamatory statements from the web and an injunction to prevent further such statements; second, for $5 million in special damages from the “tortious interference with business relations”; and third, for $10 million in damages for defamation, emotional distress, and loss of reputation. Seed Media Group may be able to have itself dismissed as a defendant on the libel claim via the safe harbor on online publication of defamatory statements by a user of a site, which has been successfully used as a defense by America Online (in Zeran v. AOL and Blumenthal v. Drudge and AOL) and ElectriCiti (in Aquino v. ElectriCiti). I suspect that Pivar will have a difficult time proving the claimed damages, as well as overcoming the truth defense to a defamation claim, but I’m curious to see if any lawyers (Timothy Sandefur?) have an opinion. The complaint looks a little odd and sloppy to me–it initially refers to “tortuous” interference rather than “tortious,” includes the odd paragraph about the Art Academy, and generally doesn’t appear to me to be a well-crafted case–but I am not a lawyer. The text of the complaint may be found here (PDF). P.Z. Myers’ reviews of Pivar’s book may be found here and here. Another review of Pivar’s book, authored by his friend Richard Gordon, may be found here. Pivar’s claim that Stephen Jay Gould would not have signed the NCSE’s “Project Steve” statement is discussed at CSI’s website. Christopher Mims has commented on the lawsuit at Scientific American’s blog, and Brandon Keim at Wired Science has a good summary of the dispute. UPDATE: I’ve just read through both of P.Z. Myers’ blog post reviews again, and I note that the alleged defamatory reference, “a classic crackpot,” appears in neither of them. In the earlier post, Myers says of Pivar’s book: “It seems no expense was spared getting it published, which is in contrast to the content, and is unusual for such flagrant crackpottery.” The later post does not contain the word “crackpot.” The post that Pivar is complaining about is another Myers post, titled “Pseudoscience by press release”, where Pivar himself commented several times, including to write, “I will ignore your insulting and intemperate language and concentrate on the substantive issues.” Apparently he changed his mind on that point. UPDATE (August 21, 2007): Blake Stacey has put together a nice chronological summary of who said what when, along with links to commentators. He points out that the “review” by Neil de Grasse Tyson which was on Pivar’s website was a quote created by taking one piece out of context and fabricating another–it’s no wonder that Tyson asked for Pivar to remove it. Andrea Bottaro summarizes the case with links to more sources about Pivar’s Stephen J. Gould claims at The Panda’s Thumb, and Timothy Sandefur weighs in with an evaluation of the legal issues at Positive Liberty, where he calls Pivar’s suit a case of “abus[ing] the legal process to try to intimidate and bully people for no good reason” and concludes that “Myers unquestionably has the right to call Pivar a crackpot, and we have the right to consider this lawsuit as proof of the fact." UPDATE (August 22, 2007): Ed Darrell at Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub has a nice article about how we determine what a “crackpot” is. Pivar seems to fit quite well. A commenter at Pharyngula has observed that Pivar’s attorney was just admitted to the New York Bar in 2005 and went to law school in the UK. UPDATE (August 24, 2007): Retired UCSD law professor Peter Irons (well versed in the law as it pertains to intelligent design) has written an excellent letter to Stuart Pivar which strongly recommends that Pivar withdraw his suit rather than quickly lose and become subject to monetary sanctions. Irons also says that he knew Gould from the 1950s until his death, and was his neighbor for many years, and that if Gould were alive today he’d probably have a viable defamation action against Pivar. UPDATE (August 29, 2007): Pivar has withdrawn his libel suit (see Dispatches from the Culture Wars and Pharyngula). But now his attorney, Michael Little, thinks he has a case against Peter Irons! Kudos to Pivar for doing the right thing. UPDATE (September 5, 2007): More entertainment regarding Michael Little may be found at Dispatches from the Culture Wars. ...

Julian Sanchez points out the staggering misrepresentation by those arguing that the recent increase in wiretapping power amounts to nothing more than an update of FISA procedures to reflect current technology. (Hat tip to Tim Lee at the Technology Liberation Front.)

At Talking Points Memo.

Ed Brayton at Dispatches from the Culture Wars reports on last week’s meeting of the American Bar Association, at which there was a panel of judges who have been recipients of threats after controversial unions. In every case, the threats came when decisions were made that upset the religious right.

The August 2007 issue of Acts & Facts (PDF, p. 5) reports that the Institute for Creation Research is relocating from Santee, California to Dallas, Texas. Their new location is the Henry M. Morris Center, a four-acre campus with three buildings fifteen minutes’ drive from DFW Airport. The ICR Graduate School, which now offers most of its courses online, will also relocate. The ICR Creation Museum will remain in Santee “for the foreseeable future." The ICR cites the “rising costs of living and working in southern California” as a key reason for the relocation. In Texas, its employees will have no state income tax to pay, and the cultural climate will no doubt also be much more receptive to the ICR. Texas is a state with a governor who has just appointed a creationist to head the Texas State Board of Education. It’s also a state that has introduced a bill to require the blatantly unconstitutional and proselytizing NCBCPS Bible curriculum in public schools, which the ACLU has already filed a lawsuit over in Odessa. UPDATE (April 24, 2008): The ICR Graduate School has been denied the right to issue Master of Science degrees in Texas by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. The full board will vote on the measure today, which is also expected to deny them the right to issue degrees. UPDATE: The full board agreed. ICR is not permitted to issue Master of Science degrees in Texas. UPDATE (May 12, 2008): The school board members in Odessa who voted for the unconstitutional NCBCPS Bible curriculum have all been voted out of office, in a repeat of the Dover, PA intelligent design disclaimer. ...

How corrupt is our Congress? They’re not even pretending to follow the Constitution. Talking Points Memo reports on how Rep. Don Young (R-AK) inserted an earmark to spend $10 million on a highway interchange in Florida (“Coconut Road”) to benefit real estate developer Daniel Aranoff, a few days after Aranoff raised $40,000 for Young. The really interesting part is not an Alaskan legislator doing political favors for contributions from a Florida developer, but the fact that the earmark was not in the version of the bill that passed the House or Senate–it was added to the bill during the enrollment process, after its passage but before being signed by President Bush. This is a process which is only supposed to allow correction of typographical and technical but non-substantive errors. ...

Both houses of Congress have passed a bill that updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to allow warrantless wiretapping when at least one party is a foreigner, without any requirement that the foreigner be suspected of having connections to terrorists. Wiretaps in such cases do not require approval of the FISA court, only of the attorney general and the director of national intelligence. As Tim Lee at Technology Liberation Front observes: So let me get this straight: the White House says “we think we should be able to eavesdrop on virtually any domestic-to-foreign phone call without court oversight, based on the say-so of one of the president’s subordinates.” And the Democrats response was “Hell no! Warrantless spying should require the say-so of two of the president’s subordinates!”Arizona’s Congressmen voted along party lines except for Harry Mitchell, who sided with the Republicans in favor of the bill, which provides for this expansion of powers for the next six months. (UPDATE, August 8, 2007: Actually, McCain didn’t vote on this bill at all, it’s another of his no-shows.) Kudos to Pastor, Grijalva, and Giffords for voting against this. (Hat tip to Technology Liberation Front and Stranger Fruit.) UPDATE (August 7, 2007): Ed Brayton at Dispatches from the Culture Wars has more on how this bill has gutted any oversight of what the Executive branch is doing. ...

I’m currently reading Pulitzer Prize winning author Tim Weiner’s 20-years-in-the-making history of the Central Intelligence Agency, Legacy of Ashes: A History of the CIA (2007, Doubleday). All of Weiner’s facts are sourced and on-the-record, including numerous recently declassified sources (some of which the government is attempting to re-classify). This review of the book by Chalmers Johnson, a former outside consultant for the CIA, does a good job of pointing out some of the highlights and arguing at the conclusion for the abolition of the CIA and letting the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research fill in for the foreign intelligence function. Weiner’s book points out how the CIA has been mismanaged since its creation from the ashes of the Office of Strategic Services, failing to come up with accurate information about major events of significance and leaving a wake of damage from failed covert ops designed to stop the spread of communism even where there was none. And it has regularly deceived presidents, massaged or fabricated intelligence information, and violated the laws of the United States. Johnson writes: Nothing has done more to undercut the reputation of the United States than the CIA’s “clandestine” (only in terms of the American people) murders of the presidents of South Vietnam and the Congo, its ravishing of the governments of Iran, Indonesia (three times), South Korea (twice), all of the Indochinese states, virtually every government in Latin America, and Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The deaths from these armed assaults run into the millions. After 9/11, President Bush asked “Why do they hate us?” From Iran (1953) to Iraq (2003), the better question would be, “Who does not?"This paragraph understates the case–Johnson goes on to describe how the CIA provided funding for Japanese and Italian politicians. Weiner’s book observes that the CIA helped a convicted war criminal become prime minister of Japan in 1957 and bribed the leading officials of the Liberal Democratic Party, which it helped maintain in power until the 1990s. CIA broadcasts from Radio Free Europe called for uprisings. To their surprise, former Hungarian prime minister Imre Nagy, who had been expelled from the Communist Party, announced on state radio a break with Russia, and within days formed a new coalition government in October 1956, but CIA Director Allen Dulles rejected him because he had been a communist and RFE attacked him. RFE broadcasts as much as promised U.S. assistance to Hungarian rebels, only to leave them to die on their own in November 1956 when the Soviets crushed the rebellion. Tens of thousands of people were killed and thousands shipped off to Siberia. Dulles lied to Eisenhower about the content of the broadcasts, transcripts of which only became available in English in 1996, and claimed the U.S. had done nothing to encourage the Hungarians. I’ve still got much to read in the book (I’m only up to 1958), but so far it is eye-opening and appalling. UPDATE (August 11, 2007): The CIA has issued a press release taking issue with Weiner’s book for its bias. UPDATE (December 16, 2009): The CIA has published a review critiquing the accuracy and reliability of Weiner’s book. ...

The New York Times editorialized that vice president Dick Cheney was the person who sent then White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and chief of staff Andrew Card to the hospital bedside of Attorney General John Ashcroft to try to get him to reauthorize the warrantless wiretapping program that the acting Attorney General James Comey and many Department of Justice staff (including Comey and FBI Director Robert Mueller) threatened to resign over. Larry King asked Cheney about it, and his response is that he had no recollection of such an event, and besides, he didn’t read the New York Times editorial. Sounds like a lie to me, and Larry King seems to suggest he thinks so as well. Talking Points Memo thinks they’ve identified a Cheney “tell." (And no, it’s not just that his lips are moving…)