1 in 3 teens are abused in their relationships

Court to rule on student loan debts

Posted By Lyle Denniston On June 15, 2009 @ 10:07 am In Orders and Opinions |

The Supreme Court, agreeing on Monday to hear four new cases, said it would decide whether an individual who owes on a student loan may wipe out the debt — at least partly — in a bankruptcy without showing that the debt posed an “undue hardship.” The case is United Student Aid Fund v. Espinosa (08-1134).

The Court also said it would spell out the rights of service station operators to sue to challenge the loss, or non-renewal, of their franchises from oil companies. The Court consolidated for review the cases of Mac’s Shell v. Shell Oil (08-240) and Shell Oil v. Mac’s Shell (08-372).

In a third case, the Court will consider putting constitutional limits on states’ authority to restore storm-eroded beaches along the ocean or lakeshores, when such action modifies private property boundary lines. (Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida (08-1151).

The fourth new case brought back to the Court an issue it had agreed to decide, but did not resolve, six years ago: when two companies agree to send their disputes to arbitration, may a court order that process to go forward as a class action, if the contract says nothing on that issue. The issue arises anew in Stolt-Nielsen S.A., et al., v. Animalfeeds International Corp. (08-1198).

In two rulings on the merits, the Court struck down, by a 7-2 vote, a tax imposed by the city of Valdez, Alaska, on cargo ships that used its port (Polar Tankers v. Valdez, 08-310), and it issued a unanimous ruling clarifying the findings that an immigration judge must make in order for a conviction of a crime to be used as the basis for deportation (Nijhawan v. Holder, 08-495).

The Court, moving toward a summer recess starting late this month, has 14 decisions to go. It announced Monday that it would sit again on Thursday, and more decisions are expected then.

The Court, in another of Monday’s orders, invited the U.S. Solicitor General to offer the federal government’s views on an issue under the bankruptcy law’s Chapter 13 — what is the formula bankruptcy courts are to use in deciding how much a Chapter 13 debtor has available to pay creditors who hold no security, when a repayment plan is being fashioned. There is no deadline for the S.G.’s response. The case is Hamilton, Trustee, v. Lanning (08-998).

Among the cases the Court refused to hear on Monday was a constitutional dispute over the federal government’s powers to set aside federal and state laws that interfere with the building of the long fence on the U.S.-Mexico border, part of an effort to restrict drug traffic and thwart terrorist movements. The Court had turned aside that controversy a year ago (07-1180). This time, the Justices examined the new case at eight separate private meetings, then still came to the conclusion that it would not rule on it. The case is El Paso County, et al., v. Napolitano (08-751). As usual, the Court offered no explanation for denial of review.

In another denial, the Court refused to hear a claim that anti-Castro sentiment was so rampant in the Miami, Fla., area that a group of five Cubans could not get a fair trial there on charges of spying for that government. The case had stirred a strong international reaction. It was Campa, et al., v. U.S. (08-987).

Filings in granted cases and the CVSG case are below the jump.

State getting IOUs ready

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

By JIM MILLER
Sacramento Bureau
Press Enterprise

SACRAMENTO - California Controller John Chiang warned Wednesday that the state would issue IOUs for the first time in 17 years starting next week unless the Legislature starts fixing an estimated $24 billion budget shortfall. Chiang's announcement came as a Democrat-crafted package of budget cuts failed on party-line votes, highlighting the Capitol's gridlock in solving the state's budget mess and avoiding a cash crisis in July.

Lawmakers are scheduled to be back in session this morning to try again. Legislative leaders told lawmakers to be ready for floor sessions throughout the weekend. Yet there were no signs Wednesday that lawmakers are anywhere close to an agreement on fixing the 2009-10 spending plan passed only four months ago. State revenue has nosedived since then and voters rejected several billion dollars in budget solutions. Wednesday's legislation contained about $11 billion in spending cuts. The Legislature's majority Democrats said they would oppose additional reductions to children's health, welfare-to-work, and in-home care programs. "We're the eighth-largest economy in the world. There is no excuse for us not being able to provide for our most vulnerable citizens," said state Sen. Denise Moreno Ducheny, D-San Diego, who represents part of Riverside County.

Republicans countered that the Democratic proposal would still leave the state spending billions more than it takes in. They also opposed higher taxes on oil and tobacco products that are part of a different bill that was not considered Wednesday. "You think we enjoy making cuts? You think we want to see little kids running around without shoes or food or anything like that?" said state Sen. Bob Dutton, R-Rancho Cucamonga. "The problem is that the way we've been going about this the last six or seven years wasn't the right way to do it," said Dutton, the Senate GOP's budget point person. Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has proposed billions in additional cuts and the elimination of some health and welfare programs. The governor has vowed to veto the Democrat-crafted legislation if it reaches his desk. The governor's office said Wednesday's debate "has cost the state valuable time and pushed us closer to insolvency."

IOU ahead

Wednesday's budget votes were the first since all-night legislative sessions in February yielded $41.7 billion in higher taxes, spending cuts and borrowing as part of a spending plan that was supposed to take the state through June 2010. The state's budget problems won't go away. California's projected tax revenue has fallen by billions. Last month, voters snubbed $6 billion in borrowing and fund shifts assumed in the February deal.

The state now is on pace to run out of money by July 28. Treasurer Bill Lockyer and Chiang -- both Democrats -- and Schwarzenegger have called on lawmakers to fix the budget by the end of June to allow enough time to arrange short-term loans.

Chiang's IOU announcement adds another level of urgency in the standoff. The state has not issued IOUs since 1992. Chiang's office delayed some payments during a cash crunch earlier this year but the problem is much worse now, his office said. "We need to conserve cash in order to make all the payments at the end of July," controller's spokeswoman Hallye Jordan said.

Bond holders, schools, and some other state programs get first dibs on state money. The state cannot issue IOUs to state employees because of a court ruling after the 1992 IOUs. The IOUs would go to companies doing business with the state, local governments, and some other recipients of state money. They later would be repaid in full, plus interest.

Issuing IOUs likely would worsen the state's credit rating. That would make it more expensive, if not impossible, to borrow money next month and thereafter. "If the state starts issuing IOUs, the damage to our credit rating could be substantial and long-term. It could take years to recover," Lockyer spokesman Tom Dresslar said. State Sen. Gloria Negrete McLeod, D-Chino, said Republican lawmakers should support the Democratic plan and avoid the IOUs. If the Republicans don't feel it's enough, well, they don't have a plan," she said. "Somebody said this is like giving a starving man a hamburger and he doesn't want it because it doesn't have fries." I want to solve the problem. I'd stay here 24 hours a day if I have to if we actually solve the problem," (S)he said.

Riverside County Board of Supervisors, others volunteer for 10 percent pay cuts

:00 PM PDT on Tuesday, June 16, 2009
By JULIA GLICK
The Press-Enterprise

All Riverside County supervisors and several other elected officials have volunteered for 10 percent pay cuts to help save money and to demonstrate solidarity with workers who are being asked to make concessions, it was announced Tuesday.

Supervisors Roy Wilson and Marion Ashley requested and were granted 10 percent pay reductions last week. They encouraged other elected officials to do the same. Supervisor John Tavaglione, who was traveling last week on county business, announced Tuesday he would join them. Supervisors Jeff Stone and Bob Buster followed suit. "We need to set the example for our employees in these very difficult times," Tavaglione said. "I think our board should be unanimous in that regard."

Supervisors will each see a cut of about $14,300 to their annual $143,000 salaries. The cuts would last at least one year and could be renewed based on the county's financial position. County Executive Officer Bill Luna next week plans to propose that managers take similar cuts to their pay and benefits, according to a county news release. Auditor-Controller Robert Byrd, Treasurer-Tax Collector Don Kent and Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder Larry Ward have also requested cuts.

The county is working to close a $130 million revenue shortfall in the fiscal year that begins July 1. It has sought concessions from several employee unions.In April, supervisors authorized Luna to impose cuts and furloughs on managers who are not represented by unions.

The county is running out of time on the budget, Luna said in a written statement. Hopefully, unions will recognize the budget crisis and agree to their share of cuts, he added. The county plans to adopt a budget June 30.

Riverside County Board of Supervisors, others volunteer for 10 percent pay cuts