EOC Week 6: Supreme Court Prayer

"Part of what we are trying to do here is to maintain a multi-religious society in a peaceful and harmonious way. And every time the court gets involved in something like this, it seems to make the problem worse rather than better." - Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan

The issue at hand is the Supreme Court's examination of proper guidelines for prayer in public meetings. The dispute rose from two Greece, NY residents complaining that having to sit through predominantly Christian prayers during Town Board meetings violated their 1^st amendment rights to religious freedom.

Oddly enough a case this sensitive and complex is something I consider that is pretty simple. In my opinion I feel that though you can’t control the religion of others, I believe that you shouldn’t be forced to participate in the religious acts of others in a public setting. Town Board meetings are already tense as they serve as the place where community issues are being disputed and debated. I think having secular religious prayers that specifically indicate one religion is off-putting to those who don’t share the same beliefs, therefore should never be considered to be a part of public forums.

"What troubles me about this case is that here a citizen is going to a local community board … and is immediately being asked, being forced to identify whether she believes in the things that most of the people in the room believe in, and it strikes me that this might be inconsistent with this understanding that when we relate to our government, we all do so as Americans, and not as Jews and not as Christians and not as nonbelievers." – Kagan

In all essence there are many things to consider, including the consideration of whether ministers and religious leaders should be policed. But in grand scheme of things, a public meeting isn’t about isolating others and focusing on one secular belief. It’s about bringing a diverse crowd together; and ironically, prayers no longer do that in this ever evolving world we live in.

EOC Week 3: Erin Brockovich

Erin Brockovich is a legal clerk and environmental advocate who was essential in the groundwater contamination case of Hinkley, CA versus the Pacific Gas & Electric company. As an employee of Edward L. Masry’s legal firm, she investigated the cause of illnesses from residents in the town, where the PG & E factory resided for decades. Her findings included that the groundwater in Hinkley, CA had been contaminated with hexavalent chromium, now a noted carcinogen, used by PG & E to prevent rust in the machinery.

“At issue was a carcinogenic chemical called hexavalent chromium, known more simply as “chrome 6.” The company had detected the chemical in a monitoring well north of its compressor station in Hinkley, California. Groundwater in the area flowed north - toward the homes, and businesses, of PG&E’s neighbors (who used groundwater for drinking purposes). And those neighbors, at least some of them, were getting sick.”

The case was settled in 1996 for a record $333 million, a record amount for the largest settlement paid in a direct-action lawsuit in US legal history. Ten years later, PG & E agreed to pay an additional $295 million to settle with 1,100 more people for hexavalent chromium related claims However, many of the plaintiffs believed that their settlement money were not enough.

“Now, many of the townspeople who sued complain their awards were smaller than they deserved. Some have even hired lawyers to get back excessive legal fees charged to children. They say the attorneys kept their awards for six months after the settlement money was delivered, and that they didn’t receive interest on it. They complain that there was little or no apparent logic behind the varying amounts of money individual plaintiffs received; some claim that the arbitrators never even looked at their medical records.”

In my opinion, I feel that the families of those affected by the contamination received enough in settlement. Though I don’t know the exact amount each plaintiff received, it’s understandable for those involved to feel they deserve more money, especially with such a large amount to be reimbursed into so many plaintiffs. It’s difficult to gauge how much financial help the settlement assisted the residents of Hinkley, CA but I’m sure such an amount won against a large company’s wrongdoings is nothing but positive.

EOC Week 2: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court returns for its new term. Several cases are on the docket. One case that stood out for me is one that looks over affirmative action at the University level.

Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action

This case discusses whether a state can amend its constitution to prohibit a public university from using race or sex to make admissions decisions. This case looks to overturn the previous decision made from the Barbara Grutter v Lee Bollinger decision of 2003, when the University of Michigan was allowed to use race as a factor in assessing applicants. In 2006, Michigan residents responded by passing a constitutional amendment banning the practice. Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action is looking to examine whether this state amendment voted on by its residents violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14^th Amendment. The last time the court talked about this issue was in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, where the Supreme Court decided that race relations to create adversity doesn’t violate.

“The court’s ruling in this case will affect Michigan and five other states – California, Arizona, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Washington – that have similar bans. Justice Elena Kagan has recused herself from the case, presumably because of her work on the case in 2009 as U.S. Solicitor General. If the court deadlocks 4-4, the 6th Circuit Appeals Court ruling overturning the Michigan ban would become the governing law.” - George E. Curry

In my opinion I agree that universities should be able to diversify their student body. But I’ve never been a fan of Affirmative Action as they promote the idea that a minority (whether racial or gender) isn’t able to achieve something without being chosen to improve a universities outlook. The root of the problem isn’t that universities are horribly disproportionate in diversity, the problem is that America’s public system doesn’t provide inner cities that are predominantly minority an equal opportunity to succeed academically. But that’s for another argument. 

EOC Week 1: Voice

The government name is Miguel. Call me MOOSE. I am a curator of sound and a creator of music. As a student I obsess over presentation and how a quality final product is supposed to sound. As a record producer, I am obsessed with the creation process of sounds. From sequencing drum patterns, to crafting melodies and groovy rhythms, I aim to advance the way songs and albums are put together.  As a songwriter, I use it as an avenue to tell the stories of the life I lived in and the world that I lived in. As an audio mixer, I’m meticulously working with levels and EQs to create the richest sound possible. I was predetermined to love it from birth. My earliest memories have to be the countless hours I spent as a child listening to classic MoTown, soul and funk ballads driving with ma dukes to her work. Much like extended exposure to radiation, music has changed my whole being. From the first rap I wrote n 4th grade, I dreamed of doing nothing else but to be considered as great as those musicians I looked up to. Today I am steadfast in achieving that dream. If it has taught me anything, it’s to stay true to myself. For as long as I live, sound will always be the truest thing I know.