Louisiana Considers Bill to Restrict Lawsuits

Source: Newsweek

Just as Louisiana politicians are about to get an up-close-and-personal look at the BP oil spill (it is approaching the shores an hour's drive from Baton Rouge, the state capital), they are considering a bill to "kneecap" all university environmental-law clinics in the state, which have led the way in challenging the historically cozy relationship between state politicians and the petrochemical industry.

Senate Bill 549 would prohibit clinics that receive any government funding from suing state agencies, companies, or individuals for failing to comply with state or federal laws or for damages (unless the legislature granted an exemption). So "while the Gulf churns with oil and the state mourns the deaths of 11 oil rig workers, the Louisiana legislature is being asked to serve up a favor to the state's petrochemical industry," leaders of the Clinical Legal Education Association (the country's largest association of law teachers) warn in a letter obtained by NEWSWEEK and hand-delivered this morning to Sen. Ann Duplessis, chair of the committee that will hold hearings on the bill next week, May 19. A denial of state funding to a university would essentially cripple it, leaving a school no choice but to close or severely curtail its environmental-law clinic.

Although the bill would apply to clinics doing work in civil litigation, domestic violence, and juvenile law, says CLEA president Robert Kuehn of Washington University School of Law, "the target is clearly environmental-law clinics, especially Tulane's." Indeed, the Louisiana Chemical Association, the trade group of chemical (including petrochemical) companies which got a favored senator to introduce the bill, was quoted in The New York Times last month saying that if law clinics "want to play hardball by trying to kneecap industry," then "we should play hardball and kneecap them with their state appropriations."

Read more: http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2010/05/11/louisiana-considers-bill-to-restrict-lawsuits.aspx

---

Corporate interests are at it again. The GOP is going to be with them for sure, the question is the Dems.

or are they just bought off so well that they do not care about the people they have taken an oath to protect?? I say it is time to start charging and arresting these people for crimes against the state. I look at this as treason.

All the elected officials are so worried about the terrorists and come to find the our elected officials are the real terror ists and it is time that they are called out on it and not just on election day but every day.

think they should be prosecuted. Otherwise, Congress should be indicted for participating in a conspiracy to favor the oil companies while obtaining large sums of money from big oil.

In reality, I don't think there is any way to indict Congress. Too bad.

and worked in the petroleum industry. Yes, they are that "bought and paid for."

This is an issue very close to me in that Mr. Laurel is a law student who will be doing clinic next year (probably in family law, with a focus on domestic violence and immigration). Also, a good friend just graduated from Tulane, and its environmental law clinic, in which he participated, is the one targeted specifically by this legislation.

We've entered the 'Twilight Zone'. Governor Barbour, would you like to comment? No? uh huh...

Un-liveable for marine life, And parts of the shoreline become wastelands.......Speechless

Source: Newsweek

Just as Louisiana politicians are about to get an up-close-and-personal look at the BP oil spill (it is approaching the shores an hour's drive from Baton Rouge, the state capital), they are considering a bill to "kneecap" all university environmental-law clinics in the state, which have led the way in challenging the historically cozy relationship between state politicians and the petrochemical industry.

Senate Bill 549 would prohibit clinics that receive any government funding from suing state agencies, companies, or individuals for failing to comply with state or federal laws or for damages (unless the legislature granted an exemption). So "while the Gulf churns with oil and the state mourns the deaths of 11 oil rig workers, the Louisiana legislature is being asked to serve up a favor to the state's petrochemical industry," leaders of the Clinical Legal Education Association (the country's largest association of law teachers) warn in a letter obtained by NEWSWEEK and hand-delivered this morning to Sen. Ann Duplessis, chair of the committee that will hold hearings on the bill next week, May 19. A denial of state funding to a university would essentially cripple it, leaving a school no choice but to close or severely curtail its environmental-law clinic.

Although the bill would apply to clinics doing work in civil litigation, domestic violence, and juvenile law, says CLEA president Robert Kuehn of Washington University School of Law, "the target is clearly environmental-law clinics, especially Tulane's." Indeed, the Louisiana Chemical Association, the trade group of chemical (including petrochemical) companies which got a favored senator to introduce the bill, was quoted in The New York Times last month saying that if law clinics "want to play hardball by trying to kneecap industry," then "we should play hardball and kneecap them with their state appropriations."

What has law professors across the country up in arms is not that the bill would hamper those who have suffered from the Deepwater Horizon blowout (still gushing out of control) from suing for damages. There are so many private attorneys handing out their business cards to shrimpers and fishermen and boaters along the gulf that the cards alone could almost sop up the crude. The real threat is that the bill would prohibit university legal clinics from challenging any future permits the state issues to oil, chemical, or other companies that seem to be flouting good environmental practices, Tulane University law professor Oliver Houck, who founded the university's environmental-law clinic in the late 1980s, told me. "If an oil rig is in state waters—within three miles of the shore—we couldn't challenge any permits issued by the state over issues such as environmental impact, or compliance with clean air and water laws," says Houck, a former federal prosecutor. "There is no public interest law firm in the state, so either the clinic brings these lawsuits or nobody does."


Read more: http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2010/05/11/louisiana-considers-bill-to-restrict-lawsuits.aspx

---

Great job Bobby Jindal! They need to get this bill passed in time to protect BP from environmental lawsuits by legal aid clinics. Great timing indeed.

:sarcasm:

:puke: We are now royally fucked by ecoterrorists.

to voting for folks like that, is to not vote. Or to write in a name. You're assuming here that these people have a choice. In reality, what were our options for State Senators, Governors and other public officials over the last few elections? Did we have some really great options we never heard of, much less knew their names to write in on the ballot? Absolutely. They don't get media attention mainly because they lack money or what is considered to be public appeal. You have to have a significant amount of money to stand a chance in most elections - advertising isn't free. Those who do use the federal or state funds that may be available in some cases still don't have the wealth to compete with those who have their own little fortunes (which is most elected officials in any position of which gives them significant influence).

You'd be surprised how many little elections Mickey Mouse has won because people are sick of electing idiots.

I have no trouble at all feeling sympathy for them.

Wow! I just learned something -- and I'm a former NOLA resident! I think we need to remedy that situation pronto. In fact, I'd be willing to work for it as a researcher!

Obama Dems are not a lot different than Hard Right Republicans when it comes to Industry..Obama is far better at the bullshit than any current Republican and that is unheard of. Republicans usually are the ones that excel at bullshit. "One Brigade a Month" ..."All combat troops out by end of August" and the list goes on and on.

Once again, some folks are passing off the idea that Bush and Republicans aren't that bad, because they are no different the Democrats now. Please.

1. 9/11 occurred as Republicans were already plotting to invade Iraq.
2. We invaded Iraq to stop WMDs.
3. Enron occurred early in Bush's presidency, which he was given a free pass.
4. The mortgage meltdown occurred at the end of Bush's presidency showing that Republicans did absolutely nothing following the Enron crisis.

"Obama Dems are not a lot different than Hard Right Republicans"

Really? You may not have noticed, but Republicans were voting as a solid block against allowing any debate on a finance bill. You may have also not noticed the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spending millions upon millions to oppose President Obama's initiatives.

There is this hysterical chatter that sanitizes Republicans and degrades Democrats while ignoring the reality taking place. It is absolutely fair to criticize President Obama and Democrats. BUT to say they are not much different ignores the attacks on immigrants in Arizona, the plots to invade Iran by neocons, and the opposition to mere increases in fuel efficiency by folks like Darrell Issa.