STF na Mídia - MyClipp

STF na Mídia
Clipping Internacional - Dia 29 de Março à 04 de Abril de 2012

29/03/2012

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
29/03/2012
Corriere Della Será - Politica
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Corte Suprema de Justicia
Regione, accordo con la banca «Ripuliti» i titoli della Grecia, 4
Diário de Notícias Lisboa - Portugal
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Tribunal Constitucional
A nova era laboral, 5
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Internationale Strafgerichtshof
Zu Gast bei einem Außenseiter , 6
Süddeutsche Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Verfassungsgericht
Ärger mit dem Lückentext, 8
Süddeutsche Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obamas Gesundheitsreform in Gefahr , 9
Süddeutsche Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
"Es droht die Tyrannei", 11
3

Corriere Della Será/ - Politica, Qui, 29 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Corte Suprema de Justicia)
Regione, accordo con la banca «Ripuliti»
i titoli della Grecia
Riconvertiti i 153 milioni di euro investiti in bond di
Atene
MILANO - La Regione «ripulisce» il suo debito. I
«veleni» greci - entrati nella pancia del Pirellone dieci
anno fa con l'emissione del bond da un miliardo di
dollari - saranno riconvertiti in titoli italiani o tedeschi.
L'accordo con Ubs, una delle due banche che ha
gestito nel 2002 la collocazione sul mercato del bond
Lombardia, è a un passo. Da qualche giorno i legali
delle parti sono convocati davanti alla Corte Suprema
di Londra, dove un giudice mediatore sta tentando di
suggerire un'intesa. Gli istituti di credito devono
rispondere dei presunti costi occulti che avrebbero
limitato il guadagno del Pirellone nell'operazione. Sul
fronte opposto, la Regione. Che vuole sfruttare
l'occasione per togliersi dal portafoglio l'incubo del
default greco.
L'accordo finale con Ubs è questione di giorni, forse di
ore. I contenuti dell'intesa sono ancora top secret , ma
da Londra filtra più di una indiscrezione. I 153 milioni di
euro saranno trasformati gradualmente in buoni italiani
o tedeschi. Anche se non dovrebbe essere fissato un
limite temporale per il termine della «conversione», al
Pirellone possono sospirare di sollievo. Secondo i
rumors nell'accordo (che si firmerà entro lunedì) la
formula dovrebbe prevedere la totale sostituzione sul
mercato dei titoli a rischio. In cambio il Pirellone
rinuncerà all'azione legale.
Molto più incerta, invece, la transazione con il secondo
istituto coinvolto nell'emissione del bond Lombardia,
l'americana Merrill Lynch, che però non ha mai
investito in titoli ellenici. Nella conversione
Grecia-Germania/Italia, Ubs potrebbe lasciare sul
campo una cinquantina di milioni. Più o meno
l'equivalente del presunto guadagno occulto che
Regione Lombardia mette in conto all'istituto di credito
svizzero. La mediazione che si va chiudendo a Londra
assomiglierebbe in pratica a un risarcimento.
La vicenda del bond Lombardia ha una data precisa:
ottobre 2002. Nel fondo di ammortamento previsto per
rimborsare a trent'anni l'intero prestito obbligazionario,
finirono anche 153 milioni di euro lombardi investiti in
titoli di Atene. Dal 2009, col concreto rischio di default ,
quello scrigno ha cominciato a «scottare». Una spada
di Damocle, sotto forma dei famigerati derivati, che ha
minacciato fino a ieri i conti della Lombardia.
Era stata la Corte dei Conti la prima a lanciare
l'allarme. Due anni fa. «La composizione attuale del
sinking fund - scrissero i giudici contabili in una
relazione - vede la presenza di titoli emessi dalla
Grecia nella misura del 24,34 per cento del totale del
fondo accantonato sino al 31 dicembre 2009, titoli che
sicuramente sono in grado di fornire più alti rendimenti
agli intermediari finanziari ma, potenzialmente,
potrebbero comportare delle perdite per la Regione
Lombardia ove la Grecia ponesse in essere operazioni
sul debito». Per questo, la magistratura contabile, già
nel 2010 suggeriva di convertire i bond greci con altri
più sicuri.
Prima dell'azione legale davanti al foro londinese, il
Pirellone aveva provato a correre ai ripari
«congelando» 153 milioni di euro dal bilancio di
assestamento del 2012 a totale copertura del rischio
default dello Stato greco. Uno scrupolo, spiegarono i
tecnici dell'assessorato. Anche perché - hanno sempre
garantito dal Pirellone - Regione Lombardia ha
comunque guadagnato più di venti milioni di euro
dall'intera operazione.
Andrea Senesi
Andrea Senesi
4

Discutir se as novas regras do Código do Trabalho
estão ou não de acordo com os preceitos
constitucionais é assunto para alimentar apaixonados
debates políticos até que a instituição com a última
palavra, o Tribunal Constitucional, as chancele. E
mesmo que a redação final das novas disposições
venha a ser retocada em detalhe, a essência do novo
diploma mantém-se intacta: em Portugal, entramos
agora numa nova era nas relações laborais. Ela
caracteriza-se pela acrescida mobilidade do trabalho -
na medida em que se facilita e embaratece o
despedimento e se adaptam horários de trabalho às
necessidades da conjuntura económica.
Este modelo, aplicado com moderação e saber, tem
dado bons resultados há muito tempo na Europa mais
desenvolvida e, através de empresas estrangeiras que
atuam em Portugal, cá também. O poder acrescido
dos empregadores - sejam eles proprietários ou
gestores - pode aumentar bastante os ganhos de
produtividade e competitividade, o que, por sua vez,
pode ter consequências positivas, já que é condição
essencial para uma melhor repartição de rendimentos
entre capital e trabalho.
Mas é também necessário, se não mesmo essencial,
que os empregadores aceitem o princípio de que só
poderão atingir altos padrões de produtividade com
trabalhadores capacitados, bem remunerados - ou de
acordo com o que produzem -, envolvidos na vida da
empresa mediante um sistema adequado de
informação e consulta dos seus representantes, e
motivados para ir melhorando o seu nível de vida em
sintonia com aquilo que produzem.
Diário de Notícias Lisboa/ - Portugal, Qui, 29 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Tribunal Constitucional)
A nova era laboral
Esta visão aqui descrita será para muitos idílica. Até
porque choca com a dura realidade de 300 mil
microempresas, da iliteracia funcional de dois milhões
de assalariados, do quero-posso-e-mando que
corroeu o País durante meio século e ainda subsiste
em muitas cabeças mandantes. Lei modernizadora ou
lei da selva, eis pois a questão que permanece em
aberto e que é preciso fiscalizar.
Mudanças em Havana
A homilia do Papa Bento XVI perante cerca de meio
milhão de pessoas na Praça da Revolução, em
Havana, sintetiza o ciclo de transição que se vive em
Cuba. No local onde Fidel Castro falava horas e horas
no auge do seu poder, o Papa falou na linguagem
específica do Vaticano e do seu dirigente, mas
suficientemente claro para não haver dúvidas sobre o
que está em causa: a necessidade do regime
continuar a mudar. De forma gradual, os impacientes
dirão "lenta", mas real, com a aproximação entre "as
autoridades e os cidadãos, entre os cidadãos, entre os
crentes no Cristo e aqueles que nele não acreditam".
Um processo cujo início se pode colocar na viagem de
João Paulo II, em 1998, quando a Igreja começou a
atuar como um mediador entre a oposição e o regime.
A multidão presente naquela "emblemática praça" -
como se lhe referiu Bento XVI - revela a importância
da Igreja em Cuba e a dimensão das mudanças
ocorridas. Diminutas, para os impacientes da
oposição, mas que estão a assumir uma dimensão e
dinâmica que as torna irreversíveis. E isto é o mais
importante.
5

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Qui, 29 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Internationale Strafgerichtshof)
Zu Gast bei einem Außenseiter
Zum Gipfel der Arabischen Liga in Bagdad sind längst
nicht alle geladenen Gäste gekommen. Und doch ist
das Treffen ein Erfolg für den Irak: denn die
sunnitischen Machthaber reichen der schiitischen
Regierung in Bagdad damit zumindest wieder eine
Hand.
Von Rainer Hermann, Maskat
Dem Gipfeltreffen der Arabischen Liga in Bagdad
bleiben zwar viele Staats- oder Regierungschef fern.
Ein Erfolg ist er für den Gastgeber Irak dennoch. Denn
die beharrliche Diplomatie Bagdads in den
vergangenen Monaten zahlt sich nun aus. Nach einer
spürbaren Verbesserung der Beziehungen mit
Saudi-Arabien, Kuweit und Ägypten sind diese und
auch andere sunnitische Staaten noch immer nicht
bereit, die schiitischen Machthaber in Bagdad zu
umarmen. Aber sie reichen ihnen zumindest wieder
eine Hand.
So reist sogar der Emir Kuweits, Scheich Sabah al
Ahmad al Dschabir Al Sabah, an, dessen Land
Saddam Hussein 1990 überfallen und dessen Ölfelder
er in Brand gesteckt hatte. Er hatte den Irak seitdem
nicht besucht. Ebenso lässt sich der sudanesische
Staatspräsident Baschir trotz des Haftbefehls, den der
Internationale Strafgerichtshof einen Haftbefehl
erwirkt hat, die Gelegenheit nicht entgehen, nach
Bagdad zu reisen.
Die Staatsoberhäupter aus Saudi-Arabien, Qatar und
den Vereinigten Arabischen Emiraten nehmen
hingegen nicht teil. Zum einen geben sie
Sicherheitsgründe an, zum anderen wollen sie den
schiitisch dominierten Irak auch nicht zu stark
aufwerten. Immerhin schicken sie aber Delegationen
nach Bagdad, selbst Saudi-Arabien, das den Aufstieg
der Teheran nahe stehenden neuen politischen Klasse
im Irak mit viel Misstrauen verfolgt. Das Misstrauen
angesichts der nähe zu Teheran schwelt weiter,
Bagdad muss sich aber trotz der Absagen nicht länger
ganz ausgegrenzt fühlen.
Für den Schiiten Maliki wäre die Aufwertung auch eine
gute Gelegenheit, der eigenen sunnitische
Bevölkerung die Hand reichen, die ihm wegen seiner
Bevorzugung der Schiiten auf Kosten der Sunniten
weiter misstraut. Der irakische Außenminister Hoshjar
Zebari, ein Kurde, sagte der Irak sei lange isoliert und
ausgegrenzt gewesen, ein Schurkenstaat, der nicht
zur arabischen Welt gehört habe. Das sei eine der
wichtigsten Hürden dafür gewesen, aus dem Irak
wieder ein normales Land zu machen.
Zweifel, ob Arabische Liga nach Bagdad einladen
würde
Auch in diesem Jahr hatte es aber lange Zweifel
gegeben, ob die Arabische Liga überhaupt offiziell zu
dem Gipfeltreffen einladen in der irakischen
Hauptstadt würde. Eine neue Welle von blutigen
Anschlägen erschüttert seit Monaten den Irak, zudem
ist Bagdad, das sich in den Schoß der arabischen
Staatengemeinschaft zurücksehnt, bei Syrien aus de
Konsens der arabischen Staaten ausgeschert. Die
irakische Regierung hat den Sanktionen gegen Syrien
ebenso nicht zugestimmt wie der Aufforderung nach
einem Regimewechsel in Syrien.
In Bagdad selbst hat die irakische Regierung viel Geld
ausgegeben, um die von Jahrzehnten der
Vernachlässigung und Konflikten gezeichnete Stadt
schöner aussehen zu lassen. Mehr als 500 Millionen
Dollar hat sie sich das kosten lassen, sie pflanzte
Hunderttausende Bäume. 100 000 Polizisten und
Soldaten sollen verhindern, dass Al Qaida ihre
Drohung wahrmachen kann und während des
Gipfeltreffens einen großen Anschlag verübt. Die
Gäste sollen ungefährdet vom Flughafen in die Grüne
Zone fahren, auf einer Straße, die viele Jahre „Straße
des Todes“ geheißen hatte.
Arab foreign ministers meet in Baghdad © dpa
Der Generalsekretär der Arabischen Liga, Ahmed bin
Hilli (links) und der irakische Außenminsiter Zebari
geben am Mittwoch eine Pressekonferenz
Nicht weniger wichtig als die Vorbereitungen in der
Hauptstadt waren die diplomatischen Erfolge der
vergangenen Monate. Kurz vor dem Beginn des
Gipfeltreffens unterzeichneten Bagdad und Riad ein
Abkommen für einen Austausch von Gefangenen.
Daran ist insbesondere Saudi Arabien gelegen, um die
Saudis, die sich im Irak Al Qaida angeschlossen
hatten, in eigenen Gefängnissen zu wissen. Im
Februar hatten beide Länder ein Abkommen
unterzeichnet, in dem sie sich zur Zusammenarbeit bei
der Bekämpfung des Terrorismus verpflichten, und
Saudi Arabien hat erstmals seit 2003 wieder einen
Botschafter für den Irak ernannt, selbst wenn er
vorläufig in der sichereren jordanischen Hauptstadt
Amman residieren wird. Nun hofft Bagdad auf die
saudische Zustimmung, eine stillgelegte Ölleitung aus
dem Irak an den saudischen Hafen Yanbu am Roten
Meer wiederzueröffnen, so dass der Irak weniger Öl
durch die Meerenge von Hormus befördern muss.
6

Ebenfalls kurz vor dem Beginn des Gipfeltreffens hatte
der irakische Ministerpräsident Nuri al Maliki in Kuweit
ein Abkommen unterzeichnet, das die Streitigkeiten
beilegte, die die irakische Fluggesellschaft an der
Wiederaufnahme ihrer internationalen Flüge gehindert
hatte. Kuweit hatte stets damit gedroht, deren
Flugzeuge beschlagnahmen zu lassen, um
Reparationsforderungen zu begleichen. Nun wollten
sich die zwei Nachbarn zusammensetzen, um die
ausstehenden Grenzstreitigkeiten zu Land und zu
Wasser beizulegen, sagte der irakische
Außenminister. Nach Kairo überwies die Regierung in
Bagdad 408 Millionen Dollar für noch nicht bezahlte
Löhne an ägyptische Gastarbeiter aus der Zeit
Saddam Husseins.
Seit 1990 hatte es in Bagdad kein Gipfeltreffen mehr
gegeben, im vergangenen Jahr war wegen der wegen
mehrerer Gründe verschoben worden. Die meisten
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Qui, 29 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Internationale Strafgerichtshof)
arabischen Staaten waren wegen den Revolten in der
Region mit sich selbst beschäftigt. Die Golfstaaten,
welche das sunnitische Herrscherhaus in Bahrein
unterstützten maßregelten den Irak wegen dessen
Haltung zu den Protesten der schiitischen
Bevölkerungsmehrheit. Zudem schreckten viele wegen
der unzureichenden Sicherheit vor einer Reise nach
Bagdad zurück.
Die sunnitischen arabischen Staaten haben aber
erkannt, dass auch sie handeln müssen, wenn sie
verhindern wollen, dass der Irak ganz unter den
Einfluss Irans gerät. Zum einen hoffen sie nun,
Bagdads Haltung gegenüber Syrien zu revidieren, so
Iran der einzige Verbündete des Assad-Regimes
bleibe. Der saudische Außenminister Saud al Faisal
sagte vor dem Beginn des Gipfeltreffens, die zentrale
Frage sei, ob der Irak mit den Arabern sei oder mit
Iran.
7

Von Simone Boehringer
Süddeutsche Zeitung/ - Politik, Qui, 29 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Verfassungsgericht)
Ärger mit dem Lückentext
Verfassungsrechtler monieren eine unvollständige
Vorlage beim Gesetz für den permanenten
Euro-Rettungsschirm ESM. Der Punkt, der die Rechte
des Parlaments regeln soll, lautet bisher schlicht: (...).
Juristen erwägen deshalb eine
Verfassungsbeschwerde.
Wenn an diesem Donnerstag die
ESM-Gesetzesvorlagen in den Bundestag eingebracht
werden, gibt es eine große Lücke. An der Stelle, an
der die Beteiligungsrechte des Parlaments geregelt
werden sollen, steht bislang nur (...).
"Der Entwurf zum ESM-Finanzierungsgesetz ist
unvollständig. Er dürfte folglich gar nicht gelesen
werden", urteilt Christoph Degenhart,
Staatsrechtsprofessor an der Universität Leipzig. Er
steht mit seiner Einschätzung nicht allein. "Ich halte
dieses Gesetz nicht für verfassungskonform
eingebracht. Der Entwurf lässt bewusst Lücken in
wesentlichen Punkten und das verletzt Vorschriften
über das Gesetzgebungsverfahren im Grundgesetz",
meint Hanno Kube, Professor für Öffentliches Recht
an der Universität in Mainz.
Tatsächlich sollen die Details über die
Parlamentsbeteiligung im Laufe des
Beratungsprozesses vom Bundestag "selbst formuliert"
und hineingeschrieben werden, wie eine Sprecherin
des Bundestages bestätigt. Es handelt sich dabei um
genau jene Bestimmungen, die gewährleisten sollen,
dass der Bundestag nicht sein Haushaltsrecht ohne
verbindliche Rückkopplungen an den ESM abgibt.
Juristen erwägen Verfassungsbeschwerden
"Die Parlamentsbeteiligung ist nicht eine
nebensächliche Regelung, die man später noch im
Wege eines Änderungsantrags nachschieben kann,
sondern eine wesentliche Voraussetzung dafür, dass
das Gesetz verfassungsmäßig ist. Dies erfordert eine
vollständige Beratung in allen Lesungen", erklärt
Dietrich Murswiek, Staatsrechtler der Universität
Freiburg.
Murswiek ist schon mehrfach vors
Verfassungsgericht gezogen, zuletzt mit einer Klage
gegen den Rettungsschirm EFSF. Auch gegen den
ESM sind schon Beschwerden einiger Juristen in
Vorbereitung. Eine weitere wegen Formfehlern zu
riskieren, scheint in der ohnehin sehr emotional
geführten Debatte unverständlich. "Vermutlich will die
Regierung damit einer künftigen Kritik wegen
unzureichender Beteiligung des Deutschen
Bundestages bei der ESM-Gesetzgebung den Wind
aus den Segeln nehmen", mutmaßt Staatsrechtler
Degenhart. Sollte es zu einer gerichtlichen
Überprüfung kommen, könne sie argumentieren, der
Bundestag selbst habe die entsprechende Passage ja
im Beratungsprozess formuliert.
Und was meint Bundestagspräsident Norbert
Lammert, zu dessen Pflicht es gehört, die Rechte des
Parlaments zu schützen? Die Inhalte "werden im
Ausschussverfahren zusammengeführt", sagt eine
Sprecherin der SZ. Die ausformulierte Vorlage gebe es
nicht für alle, sondern nur für Mitglieder des
Haushaltsausschusses. Andere Abgeordnete müssen
am Donnerstag die (...)-Lücke beraten.
8

Süddeutsche Zeitung/ - Politik, Qui, 29 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obamas Gesundheitsreform in Gefahr
Von Reymer Klüver, Washington
Barack Obamas wichtigstes Reformvorhaben droht zu
scheitern: Die konservativen Richter am Obersten
Gerichtshof der USA stehen einer
Krankenversicherungspflicht sehr skeptisch
gegenüber. Es geht um die Frage, wie stark der Staat
in die Freiheit des Einzelnen eingreifen darf.
In der entscheidenden Anhörung zur
Verfassungsmäßigkeit der Gesundheitsreform von
Präsident Barack Obama haben die konservativen
Richter am Supreme Court der USA deutliche
Skepsis erkennen lassen. Sie überhäuften den
Vertreter des Weißen Hauses, Rechtsbeistand Donald
Verrilli, mit kritischen Fragen zur Einführung einer
Krankenversicherungspflicht für alle Amerikaner, wie
sie die Gesundheitsreform vorsieht.
"Wenn die Bundesregierung das machen kann, was
kann sie dann noch alles machen?", fragte Richter
Antonin Scalia und fasste so die Zweifel seiner
Kollegen zusammen. Damit ist höchst fraglich, ob das
Reformwerk die Billigung des Obersten Gerichtshofs
der USA finden wird.
40 bis 50 Millionen Amerikaner ohne
Krankenversicherung
Im Kern geht es in der Auseinandersetzung nicht
darum, ob die Krankenversicherungspflicht
wünschenswert wäre, um den schätzungsweise 40 bis
50 Millionen Amerikanern ohne Krankenversicherung
einen Schutz im Krankheitsfall zu verschaffen. Es geht
vielmehr um die Grenzen für staatliche Eingriffe in die
Freiheit des Einzelnen - konkret um die Frage, ob der
Bund in den USA die Bürger zwingen darf, eine private
Krankenversicherung abzuschließen.
Am Obersten Gerichtshof offenbarte sich indes die
scharfe Polarisierung entlang der Parteigrenzen, die
das Land in dieser Frage seit Jahren kennzeichnet. In
dem neunköpfigen Gremium werden fünf Richter dem
konservativen Flügel zugeordnet. Sie wurden von
republikanischen Präsidenten berufen. Vier gelten
hingegen als liberal; demokratische Präsidenten hatten
sie nominiert.
Der Supreme Court dürfte seine Entscheidung zur
Gesundheitsreform Ende Juni bekanntgeben, kurz vor
Beginn der heißen Phase des
Präsidentschaftswahlkampfs. Die Gesundheitsreform
ist das wichtigste Reformvorhaben des Präsidenten,
das er nur mit Hilfe eines politischen Kraftakts 2010
durch den Kongress gebracht hatte. Sie ist in der
US-Bevölkerung nicht gerade beliebt. In Umfragen
bewertet sie nur eine äußerst knappe Mehrheit als
positiv. Die Pflicht zur Krankenversicherung wird sogar
von einer breiten Mehrheit der Amerikaner abgelehnt.
Darf man die Bürger zwingen?
Die juristische Streitfrage betrifft eine Passage in der
amerikanischen Verfassung, die im Laufe der
US-Geschichte wiederholt im Zentrum grundsätzlicher
juristischer Auseinandersetzungen stand: die
sogenannte commerce clause. Sie gibt Washington
das Recht, wirtschaftliche Aktivitäten per Gesetz zu
regeln, die über einen einzelnen Bundesstaat
hinausgehen. Das sei bei Krankenversicherungen
eindeutig der Fall, so Verrilli, Rechtsbeistand der
Regierung. Die konservativen Richter waren davon
nicht überzeugt. Washington schaffe erst eine
wirtschaftliche Aktivität, indem es die Bürger zum
Abschluss einer privaten Versicherung zwinge, sagte
Anthony Kennedy. "Kann man wirtschaftliche Aktivität
erzeugen, nur um sie dann gesetzlich regeln zu
können?", fragte er pointiert.
Kennedy galt vor der Anhörung als einer von zwei der
konservativen Richter, die am Ende der Reform unter
Umständen zustimmen könnten. Auch der andere, der
Vorsitzende Richter des Supreme Court, John
Roberts, äußerte starke Vorbehalte. Wenn das Gericht
dem Staat erlaube, die Amerikaner zum Abschluss
einer Krankenversicherung zu zwingen, "wäre alles
möglich". Denkbar wäre zum Beispiel die Pflicht für
alle Amerikaner, ein Handy zu kaufen, merkte er
sarkastisch an.
Der Rechtsvertreter der Bundesregierung war bemüht,
diese Befürchtungen zu zerstreuen. Die Frage der
Krankenversicherung sei "einmalig", weil sie alle
Amerikaner betreffe und so enorme wirtschaftliche
Konsequenzen habe, sagte Verrilli. Richter Kennedy
schien das zu akzeptieren, schränkte aber ein: "Wenn
Sie das Verhältnis des Einzelnen zum Staat in dieser
einmaligen Form ändern, haben Sie da nicht die
schwerwiegende Verpflichtung die verfassungsmäßige
Berechtigung dafür nachzuweisen?"
"Katastrophe" für das Weiße Haus
9

Die vier liberalen Richter signalisierten mit ihren
Fragen, dass sie gewillt sind, die Reform als
verfassungsmäßig abzusegnen. Vor allem das
Argument der Bundesregierung fand ihre Billigung,
dass unversicherte Amerikaner die Kosten für ihre
Behandlung im Notfall bisher auf die Allgemeinheit
abwälzen könnten und es daher nur recht und billig
sei, sie daran durch den Zwang zur
Krankenversicherung zu hindern.
Süddeutsche Zeitung/ - Politik, Qui, 29 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Unter Experten galt es aber nach der Anhörung als
ausgemacht, dass die Skepsis der konservativen
Richter kein gutes Zeichen für die Reform sei. Der
angesehene Rechtsexperte des Magazins New Yorker
und des Kabelsenders CNN, Jeffrey Toobin, nannte
die Anhörung sogar eine "Katastrophe" für das Weiße
Haus.
10

Süddeutsche Zeitung/ - Politik, Qui, 29 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
"Es droht die Tyrannei"
Im Inneren des ehrwürdigen Supreme Courts geht es
um die Rechtmäßigkeit der Gesundheitsreform, dem
wichtigsten Gesetz von Präsident Obama. Die
konservativen Richter zeigen deutlich ihre Skepsis -
und draußen schreien Gegner und Befürworter von
Obamacare ihre Slogans heraus. Sie buhlen um die
Aufmerksamkeit der Journalisten und versuchen hin
und wieder auch, die Gegenseite zu überzeugen.
Auf Europäer wirkt das faszinierend und befremdlich
zugleich. Die Frage scheint Amy fast ein bisschen
peinlich zu sein. "Du kannst bestimmt nicht verstehen,
wieso wir Amerikaner über dieses Thema so sehr
streiten, oder?", will die Studentin der George
Washington University von mir wissen. Sie weiß, dass
jeder Deutsche krankenversichert ist. Auf dem Plakat,
mit dem sie vor das Gebäude des Obersten
Gerichtshofs gekommen ist, steht geschrieben: "We
are the only first world country where the working
people are afraid of their medical bills. Fear isn't
Freedom!"
Amy hat sich mit Freunden verabredet, um den neun
Richtern über die Medien zu zeigen, dass es viele
Amerikaner gebe, welche die von Präsident Barack
Obama durchgesetzte Gesundheitsreform
unterstützen. Tim hält ein "I like Obamacare"-Plakat
hoch: "Ich finde es aus moralischen Gründen falsch,
dass nicht alle Bürger dieses Landes abgesichert
sind", sagt er. Wie viele Studenten sorgt er sich darum,
was nach seinem Abschluss passiert: "Wenn ich
keinen guten Job finde, kann ich mir keine
Versicherung leisten und bin nicht mehr über meine
Eltern abgesichert."
Tim ist überzeugt, dass durch Obamacare der Staat
weniger ausgeben muss: "Heute befinden sich
mindestens 40 Millionen Amerikaner außerhalb des
Systems. Wenn sie die Schmerzen nicht mehr
aushalten, gehen sie in die Notaufnahme." Da die
Armen keine Routineuntersuchungen erhalten, steigen
die Behandlungskosten immens. Die Rechnungen
müssen schließlich die Steuerzahler übernehmen.
"Diese Leute ignorieren, dass sie auch heute schon für
die anderen mitzahlen", meint Tim kopfschüttelnd und
blickt zu einer Gruppe von Tea Party Patriots hinüber,
die dank ihrer Megaphone nicht zu überhören ist.
Auf den Schildern der 20 Aktivisten steht "No to
Obamacare", "We will not comply" ("Wir werden nicht
nachgeben") oder in Anspielung auf den neuesten
Blockbuster "Obamacare is the real Hunger Game".
Als ich mich im Windschatten einiger Fotografen
nähere, recken viele ein Exemplar der US-Verfassung
empor. "The constitution matters. The constitution
matters", brüllt ein Mann mit Cowboyhut und
Sonnenbrille ins Megaphon, hinter ihm wehen die
Stars and Stripes sowie eine Fahne mit dem
Tea-Party-Logo im Wind: Sie zeigt eine
Klapperschlange vor gelbem Hintergrund und den
Slogan "Don't tread on me".
Nein, auf ihnen herumtrampeln möchte ich nicht,
sondern nur ihre Argumente hören. "Zeigen Sie mir die
Stelle in der Verfassung, in der steht, dass jeder
Bürger eine Krankenversicherung braucht", ruft eine
junge Tea-Party-Anhängerin einer Rentnerin zu, die
sich aus dem Pro-Obamacare-Lager herübergetraut
hat. Vor den Augen und Ohren der Medienvertreter
entspinnt sich eine Diskussion. Die alte Dame
argumentiert ähnlich wie die Studenten mit Appellen
an Solidarität und Gerechtigkeit, doch die Gegnerin
ruft nur: "Wenn die Richter ihnen das durchgehen
lassen, dann droht die Tyrannei. Die Regierung wird
dafür sorgen, dass wir nicht mehr aussprechen dürfen,
was wir denken."
Damit ist der Grundkonflikt gut beschrieben, dem die
neun Richter unter Vorsitz von Chief Justice John
Roberts (mehr über dessen herausgehobene Stellung
in diesem SZ-Artikel) in der dreitägigen Anhörung
nachspürten. Denn es geht nicht um die Frage, ob
eine Krankenversicherungspflicht erstrebenswert wäre
und das Leben von Millionen Amerikanern verbessern
würde, sondern inwieweit die Regierung die Bürger
zwingen darf, eine private insurance abzuschließen.
"Was kann die Regierung noch alles machen?"
Antonin Scalia, einer der Richter, formulierte in
höflicheren Worten die Bedenken der krakeelenden
Obamacare-Gegner: "Wenn die Bundesregierung das
machen kann, was kann sie dann noch alles machen?"
Um vor dem Staatszwang zu warnen, hällt ein
Demonstrant ein Schild mit der Aufschrift "I don't like
broccoli" in die Luft - Obamacare-Gegner möchten
damit zum Ausdruck bringen, dass die Regierung die
Amerikaner in einem nächsten Schritt zwingen könnte,
das grüne Gemüse zu essen, um Krankheiten
vorzubeugen. Die Vertreter der Obama-Regierung
argumentieren, dass die Krankenversicherung ein
"einmaliger Fall" sei - und die unversicherten
Amerikaner bereits jetzt Teil des Systems seien, da die
Kosten von der Allgemeinheit übernommen würden.
Nach Ansicht von Rechtsexperten (mehr Infos in
diesem SZ-Artikel) deuten die kritischen Fragen
11

mehrerer Richter darauf hin, dass eine knappe
Mehrheit gegen die Rechtmäßigkeit des "individuellen
Mandats" stimmen könnte. Fünf Juristen, die von
republikanischen Präsidenten berufen wurden, gelten
als konservativ, während die übrigen vier Mitglieder
des Supreme Courts als progressiver gelten. Nach den
drei Tagen gilt es auch als denkbar, dass das Oberste
Gericht das gesamte Gesetz für nichtig erklären
könnte.
Die Demonstranten haben die Fragen der Richter
während der Anhörungen, die im Internet nachzuhören
sind (etwa auf der Website der New York Times),
genau verfolgt und geben sich siegessicher. "Ich
vertraue dem Gericht", sagt die engagierte Diskutantin
von den Tea Party Patriots. Sie stellt sich als Jill vor
und trägt einen Anstecker an ihrer Jacke, auf dem
geschrieben steht "Give me Liberty or give me death."
"Obama schert sich nicht um mich"
Sie werde im Juni wieder vor dem Gebäude des
Süddeutsche Zeitung/ - Politik, Qui, 29 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obersten Gerichtshofs stehen, erzählt mir Jill. Dann
werden die neun Richter ihr Urteil verkünden und
damit den Präsidentschaftswahlkampf beeinflussen.
Mit Sicherheit wird Jill dann nicht alleine sein:
Hunderte Journalisten hatten bereits vor dem Gericht
ausgeharrt, um die Auftritte von Republikanern wie
Rick Santorum (Video seiner Rede bei Politico.com)
und Michele Bachmann zu filmen.
Und ebenso wie die Obama-Fans werden wohl auch
der Abtreibungsgegner ("Obama schert sich nicht um
mich. Machen Sie sich nicht zum Komplizen von
Abtreibung.") und die Dame im Indianerkostüm und mit
Kriegsbemalung (eine Anspielung auf die erste Boston
Tea Party 1773) wieder da sein. Beide ließen sich
bereitwillig von Journalisten und Touristen
fotografieren und erklärten ihre Weltsicht. Eine weitere
Gelegenheit, Aufmerksamkeit auf sich zu ziehen,
werden sie nicht verpassen wollen.
12

30/03/2012

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
30/03/2012
Bizjournais - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Florida Supreme Court disciplines lawyers in Tampa, Sarasota, 17
Bizjournais - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Humana stock stays positive as Supreme Court hears health care case, 18
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Devas Chairman steps down, 19
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
TN approaches Apex court on Cauvery row, 20
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Babbio is Devas Multimedia’s new Chairman, 21
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Retrospective changes in tax laws unfair: Vodafone, 22
Correo Peru - Política
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Lourdes Flores sugiere que Fiscalía del Callao no investigue "chuponeo chalaco", 23
Corriere Della Será - Politica
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Corte Costituzionale
Jesolo, mai più torri giganti a meno di 300 metri dal mare, 24
El País - Internacional
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Derecho Constitucional
Tomás Gómez: "Si el Gobierno del PP insiste, habrá más movilizaciones", 25
El País - Internacional
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
The Constitution that never was, 26
El Peruano - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
San Martín pide a jueces evitar caer en el populismo, 30
El Peruano - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Extradición improcedente, 31
El Peruano - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Justicia intercultural en marcha, 32
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Verfassungsgericht
Aus dem Maschinenraum Wer kontrolliert die Wahlcomputer?, 33
La Repubblica - Cronaca
14

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Constitución
Nasce l"Edicola Italiana digitale accordo tra quattro grandi editori, 35
La Repubblica - Cronaca
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Constitución
La lezione arriva dell"Ecuador un fiume può fermare gli speculatori, 36
Le Monde - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Conseil Constitutionnel
Temps de parole : le CSA fait appel à la Française des jeux, 37
Le Monde - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Conseil Constitutionnel
M. Hollande et M. Sarkozy oublient l"inégalité fiscale, 38
Los Angeles Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Media giants score legal victory against foes of bundling channels, 40
Los Angeles Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Judge calls for near-complete release of UC pepper-spray report, 41
Los Angeles Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Slain student's attorney questions Pasadena police account, 43
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Supreme Court takes up healthcare in secrecy, 44
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Florida teen's body showed no sign of fight, funeral director says, 45
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Following Twitter, Seeking Red Flags, 46
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Taking Responsibility for Death, 48
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Broccoli Mandates and the Commerce Clause, 50
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Campaigning, Obama Is Mute on Supreme Court Hearings, 53
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
State Budget for 2012 Sails Through Albany, 54
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Tracking Athletes Online as Legal Red Flags Flutter, 56
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
15

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
Obama cites health care -- not high court case, 58
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
BIDEN: Confident on health care, 59
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama team puts up confident front on health care, 60
16

Bizjournais/ - News, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Florida Supreme Court disciplines
lawyers in Tampa, Sarasota
Two Tampa Bay area lawyers are among 22 recently
disciplined by the Florida Supreme Court .
David Nathan Finkelstein, a Sarasota lawyer, was
suspended for 20 days and will be on probation for one
year after reinstatement, the Florida Bar said in a
written statement.
He was accused of engaging in a pattern of
misconduct including neglect, lack of diligence and
lack of communication with clients. Finkelstein also
was accused of failing to use proper trust accounting
procedures.
Tampa lawyer Anett Lopez was suspended for 10
days. She notarized a client's family law pleadings in
the client's absence and misapplied funds for
payments of costs from the client, the release said.
Lopez also was accused of failing to maintain
minimum accounting of her trust account.
17

Bizjournais/ - News, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Humana stock stays positive as Supreme
Court hears health care case
Humana Inc. (NYSE: HUM) stock has remained
positive this week as the U.S. Supreme Court has
heard arguments in the health care reform case.
As Business First reported, Humana’s stock rose $2.90
today to finish at $91.54, up 3.27 percent from
yesterday. On Wednesday, the stock rose 53 cents.
Shares of health insurers surged Thursday after the
Supreme Court’s hearings raised hopes for a ruling
that helps the industry more than it hurts.
18

Business Line/ - Markets, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Devas Chairman steps down
Bangalore, March 30:
Devas Multimedia's Chairman, Dr M.G.
Chandrasekhar, has resigned, the company has said.
Mr Lawrence T. Babbio, who has replaced him, is a
senior adviser to private equity major Warburg Pincus.
Mr Babbio is the former Vice-Chairman and President
of telecommunications operator Verizon, besides
serving on the board of Hewlett Packard and Aramark,
a statement says.
The Bangalore-based Devas is being probed by the
Enforcement Directorate for its overseas investment
and equity dealings. A year ago, the Centre cancelled
a controversial 2005 contract for two satellites and use
of the S-band spectrum that it signed with ISRO arm
Antrix Corporation.
Devas started arbitration over it in London. Antrix and
Devas are now fighting over the jurisdiction of
settlement in both the Supreme Court and the
Karnataka High Court. The case is due in early April.
Dr Chandrasekhar relinquished the post effective from
March 16, 2012 but remains a Director of the
company. He was ISRO's Scientific Secretary in early
1990s and a top official in the defunct WorldSpace
digital radio company.
madhu@thehindu.co.in
19

Business Line/ - Markets, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
TN approaches Apex court on Cauvery
row
Chennai, March 30:
The Tamil Nadu Government has approached the
Supreme Court to prevent Karnataka from using the
Cauvery water stored in its four main reservoirs for
irrigation between February and May.
This demand is in line with the final order of Cauvery
Water Disputes Tribunal on February 5, 2007.
On March 21, 2012, the Tamil Nadu Government filed
the interim petition in the Supreme Court seeking an
order to stop Karnataka from using the water stored in
the Harangi, Hemavathi, Krishnaraja Sagar and the
Kabini during the summer months, said the Chief
Minister, Ms J. Jayalalithaa, in the Assembly today.
The Tribunal was constituted by an order of the
Supreme Court in 1991 to resolve the dispute over
the sharing the waters of the multistate river. The
Tribunal gave its final order 17 years later in 2007
spelling out how the water has to be shared between
Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Pondicherry.
But the order is yet to be implemented as the issue
has been taken to court. Responding to a calling
attention motion Ms Jayalalithaa said when Karnataka
exploits the water during the summer months Tamil
Nadu does not get its fair share at Mettur Reservoir for
its own use.
During the monsoons Karnataka lets out only surplus
water to Tamil Nadu after all its reservoirs are full.
Karnataka disregards the final order of the Tribunal by
using the reservoirs' water to irrigate crops during the
four months.
Between 2007-08 and 2010-11 Karnataka has utilised
41 to 73 thousand million cubic feet of water for
summer irrigation instead of storing it for the next
irrigation season. The final order allows Karnataka to
use 103 tmcft of water during the irrigation season but
the State has utilised over 203 tmcft, she said. Also,
Karnataka does not supply water for Tamil Nadu's
‘Kuruvai' paddy crop in June and July.
Ms Jayalalithaa said the final order could have been
implemented if it had been published in the
Government of India gazette. But all the States
concerned in the dispute and the Central Government
have approached the Tribunal for clarifications. Also,
Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala have filed appeals
in the Supreme Court and the Centre has also
impleaded itself in the case, she said.
She had met the Prime Minister in June 2011 in New
Delhi and submitted a petition that included demands
to publish the order in the official gazette and
constitute a Cauvery Regulatory Authority. She had
reiterated these demands in a letter to the Prime
Minister on October 17.
Pending implementation of the final order, the Tamil
Nadu Government's stand is that the interim order of
June 25, 1991, will be in force. The Cauvery
Monitoring Committee has also expressed the same
opinion in October 16, 2008, in its 23rd meeting.
The Karnataka Government's stand is that the interim
order has lapsed following the announcement of the
final order. Till the final order is implemented, it should
only be a temporary arrangement, a ‘Protem
Governing Regime'.
20

Business Line/ - Markets, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Babbio is Devas Multimedia’s new
Chairman
Bangalore, March 29:
Devas Multimedia’s Chairman, Dr M.G.
Chandrasekhar, has resigned, the company has said.
Mr Lawrence T. Babbio, who replaces him, is a senior
adviser to private equity major Warburg Pincus. Mr
Babbio is the former Vice-Chairman and President of
US telecommunications operator Verizon. He is also
on the board of Hewlett Packard and Aramark, the
statement said.
The Bangalore-based Devas, set up in December
2004, is being probed by the Enforcement Directorate
for its overseas investments and equity dealings.
A year ago, the Centre cancelled a controversial 2005
contract for two satellites and use of the S-band
spectrum that it signed with ISRO arm Antrix
Corporation.
Devas started arbitration in London over the cancelled
contract. Antrix and Devas are now fighting over the
jurisdiction of settlement in both the Supreme Court
and the Karnataka High Court. The case is due to
come up in early April.
Dr Chandrasekhar relinquished the post effective
March 16, 2012 but remains a Director of the
company. He was ISRO's Scientific Secretary in early
1990s and a top official in the defunct WorldSpace
digital radio company.
The statement said: “Devas Multimedia welcomes Mr
Babbio as Chairman of the board and will look to his
leadership as the company moves forward. The board,
with regret, has accepted Dr Chandrasekhar’s
resignation and noted its appreciation for the able
leadership rendered during his tenure as Chairman.’’
21

Business Line/ - Markets, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Retrospective changes in tax laws unfair:
Vodafone
New Delhi, March 30:
Vodafone on Friday said that the changes to the tax
regime as specified in the Finance Bill was grossly
unjust.
"The proposed changes seek to apply, on a
retrospective basis, tax liabilities which explicitly were
not countenanced under Indian law in force at the time
of the transaction between Vodafone and Hutchison,"
the British telecom major said in a statement.
"These facts have been examined in detail by the
highest court in the land, which delivered an
unambiguous judgment affirming that there is indeed
no tax due on the transaction – a conclusion reiterated
in the Supreme Court’s rejection of the Government’s
recent review petition," it added.
Vodafone said that since it was the acquirer in this
transaction, the company made no capital gain
whatsoever.
"The proposed changes in the Finance Bill
fundamentally contradict the firm conclusions of the
apex court and as such raise important constitutional
questions for India as well as widespread and
profound concerns in the minds of international
investors," Vodafone said.
The telecom company said that it was considering a
number of courses of action, both in India and
internationally.
22

Correo Peru/ - Política, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Lourdes Flores sugiere que Fiscalía del
Callao no investigue "chuponeo chalaco"
Lima - La lideresa del Partido Popular Cristiano (PPC),
Lourdes Flores, planteó hoy trasladar a la Fiscalía
contra el Crimen Organizado de ámbito nacional la
investigación de las interceptaciones telefónicas, pues
considera que la del Callao no asegura independencia
e imparcialidad.
Como se recuerda, la excandidata a la comuna limeña
fue víctima del "chuponeo" en la campaña electoral de
2010. A su juicio, lo más lógico sería que la
investigación esté a cargo de la fiscalía contra el
crimen organizado que vio el caso Business Track.
"Mi modestísima sugerencia a las autoridades (...) y
creo que esto estaría en mejores manos, lejos e
independiente del Callao, en la Fiscalía contra el
Crimen Organizado por las condiciones cómo se han
manejado en el Callao", consideró.
Flores Nano dijo que si se comprueba que hubo un
'chuponeo' organizado en el Callao, "nadie debe
quedar excluido de las investigaciones", más allá del
alcalde del Callao, Juan Sotomayor, involucrado en la
denuncia, y exfuncionarios municipales chalaco.
"De mis labios no saldrá una inputación a nadie, pero
lo importante es que se determine quién está detrás
de esa práctica ilícita, quién las financia y si se ha
usado dinero o recursos de entidades estatales como
el municipio o la región Callao", indicó.
Anotó que es "inaceptable" que en la vida política
nacional haya sido absolutamente normal en los
últimos 20 ó 25 años convivir con el 'chuponeo', pero
lo más grave -dijo- es crear una "red de defensa y
extorsión a partir de la construcción civil" y con el
apoyo de personas que estuvieron presas y ahora
operan como garantes de la seguridad. "Eso es
cuestionable", aseveró.
La secundan. El legislador Víctor Andrés García
Belaunde también se mostró a favor que la
investigación sea realizada fuera del Callao porque
aseguró que existirían vínculos entre las autoridades
regionales, ediles y judiciales del primer puerto.
Según dijo, esa cercanía tendría relación con los
pocos resultados encontrados en las investigaciones
de la Fiscalía y el Poder Judicial del Callao sobre
casos pasados y no aseguran que el tema se va con
imparcialidad.
"Hay demasiadas vinculaciones entre ellos,
donaciones, ayudas, y eso le quita independencia al
Poder Judicial o al Ministerio Público en el Callao.
Por eso, estas cosas a mi modo de ver se tienen que
ver en Lima", comentó el congresista. // Video:
Panamericana TV
23

Corriere Della Será/ - Politica, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Corte Costituzionale)
Jesolo, mai più torri giganti a meno di
300 metri dal mare
La Corte costituzionale dà ragione alla
Soprintendenza. Il Comune costretto a dire addio al
piano di «sviluppo verticale» di Kenzo Tange
JESOLO (Venezia) — Mai più torri e grattacieli a due
passi dal mare di Jesolo. Nemmeno una palazzina
oltre i dieci piani si potrà più costruire lungo la spiaggia
più celebre del Veneto, o almeno, non al di là del
confine ideale di via Bafile. La Corte costituzionale,
dopo un contenzioso infinito, ha infatti dato ragione
alla soprintendenza di Venezia: non si possono
costruire edifici sopra gli otto piani lungo il litorale nella
cosiddetta «fascia di vincolo dei 300 metri» ed ogni
intervento, fossero anche le ventole dell’aria
condizionata affisse sui balconi, deve ottenere prima
della realizzazione il via libera paesaggistico. Dopo
almeno sette anni di braccio di ferro tra
amministrazione comunale e soprintendenza, con
ricorsi al Tar e al Consiglio di Stato e persino una
norma scritta ad hoc dalla Regione per permettere a
Jesolo di continuare a costruire, i «giudici delle leggi»
hanno finalmente fatto chiarezza. E ora il Comune si
ritrova con una bella grana da risolvere, per di più nel
bel mezzo della campagna elettorale.
La sentenza della Corte non riguarda infatti solo il
futuro: anche le vecchie costruzioni, in base alla
sentenza, risultano ad oggi «abusive». Significa cioè
che ci sono almeno 400 tra piccoli e medi interventi
ufficialmente fuorilegge, che dovranno essere
sistemati in accordo con i tutori del paesaggio e dei
monumenti. «Da due anni a questa parte (dalla
sentenza del Consiglio di Stato, ndr.) abbiamo iniziato
a mandare tutte le pratiche in soprintendenza - spiega
il sindaco Francesco Calzavara - stiamo affrontando
uno a uno i vecchi interventi per trovare una soluzione
adeguata ». Il futuro di una Jesolo riqualificata e
rinnovata con grattacieli avenieristici modello Dubai
sulla spiaggia va però in pensione per sempre.
«Sacrificando qualche torre stiamo ridando comunque
un nuovo volto alla città - continua il primo cittadino -,
stiamo rivedendo i progetti con qualche revisione dei
volumi e altezze massime di 8 o 9 piani». Inoltre,
grazie al «caso Jesolo», su cui appunto la
soprintendenza veneziana si è impuntata dal 2005 in
poi, si fa chiarezza una volta per tutte sulle edificazioni
lungo le coste del litorale italiano.
Le sentenze delle Corte costituzionale hanno valore
nazionale, travalicano cioè i confini jesolani e
impongono che si intervenga ad esempio ad Amalfi
dove i casi di abusivismo sono ben più eclatanti di
quelli registrati a queste latitudini. A Jesolo tutto è nato
quando palazzo Ducale, sede della soprintendenza di
Venezia e litorale, si è mosso per verificare la
regolarità delle 5 torri approvate dal Comune nell’ottica
della «ricomposizione verticale di Jesolo» pensata, per
conto del Comune, nel master plan del giapponese
Kenzo Tange e che prevedeva tre zone di sviluppo: la
pineta con il verde e nuove torri, la portualità e la
residenzialità stabile tra Jesolo paese e piazza Drago.
La soprintendenza ha deciso di non dare il via libera
all’operazione e ha iniziato ad acquisire tutte le
pratiche edilizie arrivando a un faldone di circa 400
documenti che comprendono, ad esempio, anche lo
storico locale de divertimento estivo «Terrazzamare ».
Le vittorie prima al Tar e poi al Consiglio di Stato
hanno imposto un dietrofront a Jesolo. E appunto oggi
il suo sindaco non difende più le torri ma solo «lo
sviluppo urbanistico della cittadina». Tra il Comune e
la soprintendenza si è messa di mezzo la Regione che
nel maggio del 2011 ha approvato un articolo di legge
per sancire l’edificabilità di quel tratto di litorale. La
norma è stata impugnata e il 19 marzo la Corte
costituzionale ne ha dichiarato l’illegittimità perché
«assimilare aree vincolate a quelle non vincolate è
legislazione di competenza statale».
Gloria Bertasi
24

El País/ - Internacional, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Derecho Constitucional)
Tomás Gómez: "Si el Gobierno del PP
insiste, habrá más movilizaciones"
El líder del PSM y los sindicatos piden abrir una
negociaciación tras el 29-M
El presidente de la patronal madrileña cree que la
huelga "no fue un éxito en absoluto"
El día de la huelga ha pasado. Madrid vivió una
jornada de seguimiento intenso en los transportes, en
la industria, en los centros escolares… Decenas de
miles de madrileños (170.000 personas, según
estimaciones de este periódico) protestaron en
manifestación por la tarde. ¿Y ahora qué? Oposición y
sindicatos reclaman al Gobierno nacional (y también al
Ejecutivo de Esperanza Aguirre) que retireb la reforma
laboral y se sienten a negociar con las centrales,
mientras que el jefe de la patronal madrileña, Arturo
Fernández, sostiene que la huelga "no fue un éxito en
absoluto" y pide desechar nuevas movilizaciones.
El secretario general del PSM, Tomás Gómez, augura
que "solo hay un camino" para el Gobierno de Mariano
Rajoy: retirar "inmediatamente" la reforma laboral y
negociar. "Si el Gobierno del PP insiste, estoy
convencido de que habrá nuevas movilizaciones, no
se si serán huelgas u otro tipo de movilizaciones”, ha
señalado en un desayuno informativo. Para el líder de
los socialistas madrileños “sería un escenario
absolutamente impensable porque demostraría que el
PP está tan lejos de la ciudadanía y es incapaz de
entender a la sociedad".
Gómez, como sostiene el PSOE desde el pasado
domingo, considera que, además de la huelga, las
elecciones andaluzas y asturianas son los "primeros
reveses" para el Gobierno de Rajoy tras sus primeros
100 días al frente del Ejecutivo. La exministra
socialista Carmen Chacón, que ha asistido al
desayuno informativo de Gómez junto al exministro
José Blanco, también ve "un serio aviso" para el
Gobierno de los populares. "Lo más razonable que
puede hacer el Gobierno" tras las protestas de ayer
"es sentarse con los representantes de los
trabajadores y volver a repensar el mercado de
trabajo".
El líder de los socialistas madrileños ha propuesto un
"patriotismo ciudadano" para salir de la crisis que
"piense en los españoles, en la libertad y en el
bienestar concreto de la gente concreta", frente al
"patriotismo de bandera" de unas "élites apátridas"
que solo defienden su propio interés. Aguirre llamó
ayer "antipatriotas" a los sindicalistas, además de
augurar que "caerán como el muro de Berlín".
A la salida del desayuno informativo, se ha
pronunciado también el presidente de la patronal
madrileña CEIM y vicepresidente de la CEOE, Arturo
Fernández. Considera que "la huelga de ayer no fue
un éxito en absoluto, fue una huelga no general".
Ahora, pide, toca ponerse a trabajar: "Ya ha habido la
huelga, es un derecho constitucional que respetamos
pero ahora es el día después y el día después hay que
pensar en trabajar y conseguir que no haya 5.300.000
parados, que es la lacra de este país". Fernández pide
a trabajadores, empresarios y organizaciones dejarse
"de más huelgas, cuando el país está en una situación
límite".
Al secretario general de CC OO Madrid, Javier López,
le sorprende la visión del jefe de la patronal madrileña.
Asegura que en las distintas empresas que gestiona
Arturo Fernández hubo trabajadores que acudieron a
la huelga y que en el hospital Invanta Leonor de
Vallecas (en el que una empresa del portavoz de la
patronal gestiona la cafetería) se cumplieron los
servicios mínimos. Fernández tiene un imperio
hostelero con más de 4.000 empleados y 180
establecimientos. Tanto López como José Ricardo
Martínez, secretario general de UGT en Madrid, han
ofrecido a la presidenta regional una mesa de diálogo
para hablar de empleo.
25

El País/ - Internacional, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
The Constitution that never was
March 19 marked the 200th anniversary of Spain's first
magna carta, promulgated in Cádiz
As happened in 1812, the event has been largely
overlooked
Two hundred years ago, Spain was immersed in a
chaotic and particularly brutal war to expel the forces
of Napoleon Bonaparte, which had been occupying the
country since 1808.
That year, to secure control of the country, Napoleon
persuaded Spanish aristocrats to overthrow the king,
Charles IV, and replace him with his son Ferdinand.
Napoleon then promptly removed him, handing the
throne to his brother, Joseph Bonaparte. A puppet
Spanish government approved the new king, but the
coup sparked a popular uprising that soon spread
throughout the country, throwing together an unholy
alliance of nobles and priests intent on protecting the
ancien regime, backed by the masses.
As resistance to the French spread, Britain joined in,
sending Arthur Wellesley, better known as the Duke of
Wellington, to land a force in Portugal. Britain also
provided naval support to the Spanish and
Portuguese, having already sunk much of the French
fleet three years earlier at Trafalgar.
The war dragged on, and got bloodier. By 1812, some
350,000 French soldiers were tied up in Spain, but had
still achieved little more than a stalemate, their supply
lines constantly harried by Spanish guerrillas.
With the Spanish king Napoleon's hostage in Bayonne,
the anti-French forces had created a de facto
government in exile, called the Supreme Central Junta,
which saw itself as simply holding the fort until the
Bourbon monarchy could be restored. Meanwhile, in
1810, Spain's legislative assembly, the Cortes
Generales, had taken refuge in the southern port of
Cádiz on the Atlantic coast. The city was under siege,
but was kept supplied by British warships.
When the Cortes convened in the Real Teatro de las
Cortes in Cádiz on September 24, 1810, it was divided
into two groups: a smaller number of representatives
who wanted to maintain the ancien regime, and a
majority, who saw the historic opportunity to create a
more liberal political system: a constitutional
monarchy.
With the king held hostage in France, parliament took
refuge in Cádiz
The representatives who gathered at Cádiz were a far
more liberal lot than most of their peers, and they
produced a document more revolutionary than might
have seen the light of day in Spain were it not for the
war. The liberals wanted equality before the law, a
centralized government, a modern civil service, reform
of the tax system, an end to feudal privileges and the
recognition of property rights.
Three basic principles were soon ratified by the
Cortes: that sovereignty resides in the Spanish Nation
(spelt out in capital letters in the original document);
the legitimacy of Ferdinand VII as King of Spain; and
the inviolability of the deputies. On the basis of these
three principles, the first steps towards a political
revolution were taken - until then, Spain had been
ruled as an absolute monarchy. The proposed
Constitution would reduce the power of the Crown, as
well as that of the Catholic Church and the nobility. It
also established principles of freedom of thought by
banning the inquisition and allowing for a free press.
Work began on the new Constitution, and within 18
months, it was promulgated; on Saint Joseph's Day,
March 19. "The object of the government is the
happiness of the nation," it declared optimistically. No
wonder that Spaniards later dubbed it "La Pepa,"
referring to it with the diminutive of Josephine.
One of the first examples of conservative liberalism, it
came to be called the "sacred code" of the branch of
liberalism that rejected the French Revolution. After
the American Declaration of Rights and the French
Constitution, it was only the third document of its
kind, and would serve as a model for the liberal
constitutions of several European and Latin American
nations.
Two centuries later, distracted by a worsening
economic crisis, the prospect of deeper spending cuts,
and a looming general strike, today's Spaniards might
be forgiven for a lack of enthusiasm for their forebears'
achievements.
Even in Cádiz, which has restored the San Felipe
Oratory, where the Constitution was promulgated,
and which has organized a series of exhibitions and
events throughout the year, there is little excitement.
Cádiz has the highest unemployment level in Spain, at
35 percent.
The idea was to have a constitutional king; in France
26

they cut his head off"
"Things are bad; there is a lot of unemployment. All we
need is a bit of work, and this would be the best place
to live in Spain. The shipyards have all but closed
down, and the container ships go to Algeciras. There's
no money and people are having a hard time," says a
fisherman down on the quayside. "Let's hope the
celebrations liven things up a bit," he adds.
Over at a small shop by the Cathedral, the owner is
franker still: "The Constitution can go to hell! They
have better things to spend money on, like creating
jobs," says the owner.
The Popular Party's Teófila Martínez, who was elected
mayor for the fifth time last year, says that she could
have done with some financial support from the
Andalusian regional government, as well as from
Madrid. Sipping on an aperitif in a local bar, she
explains:
"We have been preparing the city for this for years.
The place was very run down. We are aware of our
responsibility, but let me tell you that in my opinion,
this is a celebration that has more to do with the
government, with the state, than with just the city. A
city can't do something like this on its own, however
hard it tries. This goes beyond the local realm,"
Martínez says.
"We put in a bid for European Capital of Culture, but
there was no joy there, so we asked to be the
Iberoamerican capital of culture, and we were awarded
that. We have put together a program which is modest
and within our means. We always understood that this
wasn't something we could or should do without Latin
America, and the region will be represented over the
year through all of the arts," the mayor continues. She
says that she wants this year to provide an opportunity
not only to put Cádiz on the tourist map, but also for
the city to host conferences on the wider implications
of the Constitution.
"We want Cádiz to be a place where ideas are
discussed. We are hosting a conference organized by
young people from eight different Latin American
countries and where they will discuss their
constitutions and the process by which their countries
became independent, and the role that the
Constitution of 1812 actually played in these
questions."
The government's objective is the happiness of the
nation: Article 13
What to do with Spain's empire in the Americas was a
El País/ - Internacional, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
key issue for the men who wrote the 1812
Constitution. Representatives from what is today
Mexico and Peru were present, but there were no
delegates from the regions now known as Venezuela
and Argentina. Most of the delegates were criollos,
people of Spanish ancestry born in the Americas, and
some wanted to grant the vote to the black and
mixed-race population, a decision that would have
granted the Americas a majority in future Cortes.
Predictably, the Spanish deputies wished to limit the
weight of the Americans in any future Cortes and
opposed these proposals. Nor were the peninsular
Spanish inclined toward any kind of federalism, which
would have granted greater self-rule to the American
possessions; most peninsular deputies, therefore,
shared the absolutists' inclination toward centralized
government.
The importance of the Americas was clear from the
start: Article 1 of the Constitution reads: "The Spanish
Nation is the collectivity of the Spaniards of both
hemispheres."
The Constitution defined the Spanish Monarchy as
the union of all the Spanish possessions around the
world and defined as Spaniards all white or native
persons born in both hemispheres or naturalized there.
This changed the legal status not only of Spaniards in
Spain, but also of people of Spanish ancestry and the
indigenous peoples of the Americas from being
subjects of an absolute monarch to the citizens of a
nation rooted in the doctrine of national, rather than
royal, sovereignty.
Nevertheless, the authors of the Constitution wanted
to avoid giving American citizens any chance to create
political structures in any way proportional to their
population numbers.
The question of what to do with the Americas raised
the issue of race far beyond those of peninsular Spain.
Article 22 explicitly recognized the civil rights of free
blacks and mixed-race people. But Article 29 deprived
them of automatic political rights.
It is ironic that the century and a half that followed was
so violent and unhappy"
Events in the Americas were already moving quickly:
after several decades during which its influence waned
over its colonies, Spain soon found itself up against a
well-organized coalition of landowners and locally born
merchants and professionals in Latin America able to
rally the masses to its calls for independence. Within a
decade, the region would have shaken off Spanish
rule.
27

The 1812 Constitution was an inspiration to the future
leaders of the emerging states of Latin America. One
provision of the Constitution, which provided for the
creation of a local government (ayuntamiento) for
every settlement of more than 1,000 people, using a
form of indirect election that favored the wealthy and
socially prominent, came from a proposal by Mexico's
Ramos Arizpe, who would later play a key role in his
country's independence struggle.
This provision benefited the bourgeoisie at the
expense of the hereditary aristocracy both in Spain
and in the Americas, where it was particularly to the
advantage of the criollos, who came to dominate the
ayuntamientos. It also brought in a certain measure of
federalism through the back door, both in Spain and
overseas: elected bodies at the local and provincial
level might not always be in lockstep with the central
government.
Spanish novelist Arturo Pérez Reverte, who has
written an engaging account of the events surrounding
the writing the Constitution in El asedio (or, The
siege), says that the authors of the magna carta
achieved much, but could have achieved more.
"The Cádiz Cortes were a major achievement,
something quite fundamental, but it was also a missed
opportunity. The liberals were unrealistic. They did not
understand what was going on around them; they did
not understand the art of the possible. The
Constitution required other conditions to work. The
country was in the hands of fanatical priests, a
rapacious king and a reactionary aristocracy, and a
piece of paper wasn't going to change that. Which is
why it didn't last. We mistook our enemy: it wasn't the
French, the enemy was within, as time would later
show. The Constitution is a wonderful, failed
adventure, and at the same time, it is the seed of so
many other successful projects that followed it. Spain
would never be the same afterwards."
Despite its influence, the Constitution barely saw the
light of day. When Ferdinand VII was restored to the
throne in March 1814, he abolished it. Even during
those two short years, it was never really in effect,
given that much of Spain was under French military
occupation, and the other areas were in the hands of
interim administrations that were more concerned
about seeing off the French than on implementing a
new constitution.
Between 1820 and 1823, the document was dusted off
again, and then enjoyed another brief period of use
between 1836 and 1837. Since the 1837
Constitution, Spain has had six more, including the
El País/ - Internacional, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
present one, written in 1978 after the death of General
Franco.
Teófila Martínez says that it is important to celebrate
the Constitution, saying that today's politicians could
learn from the example of their forebears. "I am very
proud of them: they were able to overcome their
differences and create something for the benefit of
Spain. It was a hugely important document - if only we
were capable of something like that today."
José María García León, a local historian and expert
on the Constitution of 1812, who has written
extensively on the subject, praises Martínez for her
work, but says that the bicentenary has been a missed
opportunity.
"The city authorities have made a serious effort to
inform people about this, and I think that people here
are, on the whole, proud. What has disappointed me is
that there hasn't been more done at the national level.
They have pretty much left us alone to get on with it.
But this shouldn't be a local thing, and I'm not just
talking about the money. How come there hasn't been
anything on the television about the Constitution,
about the events of those times, no films, or major
piece of music to celebrate this? The Ministry of
Culture has not gotten involved to the extent it should,
and neither has the Royal Academy of History. And the
Royal Family has been largely silent: we shouldn't
forget that this was a document allowing for a
constitutional monarchy; in France they cut the king's
head off."
It has to be said that the commemorations have been,
well, low key. On March 19, Prime Minister Mariano
Rajoy addressed a gathering of the great and good,
among them King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofía, in the
San Felipe Oratory in Cádiz, noting in a less-than
inspired speech: "The government and all state
institutions are called on to step up their efforts to
create conditions under which all citizens enjoy
wellbeing."
"The constitutional reformers of Cádiz taught us not to
be afraid of making reforms but to be sufficiently
decisive and brave to make them," the conservative
prime minister concluded.
King Juan Carlos, for his part, said: "In the work
carried out in Cádiz in a difficult historic period, we can
find the necessary reference point and inspiration to
tackle the serious difficulties that our country is going
through at present."
The historian García León says that while the French
and the Americans held huge nationwide celebrations
28

to commemorate their respective Constitutions, "Spain
has failed. We could have used it as a way to bring us
closer to Latin America. The Foreign Ministry has done
nothing, neither has the Instituto Cervantes. They
consider the Constitution of 1812 more important in
Mexico than over here."
He blames the previous two national administrations of
Prime Ministers Zapatero and Rajoy for failing to plan
ahead. "It's our first Constitution!" he shouts. "An
opportunity for us to say to the world, 'Listen, we were
already democrats, 200 years ago. We're not
newcomers to this.' I think that we have thrown away a
golden opportunity. We have failed to take advantage
of this, something that could have captured the world's
attention this year. And why? Laziness and ignorance.
The previous governments just couldn't be bothered.
There was nobody with the talent or the energy to
make something of this."
There are plenty of people in Cádiz who agree with
León, and think that the bicentenary could have been
put to greater use in helping the city and its province's
economies; that it could have been what the Expo was
to Seville or the Olympics to Barcelona in 1992.
The widely held view is that things have been handled
El País/ - Internacional, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
badly. Some point to the consortium set up to organize
the celebrations; others to the political fighting between
the Socialist Party-controlled regional government and
the Popular Party administration in Cádiz that has
seen both sides organize their own events.
Leaving aside the squabbling and petty fighting
between politicians, García León highlights one of the
Constitution's more attractive qualities: "It insists on the
importance of happiness. This is something that
seems very modern to us, very new, and this is
something that Brazil's former president, Lula, has
talked about. It is a bitter irony that the century and a
half that followed was so violent and unhappy," he
says.
"The objective of the government is the happiness of
the nation, given that the goal of all societies is none
other than the wellbeing of the individuals it is
composed of," reads Article 13.
With an electorate looking at a future that is going to
get a lot worse before it gets better, and with a raft of
highly unpopular cuts still to implement, perhaps it is
not so surprising after all that today's government
decided to play down the celebrations.
29

El Peruano/ - Noticia, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
San Martín pide a jueces evitar caer en el
populismo
Debate debe centrarse en líneas propositivas
razonables, manifiesta
Exhortó a magistratura a actuar con mayor celeridad y
eficacia
La actual discusión y demanda de la magistratura para
mejorar el sistema de remuneraciones de jueces
superiores, especializados y de paz letrado debe
centrarse en líneas propositivas razonables, sin caer
en populismos ni peticiones que, finalmente, no van a
ser aceptadas por su falta de sustento económico y de
lógica jurídica.
Así lo sostuvo el titular del Poder Judicial, César San
Martín Castro, quien afirmó que en este caso el
objetivo es lograr un régimen remunerativo y
previsional, razonable, equilibrado y que haga justicia
a un cuerpo de funcionarios y autoridades, que tiene
un carácter estable y constituye una línea de carrera
fundamental para la vigencia del Estado
Constitucional.
Fue al inaugurar la Primera Reunión Anual 2012, que
congrega hasta hoy a los 31 presidentes de las cortes
superiores de justicia del país. En la cita, la autoridad
exhortó a los jueces de todo el país a enfrentar con
decisión y voluntad los retos que plantea
insistentemente la ciudadanía y ser más céleres y
eficaces en el servicio de impartición de justicia.
Durante el cónclave, al que asisten también jefes de
oficinas de administración de estas cortes, el
magistrado expresó que la celeridad demanda
medidas imaginativas para una descarga procesal
efectiva. Agregó que durante su gestión se aprobaron
nuevas directivas, se impuso un nuevo modelo
organizacional de carácter gerencial y se diseñó un
proyecto de inversión para alcanzar en tres o cuatro
años la "carga cero".
En este contexto, remarcó que la descarga efectiva
empezó el año pasado, cuando se resolvieron cien mil
causas más (diferencia entre las que ingresan y
egresan anualmente).
"Hay un stock final que tenemos que trabajar como
proyecto de inversión", remarcó el presidente de este
poder del Estado.
Durante esta jornada, los jefes de las oficinas de
administración distrital, por separado, también
debatirán e intercambiarán ideas relacionadas con sus
funciones.
Seguridad ciudadana
Respecto de la exigencia ciudadana de mayor
eficacia, San Martín dijo que ésta se presenta en los
ámbitos de seguridad ciudadana y determinadas
decisiones judiciales que tienen efecto sobre políticas
públicas, especialmente de procesos asociados a la
violencia, libertades indebidas no bien pensadas, y
argumentación contradictoria.
Por otro lado, manifestó que se atribuye a los jueces
"un uso perverso y equivocado, y una jurisprudencia
errática de medidas cautelares en ámbitos como la
pesca y acciones que las comunas dictan sobre
locales que funcionan indebidamente".
Al respecto, aseveró que la judicatura ya lo está
enfrentando con propuestas legales, como la
regulación al uso de medidas cautelares en amparos,
el procedimiento de ejecución coactiva y el cambio de
leyes penales.
30

Extradición improcedente
El Poder Judicial declaró improcedente ayer el
pedido de extradición del expresidente Francisco
Morales Bermúdez formulado por la justicia argentina
por su presunta participación en el llamado Plan
Cóndor, que perseguía a los opositores de las
dictaduras de la década de los setenta.
La instancia judicial del país sureño encausó a
Morales Bermúdez por los presuntos delitos de tortura,
asociación ilícita y secuestro en contra de 13
periodistas y opositores políticos a su régimen que
fueron sacados del país y enviados a Buenos Aires el
25 de mayo de 1978, según reseñó ayer la página
web del Poder Judicial.
El Peruano/ - Noticia, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
31

El Peruano/ - Noticia, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Justicia intercultural en marcha
Mejora la relación del Estado con comunidades, dice
Javier La Rosa
Sin embargo, advierte que algunos abogados se
resisten al cambio
El coordinador del área Pueblos indígenas del Instituto
de Defensa Legal (IDL), Javier La Rosa, destacó la
decisión del Poder Judicial de impulsar la justicia
intercultural, admitiendo las medidas correctivas que
se imparten en las comunidades indígenas para
establecer el orden, pero sin utilizar la prisión.
En ese sentido, dijo que es muy importante que el
Poder Judicial interactué con los otros sistemas de
justicia que existen en el país.
¿La justicia intercultural es posible en el Perú?
–En estos momentos es una aspiración. Lo ideal es
que se haga realidad en el marco de la relación que
hay entre el Estado, a través del Poder Judicial, con
el ejercicio de justicia que hacen en el Perú los
pueblos indígenas. Hoy, la justicia intercultural es una
apuesta.
Otros sectores reconocen la visión intercultural en su
gestión desde hace años, ¿por qué se demoró el
sector Justicia?
–En el ámbito de las diversas disciplinas del
conocimiento, la rama del derecho es una de las más
conservadoras. La mayoría de abogados y
magistrados se resiste al cambio porque es más
cómodo actuar con nuestros códigos y la ley en
nuestras manos. Pero la realidad va más allá de las
leyes.
Como sociedad civil, ¿de qué manera aporta el IDL
para que la justicia intercultural se consolide?
–Desde 2010 trabajamos en tres zonas del país, que
son: Cusco, San Martín y Cajamarca. Una zona
quechua, otra amazónica y la siguiente rondera.
Fomentamos procesos de diálogo y cooperación entre
magistrados del Poder Judicial y dirigentes de las
comunidades que sirvieron para colaborar en la
elaboración de un proyecto de ley, de criterios
generales, que se refiere a la justicia intercultural, y se
encuentra en la Comisión de Justicia.
¿Cuál es el resultado de esa experiencia?
–Hemos aprendido que no podemos partir de la idea
de que existe solo una justicia indígena o comunal en
nuestro país. Un comunero de Cusco, Puno o
Amazonas no tiene una visión de justicia semejante
con un rondero.
Que detrás del concepto de interculturalidad están el
diálogo y la interacción permanentes. La justicia
intercultural tiene la finalidad de desmontar visiones y
estereotipos.
Los nuevos aportes
El abogado de Justicia Vida– IDL Javier La Rosa dijo
que las escuelas de justicia intercultural que promueve
el Poder Judicial y en donde participan magistrados y
dirigentes comunales para intercambiar sus prácticas y
visiones de justicia, tienen que institucionalizarse.
"Es necesario que esos espacios de diálogo y
encuentro sean reconocidos por el Estado para que su
convocatoria no dependa de la buena voluntad de los
magistrados de turno."
El experto destacó la hoja de ruta que elaboró al
respecto la comisión de trabajo sobre justicia indígena
y justicia de paz que preside el magistrado Víctor
Prado Saldarriaga.
32

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Verfassungsgericht)
Aus dem Maschinenraum Wer
kontrolliert die Wahlcomputer?
Das Bundesverfassungsgericht hat den Einsatz von
Wahlcomputern in Deutschland gebremst. Mit guten
Gründen, wie ein Blick nach Estland oder Indien zeigt:
Manipulationen am Wahlergebnis sind durchaus
möglich.
Der Einzug der Piraten in das zweite Landesparlament
und die Vaporisierung der saarländischen FDP haben
ein kleines politisches Erdbeben ausgelöst,
Politikwissenschaft und Medien ergingen sich in
Erklärungsversuchen und Analysen. Eine
Selbstverständlichkeit in unseren Breiten: Niemand
äußerte Zweifel an der Legitimität des Ergebnisses, an
der korrekten Wiedergabe des Wählerwillens.
Doch man muss nicht in allzu ferne Länder blicken, um
diese Gewissheit bröckeln zu sehen. Denn die
Digitalwelt zieht in das Geschäft mit den Wählern ein -
langsam, aber beharrlich. In Deutschland ist den
Herstellern von Wahlcomputern und
Online-Wahlsystemen seit 2009 der Weg verbaut. Das
Bundesverfassungsgericht sprach ein Grundsatzurteil
über die Transparenz und Nachvollziehbarkeit der
Ergebnisermittlung bei Wahlen. In seinem Urteil legte
es fest, dass das Wahlverfahren so beschaffen sein
muss, dass jeder, auch ohne besonderen technischen
Sachverstand, das Zustandekommen des
Wahlergebnisses prüfen kann.
Manipulation innerhalb von sechzig Sekunden
In Deutschland waren zuvor mehrere Bundesländer
einige hundert Wahlcomputer der holländischen Firma
NEDAP in Gebrauch. Die Manipulation dieser Rechner
innerhalb von sechzig Sekunden wurde in einem Video
veröffentlicht. Der Hack war leicht nachzuvollziehen,
jeder Informatikstudent konnte ihn nachmachen. Und
die Versuchung der Technologie ist trotz dieser
grundlegenden Vorgaben aus Karlsruhe nicht nur bei
Hackern groß.
Die rund 80.000 deutschen Wahllokale sind für die
meisten zwar nur der Ort, wo sie ihrer politischen
Gesinnung Ausdruck verleihen können, einige wenige
sehen darin aber vor allem einen zukünftigen Markt,
den es zu erobern gilt. Wahlcomputer werden als
modern und zeitgemäß beworben, schließlich macht
man heutzutage alles mit dem Computer. Und was
zählt schon die Überprüfbarkeit einer Wahl mit
Papierzetteln gegen die immer wieder betonten
Vorteile der Schnelligkeit der Auszählung und der
Einfachheit der Bedienung?
Unwillig, unabhängige Prüfungen zuzulassen
Gerade die großen Demokratien wie die Vereinigten
Staaten, Indien und Brasilien setzen ganz auf
Wahlcomputer. Während Indiens Wählermillionen ihre
Stimme an einem erstaunlich primitiven digitalen
System aus dem vorigen Jahrhundert abgeben, setzt
Brasilien auf relativ moderne Rechner, die im eigenen
Land entwickelt wurden. In beiden Ländern gibt es
nach den seit Jahren immer wieder berichteten
Sicherheitsproblemen bei allen internationalen
Wahlcomputer-Herstellern einen ausgesprochenen
Unwillen, unabhängige Prüfungen der Systeme
zuzulassen. Zwar wurde in Brasilien eine Evaluation
unter Einbeziehung externer Experten durchgeführt,
jedoch waren die Bedingungen für den Zugang zum
System und die Publikation der Ergebnisse so
restriktiv, dass viele der auf das Thema spezialisierten
Forschergruppen abwinkten.
In Estland entschieden sich bei den letzten
Parlamentswahlen 2011 immerhin 24,3 Prozent der
Wähler, lieber zu klicken, als ihr Kreuzchen auf Papier
zu machen. Dass ihre Stimmen in einem
geschlossenen System landen, das Wähler und
Wahlbeoachter nicht durchschauen können, wird der
Bequemlichkeit und Zeitersparnis untergeordnet. Das
kleine baltische Land hatte schon in den neunziger
Jahren Internetwahlen auf den Weg gebracht, der
mühevolle Gang in entlegene Wahllokale sollte der
Vergangenheit angehören. Estland setzt nicht nur bei
Wahlen auf Modernitätsattribute: Alles soll digital,
schnell, vernetzt und effizient geschehen. Jeder
Bürger hat eine eigene digitale Identitätskarte, die
natürlich auch für die Online-Wahl als Nachweis der
Wahlberechtigung verwendet wird.
Mutig und durchaus risikoreich
Nicht nur unter Experten wird das estnische
Wahlexperiment als ausgesprochen mutig und
durchaus risikoreich eingeschätzt. Die innenpolitische
Lage ist nicht einfach angesichts der Nähe zu
Russland und einer großen russischsprachigen
Minderheit, die sich benachteiligt fühlt. Etliche
umstrittene Abstimmungen in der Vergangenheit fielen
knapp aus. Doch öffentlich diskutiert werden zwar
Wahl-Spendengelder aus Russland, nicht aber das
intransparente digitale Abstimmungssystem. Auch
nach dem landesweiten Angriff auf die estnischen
33

Netze im April 2007, das weithin dem Kreml angelastet
wird, brach zwar eine Diskussion um die digitale
Kontrolle der Strom- und Kommunikationsnetze los,
dass aber Angreifer Wahlergebnisse manipulieren
könnten, wurde ausgeblendet.
Von einer Motivation für eine digitale
Wahlmanipulation seitens interessierter Kreise muss
man dennoch ausgehen. Dass sie durch auffällige
Ergebnisse nach nordkoreanischem oder
weißrussischem Zuschnitt leicht zu erkennen wäre,
nimmt aber niemand an. Ein Wahlmanipulierer wird
geschickter vorgehen. Die nötigen Talente und das
Wissen, um komplexe digitale Sicherheitssysteme zu
überwinden, gibt es in Russland reichlich. Etliche der
besten Experten für Computersicherheit - und ihre
Überwindung - kommen aus Putins Reich, das den
Verlust der baltischen Staaten noch nicht recht
verwunden hat.
Weitere Artikel
Auf der anderen Seite des Pazifiks sind die Vorwahlen
der Republikaner in vollem Gange, die politischen
Kontroversen werden mit einer für europäische
Verhältnisse enormen Härte ausgetragen. Daher
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Verfassungsgericht)
blicken viele Beobachter mit Sorge auf die
anstehenden Präsidentschaftswahlen in den
Vereinigten Staaten. Eine vorsätzliche Verfälschung
der Ergebnisse mit Hilfe von Tausenden
Wahlcomputern im ganzen Land wird bereits seit dem
Jahr 2000 heiß diskutiert. Untersuchungen der
Geschehnisse konnten nur begrenzt erfolgen, denn
eine Papierquittung für die abgegebenen Stimmen gab
es nur selten. Wie die Computer rechneten, blieb
deren Geheimnis - und das der Hersteller. Das
verkündete Ergebnis konnte faktisch nicht geprüft,
Zweifel somit weder bestätigt noch ausgeräumt
werden.
Die Unterschiede in der politischen Kultur in den
Vereinigten Staaten und Deutschland sind augenfällig.
Die Bedeutung der Anerkennung der Legitimität von
Wahlergebnissen in den Augen der Wähler dürfte sich
im Laufe des Wahljahres drastisch zeigen. Zweifelnde
Ungewissheit, ausgeliefert der Gnade der
Computerhersteller in den Vereinigten Staaten, ruhige
Normalität mit Papier und Stift in Deutschland, trotz
des anstehenden Umbruchs im Parteiensystem.
34

La Repubblica/ - Cronaca, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Constitución)
Nasce l"Edicola Italiana digitale accordo
tra quattro grandi editori
MILANO - Per 150 anni l"edicola è stata (e ancora è)
un"istituzione delle comunità locali e nazionale, che ha
contribuito a costruire e consolidare. Nonostante i
giornali abbiano sempre avuto una diffusione
insufficiente in Italia, la presenza capillare delle
edicole sul territorio ha consentito a milioni di persone
d"informarsi e formarsi opinioni: una pluralità
dell"offerta che è il cemento della democrazia, come
usano dire editori i giornalisti. Poiché in quel doppione
virtuale della realtà che è la rete nelle sue varie
articolazioni mancava il corrispettivo dell"edicola sotto
casa, i quattro principali gruppi italiani di editoria
d"informazione - Il Sole 24 Ore, L"Espresso,
Mondadori e RCS - hanno deciso di collaborare per
crearne una, che alzerà la propria saracinesca - per
non abbassarla più - tra qualche mese. La lettera
d"intenti per la costituzione di un Consorzio per la
realizzazione di un"edicola digitale è stata infatti
firmata pochi giorni fa. Ciò consentirà agli utenti/lettori
di acquistare semplicemente, in un unico luogo online
e in formato digitale, i prodotti giornalistici preferiti. Il
nome scelto per il servizio è il più semplice da
memorizzare: Edicola Italiana.Il Consorzio sarà aperto
a tutti gli editori che vorranno farne parte. L"obiettivo
principale dell"iniziativa dei gruppi promotori è infatti
realizzare un"operazione di sistema: un"iniziativa
capace di affiancarsi
ai sistemi distributivi dei player globali e diventare
punto di riferimento degli editori di prodotti editoriali
digitali a pagamento in lingua italiana, creata per offrire
al pubblico un"esperienza semplice ed uniforme nella
scelta, nell"acquisto e nella fruizione.Grazie
all"adozione di tecnologie multipiattaforma, l"utente
potrà accedere ad Edicola Italiana da qualsiasi tablet,
personal computer o dispositivo mobile delle ultime
generazioni (smartphone) e trovare esposti sugli
"scaffali digitali" i giornali e gli altri prodotti di tutti gli
editori consorziati. Gli editori che ancora non hanno
una versione digitale dei propri quotidiani o periodici
potranno, se lo desiderano, utilizzare lo "sfogliatore"
che verrà messo a disposizione dal Consorzio. La
gestione operativa del servizio sarà affidata ad un
partner tecnologico e commerciale
indipendente.Grazie a Edicola Italiana, gli editori
puntano ad ottenere una piena trasparenza di rapporto
con i propri clienti nonché il controllo delle proprie
politiche commerciali, a partire dalla piena libertà nella
definizione dei prezzi.
35

La Repubblica/ - Cronaca, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Constitución)
La lezione arriva dell"Ecuador un fiume
può fermare gli speculatori
ROMA - A quasi settant"anni dalla dichiarazione
universale dei diritti dell"uomo è giunto il momento di
pensare di estendere le tutele anche a tutto ciò che
rende possibile la vita degli uomini: la natura. Un primo
importante passo lungo questa strada è stato compiuto
dall"Ecuador che nel 2008, con un referendum, ha
votato l"inserimento nella Costituzione di cinque articoli
per i diritti della Madre Terra. Questo caso pilota, di cui
in Italia si è parlato ancora molto poco, sarà al centro
di un convegno organizzato venerdì 30 marzo a
Bergamo da Inntea in occasione del lancio
dell"edizione italiana del libro di Cormac Cullinan,
"Wild Law: I Diritti della Natura" (Piano B Ed, maggio
2012). Al seminario parteciperà anche Mari Margil,
avvocato statunintense che ha assistito la battaglia
giuridica degli ambientalisti ecuadoregni. Alla vigilia del
suo arrivo in Italia, Mari Margil ha accettato di
rispondere ad alcune di .Cosa vuol dire inserire in
Costituzione i diritti della natura?"Significa che la legge
riconosce, ritenendoli vincolanti e da far rispettare, i
diritti degli ecosistemi e delle comunità naturali. Questi
diritti comprendono il diritto ad esistere, a rigenerarsi e
ad evolvere. Così, se un attività (mineraria, estrattiva o
simile) dovesse interferire con la capacità di un
ecosistema (un fiume, un foresta o altro ancora) a
continuare ad esistere e a rimanere in salute, allora
quell"attività
violerebbe le leggi e non potrebbe essere
consentita".E il suo coinvolgimento come nasce? "La
fondazione Pachamama di Quito è venuta a
conoscenza del lavoro che stavamo facendo negli
Stati Uniti e ci ha chiesto di andare in Ecuador per
incontrare i membri dell"Assemblea costituente.
Abbiamo incontrato anche il presidente
dell"Assemblea Alberto Acosta, che nel frattempo era
diventato un forte sostenitore dei diritti della natura.
Così ci è stato chiesto di stilare una bozza che
l"Assemblea ha poi fatto propria, ampliandola. Il nuovo
testo è stato infine ratificato da un referendum
nazionale nel 2008".
A fronte delle crescenti pressioni economiche
sull"ambiente, non c"è il rischio che rimangano
dichiarazioni di intenti inapplicabili?"Nel 2011 in
Ecuador ci sono state le prime cause intentate in base
alla nuova norma costituzionale. In uno di questi casi,
il fiume Vilcabamba si è potuto costituire parte civile
per difendere la sua possibilità di prosperare dalla
minaccia della cementificazione. Alla fine il fiume ha
vinto la causa. Una vittoria storica, la prima riportata
direttamente da un fiume in un"aula di tribunale". Non
è però certo il primo caso di speculazione bloccato con
motivazioni ambientali."E" un caso diverso. Le leggi di
salvaguardia ambientale esistenti nel resto del mondo
continuano a trattare la natura come una proprietà,
priva di diritti propri. Così, se l"attività umana minaccia
la capacità di un ecosistema di esistere e rimanere in
salute, non c"è un diritto specifico da poter difendere.
Queste leggi ambientali tradizionali, basate sul
concetto di proprietà, legalizzano, tollerandola, una
certa quantità di minaccia all"ambiente. Detto altrimenti
accettano, regolamentandola, la possibilità che un
ecosistema possa essere usato o sfruttato. Ora le
cose cambiano, e la natura cessa di essere
considerata una proprietà, diventando un portatore di
diritti autonomi. Grazie a leggi scritte per dare la
possibilità alla gente e alle comunità di far rispettare
questi diritti per conto degli ecosistemi".Si fa fatica a
far rispettare diritti riconosciuti e formalmente accettati
da molto più tempo, siete sicuri che i tempi siano
maturi per quelli degli ecosistemi?"C"è un movimento
in corso comunità per comunità, paese per paese.
Naturalmente i tempi saranno lunghi, proprio come è
accaduto per il riconoscimento dei diritti delle donne,
dei bambini, dei lavoratori. Sono necessari
cambiamenti radicali non solo nelle leggi, ma anche
nella cultura. In giro per il mondo c"è però una
crescente consapevolezza, sia tra la gente che tra i
governanti, del fallimento delle leggi tradizionali a
tutela dell"ambiente. Una consapevolezza della
necessità di cambiare il nostro rapporto con la natura
che cresce di pari passo con il degrado del Pianeta".
36

Le Monde/ - Article, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Conseil Constitutionnel)
Temps de parole : le CSA fait appel à la
Française des jeux
C'est le mercredi 4 avril à 15 heures, à son siège
parisien, que le Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel
(CSA) procèdera au tirage au sort de l'ordre de
passage des messages de campagne des candidats à
l'élection présidentielle. Ces spots seront diffusés sur
les chaînes de télévision et de radios publiques à partir
du 9 avril. Cette opération se déroulera en présence
de Michel Boyon, président du CSA, Christine Kelly et
Francine Mariani-Ducray, présidente et vice-présidente
du groupe de travail Pluralisme au CSA, ainsi que des
représentants des candidats à l'élection présidentielle.
Pour qu'il n'y ait pas de contestations, ce tirage au sort
se fera avec le concours de la Française des jeux
(FDJ). Un de ses représentants, assisté d'un huissier,
sera présent pour contrôler le bon déroulement du
tirage au sort. Le CSA justifie l'appel à la FDJ pour son
"savoir-faire" dans le domaine et éviter "un nouveau
casse-tête". "Nous avions déjà fait appel à la FDJ en
2007 et tout le monde en avait été satisfait", rappelle
t-on au CSA. Quant à l'huissier, sa présence n'était
pas obligatoire puisque le CSA est un organisme
d'Etat, mais la FDJ se déplace toujours avec un
huissier qui contrôlera et homologuera tout le matériel
fourni par la FDJ.
POUR UNE ÉGALITÉ PARFAITE
Comme pour le tirage du loto, dix boules de même
grammage portant les numéros de 1 à 10 seront
disposées dans une sphère transparente. Chaque
candidat aura un numéro qui correspond exactement
au tirage au sort, effectué le 20 mars, par le Conseil
constitutionnel lors de la proclamation officielle des dix
candidats retenus. Par exemple, lors de ce tirage au
sort, Eva Joly avait hérité du numéro 1 et avait donc
été annoncée la première pour l'obtention de ses 500
signatures.
Pour obtenir une égalité parfaite entre les dix
candidats, le CSA procédera à un tirage au sort pour
la diffusion des spots en module court (1 min 30 sec)
et ceux en module long (3 min 30 sec). En effet, du 9
au 20 avril, chaque candidat disposera de 43 minutes
d'émissions, soit huit spots de format long (8 foix 3 min
30 sec = 28 min) et dix spots de format court (10 fois 1
min 30 sec = 15 min).
Enfin, un autre tirage au sort permettra de déterminer
l'ordre de passage des candidats pendant les onze
jours de campagne. Les spots réalisés par les équipes
de chaque candidat seront diffusés sur France 2,
France 3, France 4, France Ô, France Inter, France 24
et RFI. Les modules courts passeront à 20 h 40 sur
France 2, et vers 23 heures après le "Soir 3" sur
France 3. L'ordre de diffusion des modules longs sera
déterminé le 4 avril.
Plusieurs spots pourront être diffusés tout au long de
la journée, y compris dans les émissions du matin.
Mais, quel que soit l'ordre de passage des candidats,
ce n'est que le 6 mai à 20 heures que l'on saura qui a
tiré le gros lot de la présidence de la République.
37

Le Monde/ - Article, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Conseil Constitutionnel)
M. Hollande et M. Sarkozy oublient
l"inégalité fiscale
Les Français sont préoccupés par leurs impôts,
comme le prouve l"intensité des débats suscités par
chaque proposition fiscale des deux principaux
candidats à l"élection présidentielle. Mais plus que la
vigueur des débats, c"est l"énorme sentiment de
frustration qu"ils véhiculent qui est préoccupant. Les
Français sentent bien qu"ils risquent d"être déçus et
qu"en matière de fiscalité, le statu quo a des chances
de perdurer. La raison est simple : aucun candidat ne
propose de s"attaquer à la racine de nos problèmes
fiscaux. Pourtant la solution est simple. Elle est devant
nos yeux depuis longtemps : un grand impôt unique
progressif sur tous les revenus et prélevé a la
source.Notre système fiscal est à la fois injuste,
complexe et inefficace. Miné par les niches et les
règles dérogatoires, il est même devenu régressif, les
plus aisés se retrouvant à payer des taux effectifs de
prélèvements plus faibles que les classes moyennes
et populaires. Ce constat, que nous lancions il y a un
an sur www.revolution-fiscale.fr, est aujourd"hui
accepté.Dans cette campagne, le candidat socialiste
François Hollande a le mérite de tourner le dos aux
cadeaux faits aux plus riches des dix dernières années
et de vouloir rétablir un minimum de justice fiscale
dans notre pays. Il a repris notre proposition de
refondation complète de l"impôt sur le revenu.
Malheureusement, face aux conservatismes de son
propre camp, il n"a pour l"instant pas indiqué de
calendrier précis de mise en oeuvre. Récemment, il a
fait preuve de plus d"audace en proposant d"imposer
un taux marginal de 75 % sur la part des revenus
excédant 1 million d"euros par an. Cette proposition va
dans le bon sens.Sur la base des données historiques
que nous avons rassemblée pour plus de vingt-cinq
pays, nous sommes convaincus que seule l"arme
fiscale permet de mettre un coup d"arrêt à l"explosion
des très hautes rémunérations - qui au-delà d"un
certain seuil n"ont aucun impact positif sur la
productivité et la croissance. N"attendons pas pour
agir que la montée des inégalités prenne la même
ampleur qu"aux Etats-Unis (où près de 60 % de la
croissance depuis 1980 a été absorbée par les 1 % les
plus riches).Mais l"expérience historique indique
également que pour être efficace, une telle proposition
doit s"appliquer à une assiette très large de revenus,
ce qui passe par une révolution fiscale. Il ne sert pas à
grand-chose d"appliquer un taux de 75 % sur une
assiette percée ! Dans notre scénario central, nous
proposons un taux global de seulement 60 %
(cotisation sociale généralisée incluse) au-delà de 1
million d"euros, mais il s"agit d"un taux effectif
s"appliquant à l"ensemble des revenus bruts soumis à
la contribution sociale généralisée (CSG).La différence
est essentielle, car de nombreux revenus financiers et
éléments de primes et de rémunérations sont soumis
uniquement à la CSG - et faute d"une réforme globale,
échapperaient à la taxe Hollande, qui serait de fait
contournable. Nous avons montré que pour des
paramètres réalistes le taux optimal d"imposition
pouvait atteindre 82 % avec une assiette large, mais
n"était que de 62 % avec une assiette étroite, telle que
celle de l"actuel impôt sur le revenu.La seconde raison
pour laquelle la révolution fiscale ne peut être
repoussée en fin de mandat est qu"il s"agit de la seule
façon de mener une politique efficace du pouvoir
d"achat en direction des salariés modestes et moyens.
Après avoir payé 8 % de leur salaire chaque mois au
titre de la CSG, les salariés modestes reçoivent avec
un an de retard un chèque au titre de la prime pour
l"emploi (PPE), qui représente entre un demi-mois et
trois quarts de mois de salaire ! Ce système absurde
concerne chaque année quelque 8 millions de
travailleurs modestes. En fusionnant CSG, impôt sur le
revenu et prime pour l"emploi en un impôt progressif
unique, payé par tous et prélevé à la source, on
pourrait prélever seulement 2 % au niveau du smic (et
non plus 8 %), si bien que le salaire net augmentera
de près de 100 euros par mois.C"est beaucoup plus
satisfaisant que de recevoir un chèque, et cela
permettrait de revaloriser le travail. Le barème peut
ensuite être ajusté pour mener une politique des
revenus réactive et efficace. Et ce prélèvement
simplifié et unifié pour les contribuables n"empêche
pas de continuer d"affecter à la Sécurité sociale les
mêmes recettes.Nicolas Sarkozy a d"ailleurs fini par se
rendre compte qu"une telle réforme était souhaitable,
puisqu"il a proposé de réformer la PPE en l"intégrant
dans les salaires nets. La crédibilité du président
sortant en matière de justice fiscale est certes assez
réduite : quelle idée folle que de diviser par deux
L"impôt de solidarité sur la fortune (ISF) en pleine crise
des finances publiques, tout cela en augmentant la
TVA sur les plus modestes...Mais s"il en vient à
certaines de nos conclusions, tant mieux ! En
proposant de remplacer la PPE par une "réduction des
charges salariales" (sans autre précision), M. Sarkozy
s"est contenté de reprendre la mesure de baisse de
CSG pour les bas salaires adoptée par le
gouvernement Jospin en 2000, censurée par le
Conseil constitutionnel... ce qui avait conduit à la
38

création de la PPE. Pour régler le problème, il faut
aller jusqu"au bout d"une réforme d"ensemble et
mettre en place un impôt progressif prélevé à la
source, seule façon de prendre en compte l"ensemble
des revenus et les charges de famille des salariés
concernés, comme le demande le Conseil.Une telle
reforme est simple à mettre en oeuvre : on peut
appliquer dès le 1er janvier 2013 un barème progressif
à l"assiette de la CSG, en lieu et place des taux
actuels. Pourquoi donc nos candidats en ont-ils peur ?
Parce qu"en France, le débat sur nos impôts est
confisqué par l"administration fiscale, la seule en
Europe à avoir réussi à empêcher depuis un
demi-siècle le passage au prélèvement à la source !
Le Monde/ - Article, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Conseil Constitutionnel)
Etant seule propriétaire des données fiscales, et en
limitant l"accès aux chercheurs, elle s"octroie le droit
de juger seule du bien-fondé de telle ou telle
réforme.Parce que nous pensons que le débat fiscal
doit être mené au grand jour, nous avons créé au
terme d"un long travail un simulateur de l"ensemble du
système fiscal français qui peut être utilisé par chacun
pour mesurer l"impact distributif de toute réforme
fiscale. Avec plus de 500 000 visiteurs, notre site
montre que la question des impôts nous concerne
tous. Pour répondre à ces attentes, c"est aux
responsables politiques qu"il revient de prendre leurs
responsabilités.
39

Los Angeles Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Media giants score legal victory against
foes of bundling channels
Don't look for your cable company to let you pick what
channels you want to get anytime soon.
A panel of judges for the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals in San Francisco sided with a dozen media
giants including News Corp., Time Warner, DirecTV
and Comcast in a class-action suit that was looking to
do away with the practice of bundling multiple
channels together and selling them as a package, a
long-standing industry tradition.
Bundling is when programmers sells their channels in
bulk to distributors. For example, Walt Disney Co.'s
ESPN typically cuts deals with cable and satellite
distributors for multiple channels. The distributor then
sells the bundle as part of a package to consumers.
Many media watchdogs argue that bundling allows big
media companies to get distribution for less popular
channels in return for carrying the popular channels. A
distributor can pay to carry just ESPN and none of its
spinoffs. However, the cost is usually higher than if the
distributor agrees to carry several ESPN channels. The
consumer who might only want ESPN must pay to get
the extra ESPN channels too.
In affirming a U.S. District Court ruling in California, the
9th Circuit panel said that bundling is not a violation of
antitrust laws. The plaintiffs -- a group of cable and
satellite television subscribers -- argued that
programmers abused their market power and harmed
competition by requiring distributors to sell channels in
prepackaged tiers rather than on an individual, or a la
carte, basis.
The attorney for the plaintiffs, Maxwell Blecher of the
Los Angeles law firm Blecher & Collins, said he will
either seek a hearing in front of the full 9th Circuit or
appeal to the Supreme Court.
40

Los Angeles Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Judge calls for near-complete release of
UC pepper-spray report
OAKLAND — A judge Wednesday rejected nearly all
attempts by a campus police union to block release of
portions of a report on the November pepper-spraying
of UC Davis students by university officers.
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Evelio Grillo
disagreed with assertions that large chunks of the
report — designed to scrutinize the day's events and
craft new policy — should be sealed because they
contain the same kind of information as in officer
personnel files compiled for disciplinary purposes. He
also rejected union arguments that officers named in
the report have a constitutional right to privacy.
"The court is not persuaded that either the Legislature
or the California Supreme Court intended (the law
protecting officer information) to apply whenever public
entities investigated law enforcement policies,
procedures or actions," Grillo wrote, "and to preclude
all public entities from disclosing the results of those
investigations if they touched on the conduct of
individual police officers."
Grillo sided with the union only in granting a
preliminary injunction to withhold the names of all but
two officers. He excluded Lt. John Pike because
images of him casually dousing seated protesters had
already gone viral on the Internet, and UC Davis Police
Chief Annette Spicuzza, whose identity is widely
known.
UC officials and the American Civil Liberties Union of
Northern California, which are seeking full public
access to the report, will have an opportunity to press
for disclosure of the names at trial.
The much anticipated full report — commissioned by
UC officials in the interest of transparency — won't be
available to the public until at least April 23, pending
possible appeal. Although Grillo has allowed UC to
immediately release uncontested portions, officials
said Wednesday they are unsure whether they will do
so because the extent of the redacted material could
slant the report's overall tone.
The Nov. 18 incident took place as part of an Occupy
movement protest and triggered an internal affairs
investigation. UC officials confirmed Wednesday that
five officers are facing disciplinary probes and 15 to 20
are named in the report.
The university separately convened a task force
headed by former state Supreme Court Justice Cruz
Reynoso to make recommendations regarding police
procedures. Kroll Associates, a security consulting
firm, was retained to collect information on the incident
and make policy suggestions.
Only witness officers — not those subject to discipline
— were interviewed for Kroll's report, and they were
granted immunity. But the union argued that all
material regarding the officers' conduct should be
sealed. They agreed only to the release of sections
dealing with administrators' actions and policy.
UC General Counsel Charles Robinson said he would
consult with Reynoso about whether to release that
uncontested portion in coming days. Between
one-fourth and one-third of the Reynoso report and a
little over half of the Kroll report would still be blacked
out, he said.
ACLU attorney Michael Risher argued in court that all
names should be public. (Lawyers for the Sacramento
Bee and Los Angeles Times also filed briefs seeking
access to the full report.) Robinson said UC officials
agree and will consider whether to appeal that issue.
But he expressed general satisfaction with
Wednesday's ruling.
"We think it largely represents what we argued," he
said outside the Oakland courtroom.
John Bakhit, an attorney for the Federated University
Police Officers Assn., said he would consult with his
clients before deciding whether to appeal. "We
obviously don't agree" with Grillo's overall conclusions,
he said, but "I still would consider it a win for our
officers because we can protect their safety."
The union submitted a declaration from Pike stating
that he received hundreds of letters, and more than
10,000 text messages and 17,000 emails, most of
them "threatening or derogatory," as well as unsolicited
home deliveries of food, magazines and other
products. Grillo agreed there was a likelihood other
officers could face similar issues.
Meanwhile, officials at a UC regents meeting in San
Francisco disclosed that they are working to finish a
separate report that looks at the best ways to handle
future campus protests.
UC Berkeley law school Dean Christopher Edley, one
of the study leaders, told regents he expects a draft to
be released next month for public comment. The report
does not investigate the pepper-spray incident or the
use of batons by UC Berkeley police on demonstrators
the same month, though Edley said those
controversies led to his study. Instead, he said, it is
"forward looking" and will examine such things as
freedom of expression, police training and
de-escalation techniques, and will develop
recommendations for administrators, police and
students.
41

lee.romney@latimes.com
larry.gordon@latimes.com
Los Angeles Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
42

Los Angeles Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Slain student's attorney questions
Pasadena police account
Pasadena police officers fatally shot an unarmed
college student on a dark, narrow street without
illuminating him with a light, prompting the
19-year-old's family attorney to question the official
account of the fatal incident.
Kendrec McDade was shot late Saturday night on
Sunset Avenue after police spotted his hand near his
waistband and feared that he was reaching for a gun.
One of the officers was seated in a police car that had
cut off McDade as he ran north on the street. McDade
was less than 10 feet away from the car when the
officer in the car shot at him. McDade was also being
chased by a second officer, who also opened fire
because he feared for his colleague's safety, Lt.
Phlunte Riddle said.
Riddle said the officer in the car did not have a light on
McDade at the time of the shooting.
Caree Harper, an attorney for McDade's mother,
questioned how the officers could have seen what the
former Azusa High school football standout was
doing.
"How could they have seen anything out there?" she
said. "He is a young black man in a tough part of town.
That is why he was running."
Police acknowledged Wednesday that they were
misled about the severity of the situation they were
responding to. They said that a 911 caller lied to
dispatchers and reported that he had been robbed at
gunpoint by two men who stole his backpack and
laptop. Police now say that a theft occurred, but no
weapon was involved. They arrested the caller,
26-year-old Oscar Carrillo, on suspicion of involuntary
manslaughter.
That arrest did little to quash questions involving the
controversial shooting. Pasadena Police Phillip
Sanchez has announced plans to hold a community
meeting Saturday at a local church to discuss the
incident and attempt to calm concerns.
But Harper said Carrillo's arrest does not minimize the
officers' fatal actions.
"The officers pulled the trigger," she said. "The chief is
trying to shift the blame."
Harper said police knew as early as Monday that
Carrillo had lied, but did not tell the family until shortly
before a news conference Wednesday.
Pasadena police have so far refused to identify the two
officers who fired their weapons. They were identified
only as experienced officers with only one prior
shooting between them -- that of a dog. Harper,
however, has identified them as Jeff Newlen and
Matthew Griffin.
Records reviewed by The Times show Newlen and
Griffin were involved in the shooting. Newlen called in
the shooting to police communications, according to
documents reviewed by The Times.
On Thursday, some civil rights leaders called for the
suspension of the officers and demanded the release
of a videotape that Pasadena police obtained from a
security camera that allegedly shows McDade acting
as a lookout as his 17-year-old friend steals Carrillo's
backpack. Sanchez said neither the backpack nor
laptop was ever found.
43

Reuters General/ - Article, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court takes up healthcare in
secrecy
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON | Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:52pm EDT
(Reuters) - Supreme Court justices on Friday held
closed-door deliberations on President Barack
Obama's healthcare overhaul law, likely casting
preliminary votes on how they will eventually rule on
their highest-profile case in years.
In an institution known for keeping its secrets, no leaks
are likely before formal opinions have been written and
announced from the bench. That is not expected to
occur until late June, when the court is set to go on its
regular summer recess.
The justices' private conference, a meeting in which
they typically discuss and vote on cases heard earlier
in the week, came after three days of historic
arguments over the healthcare law that ended on
Wednesday.
Legal experts said only a handful of people - mainly
consisting of the nine justices and their law clerks -
know about the outcomes of these conferences, and
they do not talk about it. Law clerks are sworn to
secrecy.
"Confidentiality is drilled into clerks from day one," said
University of Richmond associate law professor Kevin
Walsh, a law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia in the
court's 2003-04 term.
"The rules and warnings only heightened the obligation
we already felt to maintain confidentiality born out of
our respect for the Supreme Court and our desire to
protect it," he said.
"And it's not like working for the CIA, where you may
take secrets to the grave. The big news of any given
term - what the court has decided - all comes out into
the open by the end of June," Walsh said.
The Supreme Court's private conferences are held
with only the justices attending. The meeting room,
located on the second floor, is relatively small,
oak-paneled and with a fireplace and a rectangular
table. It is just off the chambers of Chief Justice John
Roberts.
"WE SHOULD REPORT IT"
In recent decades there have been no leaks of
Supreme Court rulings, including the momentous
2000 decision that stopped a Florida vote recount,
clearing the way for Republican George W. Bush to
become president over Democrat Al Gore.
There have been no leaks in high-stakes financial
cases including ones affecting the tobacco industry.
Stocks of insurers and other healthcare companies
could be roiled by any ruling on the two-year-old
healthcare law, Obama's signature domestic policy
achievement.
The last time Supreme Court leaks emerged as an
issue was under Chief Justice Warren Burger, who left
the court in 1986.
Then-ABC TV journalist Tim O'Brien reported in 1986
that the court the next day would strike down a key
part of a law to balance the U.S. government's budget.
He was right about the outcome, but the ruling did not
come down until weeks later.
In 1979 he correctly reported the ruling in a major libel
case involving the CBS News television show "60
Minutes."
Burger accused an employee in the printing shop of
tipping O'Brien and had the employee transferred. The
employee denied disclosing any information about the
ruling.
"The court has the right to protect its secrets," said
O'Brien, who has left ABC and who acknowledged that
leaks of rulings are rare.
"But if the news media learns about it, we should
report it," said O'Brien, an attorney who has taught law.
"People don't watch us or read us because of our
ability to keep the government's secrets."
In 1973 Time magazine correctly predicted the court's
historic decision that women have a constitutional right
to an abortion. Burger then warned all the law clerks
not to speak to or be seen with news reporters.
(Reporting By James Vicini and Joan Biskupic; Editing
by Kevin Drawbaugh and Xavier Briand)
44

Reuters General/ - Article, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Florida teen's body showed no sign of
fight, funeral director says
(Reuters) - The Florida funeral director who prepared
Trayvon Martin's body for burial said there were no
bruises or other signs of a fight like the one described
by the neighborhood watch volunteer who killed him.
The only injury on the 17-year-old's body was the fatal
gunshot wound in his chest, funeral director Richard
Kurtz told the CBS4 television station in Miami.
George Zimmerman told police he shot Martin inside a
gated community in central Florida on February 26 in
self-defense after Martin attacked him and repeatedly
bashed his head into a concrete walkway.
"The story just does not make sense that he was in
this type of scuffle or fight," Kurtz, a funeral director at
the Roy Mizell and Kurtz Funeral Home in Fort
Lauderdale, told the television station.
"In dressing the body we could see no physical signs
like there had been a scuffle," he said. "I didn't see any
knuckles' bruises and what have you, and that is
something we would cover up if it would have been
there. I did not see any signs of any cuts on his neck
or face."
Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, was
driving to a store when he spotted Martin walking back
to his father's fiancée's home after buying candy and
iced tea. Zimmerman called 911 and reported that the
teen looked suspicious and followed him against the
dispatcher's advice.
He said Martin attacked him and that he shot in
self-defense. Police declined to arrest Zimmerman,
prompting nationwide protests from citizens, politicians
and civil rights activists who argue that Zimmerman, a
white Hispanic, considered Martin suspicious because
he was black.
Martin's autopsy report has not been released and the
state prosecutor investigating the case said on
Thursday that some evidence is being withheld from
the public because it is part of an active criminal
investigation.
Police at the scene said the 28-year-old shooter was
bleeding from the nose and the back of the head, and
Zimmerman's lawyer said his client suffered a broken
nose from Martin's punch.
But no blood or bruising was visible on Zimmerman in
video taken by police surveillance cameras as
uniformed officers led him into the police station for
questioning after the shooting, nor were there blood
stains visible on his clothes.
(Reporting By Jane Sutton; Editing by Greg McCune)
45

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Following Twitter, Seeking Red Flags
The business plan of Varsity Monitor is simple. Major
universities like North Carolina, Nebraska and
Oklahoma pay $7,000 to $10,000 a year and Varsity
Monitor keeps an online eye on their athletes.
Among the services the company and others like it
provide is a computer application that searches social
media sites that athletes frequent, looking for
obscenities, offensive commentary or words like “free,”
which could indicate that a player has accepted a gift
in violation of N.C.A.A. rules.
“Every school, we work to customize their keyword
list,” said Sam Carnahan, the chief executive of Varsity
Monitor, which has offices in Seattle and New York
and also provides educational programs to
universities. “We look for things that could damage the
school’s brand and anything related to their eligibility.”
Yet what may look to some like a business opportunity,
and to universities and their athletic departments like
due diligence, appears to others to be an invasion of
privacy.
“I think it’s violating the Constitution to have someone
give up their password or user name,” said Ronald N.
Young, a Maryland state senator who has sponsored a
bill that would make it harder for universities to monitor
their athletes online. “It’s like reading their mail or
listening to their phone calls.”
The debate on college campuses mirrors the larger
conversation throughout the country over how much
access to personal online activities private individuals
can be compelled to give to employers. University
administrators face a tricky situation when it comes to
their players’ activity on social media, balancing issues
of privacy while trying to guard against the possibility
that an errant posting on Twitter or Facebook could
result in trouble for an athlete or the athletic
department. On March 12, North Carolina’s football
program received a one-year bowl ban and lost 15
scholarships after an N.C.A.A. investigation that was
prompted by a Twitter message sent by a player.
In the N.C.A.A.’s statement about North Carolina’s
punishment, it hinted that institutions should be
tracking public information made available by
student-athletes if there is a “reasonable suspicion of
rules violations.” That has caused an increase in
business for Varsity Monitor and companies like
UDiligence and Centrix Social. Some colleges require
athletes to give them access to their Facebook or
Twitter accounts, either by downloading software to
monitor them or simply requiring that they let a coach,
an administrator or a third-party company “friend” them
on Facebook or follow them on Twitter.
“There’s this big gray area that we’re all going into right
now,” said Bill Voth, the co-founder of Spiracle Media,
a company that advises colleges about social media.
“Schools like North Carolina need to protect
themselves. But I can see the legal side with privacy
issues.”
The men’s basketball teams participating in this
weekend’s Final Four in New Orleans — Ohio State,
Kentucky, Louisville and Kansas — represent the
many ways that athletic departments are handling the
newest forms of mass communication. Kentucky
Coach John Calipari has more than a million Twitter
followers, while Louisville Coach Rick Pitino bars his
players from using Twitter during the season. Ohio
State’s star player, Jared Sullinger, stopped sending
Twitter messages in January to eliminate distractions.
With colleges worried about a situation similar to North
Carolina’s occurring on their campuses, lingering
questions remain: Where should the line be drawn?
Can colleges monitor athletes without being invasive?
And is it legal for a university to require that a student
make his private information available?
Carnahan says his company tailors its service to
whatever the university requests, allowing it to
determine to what extent social media activities are
monitored. But some college officials are
uncomfortable with the notion of monitoring their
athletes on social media, be it public or private
content.
“If the university is going to screen all students or all
prospective students or everyone that’s applied, we’ll
engage in that with the university,” Notre Dame’s
athletic director, Jack Swarbrick, said. “I can’t foresee
a time where they would.”
Bradley S. Shear, a lawyer based in Maryland who
works in sports law and social media, supports the bill
Young introduced in Maryland. He said that a key
difference in monitoring a student’s online activities, as
opposed to an issue like drug testing, was that the
content being searched for was inappropriate as
opposed to illegal.
“The Supreme Court has ruled over and over again
46

that students do not leave their constitutional rights at
the schoolhouse gate,” Shear said. He said that any
policy that required students to give access to
“password-protected electronic content” was “a clear
violation of their student’s First and Fourth Amendment
Constitutional rights.”
He added of companies that monitor athletes’ online
activities: “These companies are selling snake oil that
contains a major legal liability time bomb. To me,
there’s no difference in having to Facebook-friend a
coach than turning over user name and password.”
Oklahoma’s athletic director, Joe Castiglione, said the
university required its athletes to friend coaches on
Facebook. He said that when athletes were questioned
about something that appeared on their Facebook
pages, they often responded, “Hey, you’re not
supposed to see that.” He said his answer was, “Well,
everyone else in the world can.”
Jeremy Foley, the athletic director at Florida, said his
department contracted with UDiligence to monitor only
the Gators’ football players.
“I’m not a big believer that it’s our responsibility to
monitor that 24-7,” Foley said. “If there’s an issue, we’ll
deal with it. We’re trying to run a business here. We’re
not trying to be Big Brother.”
Varsity Monitor’s Carnahan said that by allowing the
universities to determine how much access his
company gets, it leaves a “white space” for colleges to
make their own decisions. But Kevin DeShazo, the
founder of Fieldhouse Media, another company in the
expanding online monitoring field, said that his
company does not access private information and that
he is opposed to monitoring Facebook and forcing
athletes to download applications or give access to
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
password-protected content.
“To be forced to give you access, passwords or let
them be friends with you on Facebook — I get why
coaches feel like it’s necessary, but there has to be
some level of respect and trust with these kids,”
DeShazo said, adding that his company has focused
on educating athletes about the perils of social media.
At North Carolina, where a message on Twitter from
the former football player Marvin Austin in 2010
revealed that he was receiving impermissible benefits
and was a factor in his being suspended for the
season, the social media policy is strict.
Steve Kirschner, a spokesman for North Carolina’s
athletic department, said each of the university’s sports
teams had a coach or a staff member assigned to
monitor Twitter messages sent by its players.
Roy Williams, the men’s basketball coach, said he
recognized that social media were simply a fact of life.
His players are permitted to use social media sites,
though not without a warning.
“I tell the guys, ‘It’s America, you have freedom of
speech,’ ” Williams said. “If you say something and it
embarrasses me or the basketball program or your
family, I’m going to be disappointed.”
The legal questions are not as simple, however, and
the answers may not come from campuses but from
courtrooms and legislatures.
“These are murky waters,” Voth said, “and it’s a
problem that’s not going to be answered today or in a
few months or a year.”
47

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Taking Responsibility for Death
I WAS standing by my 89-year-old mother’s hospital
bed when she asked a doctor, “Is there anything you
can do here to give me back the life I had last year,
when I wasn’t in pain every minute?” The young
medical resident, stunned by the directness of the
question, blurted out, “Honestly, ma’am, no.”
And so Irma Broderick Jacoby went home and lived
another year, during which she never again entered a
hospital or subjected herself to an invasive, expensive
medical procedure. The pain of multiple degenerative
diseases was eased by prescription drugs, and she
died last November after two weeks in a hospice, on
terms determined by explicit legal instructions and
discussions with her children — no respirators, no
artificial feeding, no attempts to buy one more day for
a body that would not let her turn over in bed or
swallow without agony.
The hospice room and pain-relieving palliative care
cost only about $400 a day, while the average hospital
stay costs Medicare over $6,000 a day. Although
Mom’s main concern was her comfort and dignity, she
also took satisfaction in not running up Medicare
payments for unwanted treatments and not leaving
private medical bills for her children to pay. A third of
the Medicare budget is now spent in the last year of
life, and a third of that goes for care in the last month.
Those figures would surely be lower if more
Americans, while they were still healthy, took the
initiative to spell out what treatments they do — and do
not — want by writing living wills and appointing health
care proxies.
As the aging baby boom generation places
unprecedented demands on the health care system,
there is little ordinary citizens can do — witness the
tortuous arguments in the Supreme Court this week
over the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act —
to influence either the cost or the quality of the
treatment they receive. However, end-of-life planning
is one of the few actions within the power of individuals
who wish to help themselves and their society. Too
few Americans are shouldering this responsibility.
Of course many people want more aggressive
treatment than my mother. And advance directives
aren’t “death panels”; they can also be used to ensure
the deployment of every tool of modern medicine.
They can be changed or withdrawn at any time by a
mentally competent person.
But public opinion polls consistently show that most
Americans, like my mother, worry about too much
rather than too little medical intervention. In a Pew
Research Center poll released in 2006, only 22
percent said a doctor should always try to save a
patient’s life, while 70 percent believed that patients
should sometimes be allowed to die. More than half
said they would tell their doctor to end treatment if they
were in great pain with no hope of improvement.
Yet only 69 percent had discussed end-of-life care with
a spouse; just 17 percent, or 40 percent of those over
65, had done so with their children. One-third of
Americans had a living will and even fewer have taken
the more legally enforceable measure of appointing a
health care proxy to act on their behalf if they cannot
act for themselves.
The latter omission is especially disturbing because by
2030, more than 8.5 million Americans will be over 85
— an age at which roughly half will suffer from
Alzheimer’s disease or some other form of irreversible
dementia. For many members of the baby boom
generation — more likely to be divorced and childless
than their parents — there may be no legal next of kin.
Without advance directives, even a loving child may be
ignorant of her parent’s wishes. My mother remained
conscious and in charge of her care until just a few
days before she died, but like most women over 85,
she was a widow. My younger brother died of
pancreatic cancer two weeks before she did. It was an
immense comfort to me, at a terrible time, to have no
doubts about what she wanted.
My mother drew up her directives in the 1980s, when
she was a volunteer in the critical care lounge of her
local hospital. She once watched, appalled, as an adult
daughter threw a coffeepot at her brother for
suggesting that their comatose mother’s respirator be
turned off. Because the siblings could not agree and
the patient had no living will, she was kept hooked up
to machines for another two weeks at a cost (then) of
nearly $80,000 to Medicare and $20,000 to her family
— even though her doctors agreed there was no
hope.
The worst imaginable horror for my mother was that
she might be kept alive by expensive and painful
procedures when she no longer had a functioning
brain. She was equally horrified by the idea of family
fights around her deathbed. “I don’t want one of you
throwing a coffeepot at the other,” she told us in a
half-joking, half-serious fashion.
48

There is a clear contradiction between the value that
American society places on personal choice and
Americans’ reluctance to make their own decisions,
insofar as possible, about the care they will receive as
death nears. Obviously, no one likes to think about
sickness and death. But the politicization of end-of-life
planning and its entwinement with religion-based
culture wars provide extra, irrational obstacles to
thinking ahead when it matters most.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
As someone over 65, I do not consider it my duty to
die for the convenience of society. I do consider it my
duty, to myself and younger generations, to follow the
example my mother set by doing everything in my
power to ensure that I will never be the object of
medical intervention that cannot restore my life but can
only prolong a costly living death.
Susan Jacoby is the author of “Never Say Die: The
Myth and Marketing of the New Old Age.”
49

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Broccoli Mandates and the Commerce
Clause
“If the government can do this, what, what else can it
not do?” asked Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
this week in arguments on the constitutionality of the
requirement that nearly all Americans buy health care
insurance or face a penalty.
“All bets are off,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.
gravely added.
Thus did this week’s Supreme Court arguments over
the Obama administration’s health care law emerge as
a historic test of federal power versus individual liberty,
all the more remarkable given that just a few weeks
ago, the overwhelming view of constitutional scholars
was that this wouldn’t be a close case, with even
conservative justices likely to uphold the law.
That it now looks not only possible but perhaps likely
that the Supreme Court will strike down the health
care law as unconstitutional, probably in its entirety, is
a tribute to some skilled and passionate advocacy and
the persuasive power of conservative media — and
what seems a breathtaking departure from decades of
Supreme Court jurisprudence.
It’s always hazardous to predict a Supreme Court
outcome, no matter how pointed the questioning at
oral argument. This seems especially true when the
legal debate over health care has become so intensely
politicized. Pickets were marching around the
Supreme Court building. By their questioning, the four
conservative Republican appointees seemed to signal
their distaste for the law, while the four liberal
Democratic appointees seemed to embrace it. That left
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy in his usual position as
the swing vote, and he asked some tough questions,
at one point suggesting the government faced “a
heavy burden of justification.”
While the health care law has generated intense
passions on both sides, I don’t share them. Although it
seems well established that many Americans are
burdened with costly and yet woefully ineffective health
care, if I’d been elected president, I probably would
have focused my attention on the financial crisis and
the economy and moved more slowly on health care
reform. But I’m no expert on the byzantine subject,
which has confounded more than one administration,
and as far as I can tell, the legislation has had no
effect on me, my family members or friends, all of us
fortunate enough to have adequate health coverage.
But limiting Congress’s power to legislate under the
commerce clause is another matter, and could have
far-reaching, and unintended, consequences beyond
health care. Despite the often opaque and convoluted
arguments this week, the legal issues don’t strike me
as all that complicated. No one disputes that Congress
can enact laws to carry out powers enumerated in the
Constitution or necessary and proper to effectuate
those powers. Among the enumerated powers: “To
regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among
the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”
As the nation’s economy evolved from largely local
markets to regional, national and increasingly global
ones, the Supreme Court has taken a progressively
broader view of Congressional power under the
commerce clause, even when individual freedom had
to be sacrificed. This included limiting one farmer’s
ability to plant wheat during the Depression because
his production affected the overall supply and hence
had an effect on interstate commerce, and, more
recently, upholding a federal ban on homegrown
marijuana even if the plant never crossed state lines.
The court has stressed that Congress needs only a
“rational basis” for concluding that economic activity
might affect interstate commerce, and even Justice
Kennedy’s somewhat stricter standard of a “tangible
link to commerce” based on “empirical demonstration”
seems readily met here.
With famed hospitals like the Cleveland Clinic
mounting national ad campaigns and health insurers
operating in national markets, there would seem to be
little argument that health care affects interstate
commerce and that one person’s decision to buy or not
buy insurance, just like one farmer’s decision to plant
wheat, would affect a national market. Congress has
estimated that health care services and insurance
account for 17 percent of the gross domestic product
and amount to more than $2 trillion annually.
But constitutional opponents of the law have seized on
the mandate requiring most people to buy health
insurance or face a penalty as an unconstitutional
infringement of individual liberty. They’ve argued that a
ban on individual activity that, magnified in the
aggregate, might affect interstate commerce (like
wheat farming) is fundamentally different from
50

equiring someone to do something or face a penalty,
as the health care legislation does. A lower court judge
ruled that “inactivity” — the failure to buy health
insurance — by its very nature cannot affect interstate
commerce.
Until this week, most scholars seemed to think this
would be treated by the justices as a distinction without
any special significance. “It’s a silly distinction,”
Douglas Laycock, a University of Virginia law
professor, told me this week. Opponents of the law
“have gotten an enormous amount of mileage out of
‘inactivity,’ but that really has nothing to do with the
regulation of commerce,” he said. One hundred
professors from many of the country’s major law
schools signed a statement arguing that those seeking
to overturn the law “seek to jettison nearly two
centuries of settled constitutional law” and “there can
be no serious doubt about the constitutionality” of the
insurance mandate.
But then came Justice Scalia’s now famous invocation
of broccoli. “Everybody has to buy food sooner or later,
so you define the market as food,” he said. “Therefore,
everybody is in the market. Therefore, you can make
people buy broccoli.” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.
chimed in, asking Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli
Jr. to answer “as succinctly as you possibly can.”
Mr. Verrilli was anything but succinct: “The class to
which that requirement applies either is or virtually is
most certain to be in that market when the timing of
one’s entry into that market and what you will need
when you enter that market is uncertain. ...” He never
got around to discussing broccoli or, for that matter,
any other antioxidant. No wonder the justices were
soon pondering the slippery slope of federally
mandated purchases that might also be good for us,
like health club memberships.
Mr. Verrilli was trying to make the point that a decision
not to buy broccoli doesn’t increase the price others
must pay for broccoli in the same way that a decision
to forgo health insurance increases the premiums
others must pay for health insurance. But it seems to
me that a succinct answer to Justice Scalia’s question
is that the commerce clause would not limit Congress’s
ability to regulate broccoli — if members of the House
and Senate were crazy enough to pass legislation
requiring all of us to eat green vegetables and if that
were deemed a rational way to regulate commerce.
The same could be said of health clubs.
A lengthy Wall Street Journal editorial last week
argued that “the reality is that every decision not to buy
some good or service has some effect on the interstate
market for that good or service.” That may well be true,
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
and Mr. Verrilli should have admitted it rather than
getting entangled in unconvincing semantics.
That doesn’t mean we would all be required to eat
broccoli. Congress has the constitutional power to
pass many bills that would strike most people as
idiotic, but as a popularly elected assembly, it doesn’t.
The Supreme Court itself has said: “The principal and
basic limit on the federal commerce power is that
inherent in all Congressional action — the built-in
restraints that our system provides through state
participation in federal governmental action. The
political process ensures that laws that unduly burden
the states will not be promulgated.” And absurd bills
like a broccoli mandate are likely to fail other
constitutional tests.
Mr. Verrilli seems to have done a poor job at
articulating the limits to Congressional power under the
commerce clause, but the Supreme Court has already
done that for him in two relatively recent cases that, for
the first time in decades, limit its scope. Both involved
federal efforts to exercise traditionally local police
powers — to ban firearms near schools and to impose
civil penalties for gender-motivated violence against
women — under the guise of the commerce clause.
Justice Clarence Thomas argued that such a broad
reading would confer a federal police power over the
entire nation. In both cases, it was arguably a stretch
to argue, as respective administrations have, that
carrying a gun near a school or assaulting a woman
because of her gender has anything to do with
interstate commerce.
The same could no doubt be said of many activities
traditionally reserved to the states, but defenders of
the health care law needn’t address them. The
Supreme Court has established limits to the
commerce cause, which is regulating activity that has
little or nothing to do with commerce. The
multitrillion-dollar health care and insurance industries
surely fall well within that boundary.
It seems curious that opponents of the health care law
are now looking to the commerce clause, as opposed
to the Bill of Rights, as a bulwark of individual liberty.
To the extent it ever was, that battle was lost
generations ago. To Depression-era farmers, it was no
doubt an affront to individual freedom that the federal
government had the power to tell them what crops not
to plant.
Of course, the Supreme Court could reverse decades
of its own jurisprudence and fundamentally redefine
and limit the power of Congress to regulate interstate
commerce. But conservatives should be careful what
they wish for. The commerce clause was a response to
51

the chaotic and often conflicting state regulations that
hobbled the nation under the Articles of Confederation.
Its interpretation over the ensuing two centuries has
wisely reflected the growing nationalization and
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
globalization of economic activity and, by doing so, has
promoted economic growth.
52

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Campaigning, Obama Is Mute on
Supreme Court Hearings
BURLINGTON, Vt. — President Obama made no
mention of this week’s closely watched Supreme
Court hearing on the constitutionality of the 2010
health care overhaul when he delivered his standard
stump speech at a fund-raiser attended by the party
faithful here on Friday.
But the fate of his signature health care law hovered
over his remarks anyway, lending added weight as he
listed what he considers the accomplishments of his
presidency.
“Change is the health care reform we passed after a
century of trying,” Mr. Obama said to rousing cheers
from the crowd gathered in a field house at the
University of Vermont.
Because of his health care law, Mr. Obama promised,
“in the United States of America, no one will go broke
because they got sick.”
He received thunderous applause from a pumped-up
Democratic crowd that seemed eager and willing to
cheer his every utterance, even interrupting his
opening line.
“I’m here —— ” Mr. Obama began, and the applause
erupted, causing the president to stop and grin. “I
should quit while I’m ahead,” he said.
The Supreme Court was to begin deliberations over
the law after a week of arguments, with a decision
expected to be announced in June. White House
officials have publicly struck a confident air, refusing to
discuss any contingency planning under way in the
event the high court strikes down all or part of the law.
Mr. Obama, meanwhile, stuck to his oft-used campaign
lines extolling the benefits of the law, reminding the
audience that people with pre-existing conditions could
no longer be denied coverage.
He characterized this year’s presidential election as a
fight to reclaim the country for the working class. “This
is not the usual run-of-the-mill political debate,” Mr.
Obama said. Rather, he added, “this is the defining
issue of our time.”
Mr. Obama’s remarks came midway through a daylong
fund-raising trip to Vermont and Maine. The president
began with a lunch in Burlington with about 100
supporters who paid at least $7,500 each, campaign
officials said. Then some 4,500 people — many of
them students who paid $44 — attended the University
of Vermont event, which featured a performance by
Grace Potter and the Nocturnals.
The Obama campaign is trying hard to replicate the
enthusiasm young voters showed in 2008, with mixed
results so far.
Vermont’s population is reliably Democratic, and
protesters gathered along the president’s motorcade
route featured a lefty tilt, with signs demanding the
closing of the military prison on Guantánamo Bay,
Cuba, and a speedy exit from Afghanistan.
Mr. Obama’s campaign officials said he was the first
president to visit Vermont since Bill Clinton in 1995.
After Vermont, the president’s schedule called for two
more fund-raisers in Portland, Me.
53

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
State Budget for 2012 Sails Through
Albany
ALBANY — The State Legislature approved a $132.6
billion spending plan on Friday for the fiscal year that
begins Sunday, bringing to a punctual conclusion one
of the smoothest state budget negotiations at the
Capitol in years.
Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and legislative leaders
eagerly celebrated passage of the spending plan,
which slightly reduces over-all spending from the
current year, as evidence that Albany was finally
behaving responsibly after years of scandal and
disorder.
The voting on Friday marked the first time the
Legislature had approved a state spending plan with
more than 24 hours to spare since 1983 — when Mr.
Cuomo’s father, former Gov. Mario M. Cuomo, passed
his first budget.
Saying that “at one time, this state government was a
joke,” Mr. Cuomo lavished praise on lawmakers at a
news conference in his ceremonial office, where the
backslapping among the assembled officials reached a
level often seen in sports locker rooms following
championship victories.
“It has been a dramatic and almost unbelievable
turnaround in 15 months,” Mr. Cuomo said. “We went
from a model of dysfunction to, I believe, a model of
function.”
The daytime approval of the budget followed a period
in which Mr. Cuomo and lawmakers had been
criticized for a series of major votes taken in the middle
of the night, and, at times, with little public notice.
This week, the governor and the leaders of the
Legislature said their actions reflected a newfound
comity in the capital.
“This was a good budget substantively, and it was a
good budget procedurally,” said Senator John A.
DeFrancisco, a Syracuse Republican and the
chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
Mr. Cuomo and the leaders finished negotiating the
bills that made up the budget on Tuesday. That gave
them enough time to abide by a requirement in the
State Constitution, often sidestepped for major
legislation, that bills be made public for three days
before they are voted on, so that legislators and the
public can read the measures.
The Senate and the Assembly began debating most of
the bills that made up the budget on Friday morning.
Early in the afternoon, lawmakers crowded into Mr.
Cuomo’s ceremonial office to be photographed next to
the governor as he signed a portion of the budget into
law — even though neither the Senate nor the
Assembly had actually finished approving the entire
spending plan by that point.
The Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan
Democrat, called the smooth budget process “a breath
of fresh air to all of us.”
“We have been able to mesh our thoughts with your
thoughts, and we produced what I think is a great
document here,” said Mr. Silver, turning toward Mr.
Cuomo and the Senate majority leader, Dean G.
Skelos, a Long Island Republican. Mr. Skelos added,
“We’re very proud of the way government is now
functioning in Albany.”
Both the Senate and the Assembly finished passing
the spending plan later in the afternoon. There were no
major dramatics as they debated the budget bills,
although some lawmakers in the minority caucuses in
both houses made clear that they were upset with their
limited role in the budget talks.
At the start of the celebratory news conference, one of
Mr. Cuomo’s top aides, Joseph Percoco, was caught
on camera instructing the Senate and Assembly
minority leaders — who were standing behind the
lectern near Mr. Cuomo, Mr. Skelos and Mr. Silver —
to sit in the audience with the lawmakers on hand.
Senator Kevin S. Parker, a Democrat from Brooklyn,
described the budget process as “a joke” that blocked
the minority caucuses in both houses from having any
substantive role in negotiating the spending plan. “It
goes back to the old dysfunction that we saw,” Mr.
Parker said.
During the day, the minority caucuses in both houses
tried, and failed, to attach more than a dozen
amendments to the budget bills that were being
debated.
54

Assembly Republicans proposed cutting taxes for
manufacturers and repealing a payroll tax that helps
finance the Metropolitan Transportation Authority,
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
while Senate Democrats proposed to make tuition aid
available to illegal immigrants at colleges and
universities.
55

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Tracking Athletes Online as Legal Red
Flags Flutter
The business plan of Varsity Monitor is simple. Major
universities like North Carolina, Nebraska and
Oklahoma pay $7,000 to $10,000 a year and Varsity
Monitor keeps an online eye on their athletes.
Among the services the company and others like it
provide is a computer application that searches social
media sites that athletes frequent, looking for
obscenities, offensive commentary or words like “free,”
which could indicate that a player has accepted a gift
in violation of N.C.A.A. rules.
“Every school, we work to customize their keyword
list,” said Sam Carnahan, the chief executive of Varsity
Monitor, which has offices in Seattle and New York
and also provides educational programs to
universities. “We look for things that could damage the
school’s brand and anything related to their eligibility.”
Yet what may look to some like a business opportunity,
and to universities and their athletic departments like
due diligence, appears to others to be an invasion of
privacy.
“I think it’s violating the Constitution to have someone
give up their password or user name,” said Ronald N.
Young, a Maryland state senator who has sponsored a
bill that would make it harder for universities to monitor
their athletes online. “It’s like reading their mail or
listening to their phone calls.”
The debate on college campuses mirrors the larger
conversation throughout the country over how much
access to personal online activities private individuals
can be compelled to give to employers. University
administrators face a tricky situation when it comes to
their players’ activity on social media, balancing issues
of privacy while trying to guard against the possibility
that an errant posting on Twitter or Facebook could
result in trouble for an athlete or the athletic
department. On March 12, North Carolina’s football
program received a one-year bowl ban and lost 15
scholarships after an N.C.A.A. investigation that was
prompted by a Twitter message sent by a player.
In the N.C.A.A.’s statement about North Carolina’s
punishment, it hinted that institutions should be
tracking public information made available by
student-athletes if there is a “reasonable suspicion of
rules violations.” That has caused an increase in
business for Varsity Monitor and companies like
UDiligence and Centrix Social. Some colleges require
athletes to give them access to their Facebook or
Twitter accounts, either by downloading software to
monitor them or simply requiring that they let a coach,
an administrator or a third-party company “friend” them
on Facebook or follow them on Twitter.
“There’s this big gray area that we’re all going into right
now,” said Bill Voth, the co-founder of Spiracle Media,
a company that advises colleges about social media.
“Schools like North Carolina need to protect
themselves. But I can see the legal side with privacy
issues.”
The men’s basketball teams participating in this
weekend’s Final Four in New Orleans — Ohio State,
Kentucky, Louisville and Kansas — represent the
many ways that athletic departments are handling the
newest forms of mass communication. Kentucky
Coach John Calipari has more than a million Twitter
followers, while Louisville Coach Rick Pitino bars his
players from using Twitter during the season. Ohio
State’s star player, Jared Sullinger, stopped sending
Twitter messages in January to eliminate distractions.
With colleges worried about a situation similar to North
Carolina’s occurring on their campuses, lingering
questions remain: Where should the line be drawn?
Can colleges monitor athletes without being invasive?
And is it legal for a university to require that a student
make his private information available?
Carnahan says his company tailors its service to
whatever the university requests, allowing it to
determine to what extent social media activities are
monitored. But some college officials are
uncomfortable with the notion of monitoring their
athletes on social media, be it public or private
content.
“If the university is going to screen all students or all
prospective students or everyone that’s applied, we’ll
engage in that with the university,” Notre Dame’s
athletic director, Jack Swarbrick, said. “I can’t foresee
a time where they would.”
Bradley S. Shear, a lawyer based in Maryland who
works in sports law and social media, supports the bill
Young introduced in Maryland. He said that a key
56

difference in monitoring a student’s online activities, as
opposed to an issue like drug testing, was that the
content being searched for was inappropriate as
opposed to illegal.
“The Supreme Court has ruled over and over again
that students do not leave their constitutional rights at
the schoolhouse gate,” Shear said. He said that any
policy that required students to give access to
“password-protected electronic content” was “a clear
violation of their student’s First and Fourth Amendment
Constitutional rights.”
He added of companies that monitor athletes’ online
activities: “These companies are selling snake oil that
contains a major legal liability time bomb. To me,
there’s no difference in having to Facebook-friend a
coach than turning over user name and password.”
Oklahoma’s athletic director, Joe Castiglione, said the
university required its athletes to friend coaches on
Facebook. He said that when athletes were questioned
about something that appeared on their Facebook
pages, they often responded, “Hey, you’re not
supposed to see that.” He said his answer was, “Well,
everyone else in the world can.”
Jeremy Foley, the athletic director at Florida, said his
department contracted with UDiligence to monitor only
the Gators’ football players.
“I’m not a big believer that it’s our responsibility to
monitor that 24-7,” Foley said. “If there’s an issue, we’ll
deal with it. We’re trying to run a business here. We’re
not trying to be Big Brother.”
Varsity Monitor’s Carnahan said that by allowing the
universities to determine how much access his
company gets, it leaves a “white space” for colleges to
make their own decisions. But Kevin DeShazo, the
founder of Fieldhouse Media, another company in the
expanding online monitoring field, said that his
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
company does not access private information and that
he is opposed to monitoring Facebook and forcing
athletes to download applications or give access to
password-protected content.
“To be forced to give you access, passwords or let
them be friends with you on Facebook — I get why
coaches feel like it’s necessary, but there has to be
some level of respect and trust with these kids,”
DeShazo said, adding that his company has focused
on educating athletes about the perils of social media.
At North Carolina, where a message on Twitter from
the former football player Marvin Austin in 2010
revealed that he was receiving impermissible benefits
and was a factor in his being suspended for the
season, the social media policy is strict.
Steve Kirschner, a spokesman for North Carolina’s
athletic department, said each of the university’s sports
teams had a coach or a staff member assigned to
monitor Twitter messages sent by its players.
Roy Williams, the men’s basketball coach, said he
recognized that social media were simply a fact of life.
His players are permitted to use social media sites,
though not without a warning.
“I tell the guys, ‘It’s America, you have freedom of
speech,’ ” Williams said. “If you say something and it
embarrasses me or the basketball program or your
family, I’m going to be disappointed.”
The legal questions are not as simple, however, and
the answers may not come from campuses but from
courtrooms and legislatures.
“These are murky waters,” Voth said, “and it’s a
problem that’s not going to be answered today or in a
few months or a year.”
57

USA Today/ - News, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama cites health care -- not high court
case
President Obama touted his health care law today but
did not discuss the Supreme Court case that could
make or break it.
"Change is the health care reform we passed after a
century of trying," Obama told a campaign rally at the
University of Vermont in Burlington.
The high court is deciding whether the 2010 law
passes constitutional muster, particularly its
requirement that nearly all Americans have to buy
health insurance or pay a fine.
The justices held three days of hearings on the law this
week. They are likely to hand down a decision in
June.
White House officials say they are making no
contingencies in case the court strikes down the law
but are instead continuing plans to implement its
provisions.
Obama has not commented publicly on this week's
arguments.
Instead, at a pair of fundraisers in Burlington, Obama
included health care in a list of his accomplishments,
including the auto bailout, the end of combat
operations in Iraq and the death of Osama bin Laden.
At an earlier fundraiser in Burlington, Obama told
backers, "I said that we would get a health care law
that would provide near universal coverage so that
people don't have to go bankrupt when they get sick in
this country; we got it passed."
58

USA Today/ - News, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
BIDEN: Confident on health care
Add Vice President Biden to the list of Obama
administration officials who won't discuss even the
possibility that the health care law might get struck
down by the Supreme Court.
"I am not going to speculate about something I don't
believe will happen," Biden said in an interview for this
Sunday's Face The Nation on CBS. "I don't believe it
will happen."
Some Obama supporters beyond the confines of the
White House are worried in light of this week's
Supreme Court arguments. Conservative justices
asked critical questions about the health care law's key
feature: the individual mandate, the requirement that
nearly all Americans buy health insurance or face a
fine.
Biden -- one of the administration's most outspoken
members -- echoed other officials by saying, "We think
the mandate and the law is constitutional. And we think
the court will rule that way."
CBS released excerpts from the Biden interview to be
broadcast Sunday, the first day of Face The Nation's
new hour-long format.
The Supreme Court is at work on a health care ruling
likely to be made public in June, reports USA TODAY's
Richard Wolf.
Throughout the week, White House officials have said
they have no contingency plans should things go
against them in the high court.
"If there's a reason or a need for us to consider some
contingencies down the line, then we'll do it then," said
White House spokesman Josh Earnest. "But, as I said,
it's foolhardy to try to predict the outcome of this
decision based solely on the questions of the judges."
Like other officials, Biden said the administration is
focused on implementing the law. He attacked Mitt
Romney and other Republican presidential candidates
for vowing to repeal the law.
"I just think we should focus on what is the law doing
for people now and what would happen if in fact the
Republicans were able to repeal it," Biden said.
59

USA Today/ - News, Sex, 30 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama team puts up confident front on
health care
Add Vice President Biden to the list of Obama
administration officials who won't discuss even the
possibility that the health care law might get struck
down by the Supreme Court.
"I am not going to speculate about something I don't
believe will happen," Biden said in an interview for this
Sunday's Face The Nation on CBS. "I don't believe it
will happen."
Some Obama supporters beyond the confines of the
White House are worried in light of this week's
Supreme Court arguments. Conservative justices
asked critical questions about the health care law's key
feature: the individual mandate, the requirement that
nearly all Americans buy health insurance or face a
fine.
Biden -- one of the administration's most outspoken
members -- echoed other officials by saying, "We think
the mandate and the law is constitutional. And we think
the court will rule that way."
CBS released excerpts from the Biden interview to be
broadcast Sunday, the first day of Face The Nation's
new hour-long format.
The Supreme Court is at work on a health care ruling
likely to be made public in June, reports USA TODAY's
Richard Wolf.
Throughout the week, White House officials have said
they have no contingency plans should things go
against them in the high court.
"If there's a reason or a need for us to consider some
contingencies down the line, then we'll do it then," said
White House spokesman Josh Earnest. "But, as I said,
it's foolhardy to try to predict the outcome of this
decision based solely on the questions of the judges."
Like other officials, Biden said the administration is
focused on implementing the law. He attacked Mitt
Romney and other Republican presidential candidates
for vowing to repeal the law.
"I just think we should focus on what is the law doing
for people now and what would happen if in fact the
Republicans were able to repeal it," Biden said.
60

31/03/2012

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
31/03/2012
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Pranab defends retrospective amendment of I-T Act, 65
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | European Court of Justice
‘Not right to threaten democratically made laws', 66
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Retrospective change in tax laws grossly unfair: Vodafone, 67
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Powai township: No relief for Hiranandani, 68
Correo Peru - Política
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Poder Judicial entregará al MEF propuesta sobre remuneración de jueces, 69
El Dia - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Admite Zaffaroni que hay en el país "inestabilidad jurídica", 70
El Peruano - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Aplicación del nuevo Código Procesal Penal, 71
El Peruano - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Pide medidas drásticas contra espionaje telefónico, 72
La Nacion - Política
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
El dilema de la austeridad, 73
La Repubblica - Cronaca
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Constitución
Tre chiavi per aprire la gabbia della crisi, 74
Le Monde - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Cour pénale internationale
Alain Juppé et le réarmement moral de la diplomatie, 76
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Iraqi-American murder highlights anti-Muslim hate crimes, 78
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Slain Iraqi-American woman buried in Iraq, 80
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Marchers again demand arrest in Trayvon Martin case, 81
Reuters General - Article
62

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
What Supreme Court? Obama defends healthcare law, skirts debate, 82
Süddeutsche Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Widerwillen gegen Brokkoli und den Obrigkeitsstaat, 83
The Economic Times - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Charge sheet against Y S Jaganmohan Reddy is fraudulent, says YSR Congress party, 84
The Economic Times - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Pranab Mukherjee defends amendment of IT Act with retrospective effect, 85
The Economic Times - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
"Frankenstein monster" Lokpal may increase corruption : Justice Markandey Katju, 86
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
The Genius of the Mandate, 87
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
The Roberts Court Defines Itself, 89
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Fighting Terrorism, French-Style, 90
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Sense of Peril for Health Law Gives Insurers Pause, 92
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Constitutionality.
Financiers and Sex Trafficking, 94
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Why Gas Prices Are Out of Any President’s Control, 96
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Rape-Case Juror Called District Attorney ‘Wonderful’ Friend in Note, 98
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
A Health Law at Risk Gives Insurers Pause, 100
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Tracking Twitter, Raising Red Flags, 102
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
In Tenn., questions revived over Ten Commandments displays, 104
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
63

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
Ariz. sheriff faces crossroads in civil rights case, 107
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Ex-Obama aide Van Jones is back with new book, 109
64

Business Line/ - Markets, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Pranab defends retrospective amendment
of I-T Act
Kolkata, March 31:
The Finance Minister, Mr Pranab Mukherjee, today
clarified that the proposed amendments to the
Income-Tax Act, 1962 will not mean re-opening all
cases going back to 1961-62.
However, it would be applicable to cases where
foreign assets were created by some company or
individual without the sanction of the appropriate
authority.
Defending the Government's proposal to amend the
tax regime after the Supreme Court's order in the
Vodafone case, Mr Mukherjee said that cases beyond
six years could not be reopened.
“A retrospective amendment to the tax regime does
not mean it gives you the opportunity to reopen the
cases from 1961 or 1962. No income-tax case beyond
six years can be reopened. Some amendments have
been made in respect of certain cases beyond six
years but that is only for the foreign assets created by
some company or individual without the sanction of the
appropriate authority,” Mr Mukherjee said at an
interactive session organised by the Calcutta Chamber
of Commerce here on Saturday.
Mr Mukherjee, however, reiterated that a retrospective
amendment to the Income-Tax Act was essential for
cross-border deals involving local assets.
Amendment to the tax regime would help avoid
creating a situation wherein multinational companies
can evade taxes payable to a country of source and
country of operation, and also ensure that there is no
double taxation.
The Supreme Court had in January said that
Vodafone was not liable to be taxed on its $11.2-billion
acquisition of Hutchison's Indian telecom assets.
Mr Mukherjee admitted that he refrained from any
“dramatic announcement” in the Budget proposals for
2012-13 because of political constraints.
“I did not want, rather I did not attempt, to make any
dramatic announcements (in the Budget proposals),
because I have to keep in mind that every budgetary
proposal requires the approval of Parliament,” he said.
65

Business Line/ - Markets, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (European Court of Justice)
‘Not right to threaten democratically
made laws'
Overreaction' to emissions tax won't deter EU: Climate
commissioner
London, March 30:
The European Union will not back down on its plan to
charge airlines for carbon emissions, or countenance
threats that risk undermining democratically made
legislation within Europe, the region's climate chief, Ms
Connie Hedegaard, has said.
“People should be careful when threatening a trade
war. It's not difficult to start a trade war but much more
difficult to stop one,” Ms Hedegaard, EU Commissioner
for Climate Action and a former journalist and Danish
Minister for the Environment, told Business Line on
Friday.She pointed to a recent estimate that the new
EU emissions tax would cost China just €1.9 million
this year, as an example of the extent of the global
overreaction. “It's a very small amount to make a trade
war on.”
“If Europe has a law that somebody does not like it's
not right that by threatening us they think they can
make a democratic system change democratically
made laws,” she added. “In the world of the 21{+s}{+t}
century it makes sense to make polluters pay.”
Confident about solution
While the EU had a strong preference for global action,
the lack of progress on that level had necessitated
regional action. “It's been more than 10 years without
any progress. No one would be happier than the EU if
an international agreement were reached.”
Her comments came two days after the Airlines for
America called for the US President, Mr Barack
Obama, to bring a case through the International Civil
Aviation Authority. Ms Hedegaard noted that the US
organisation had dropped its lawsuit, which was due to
return to the London High Court following a European
Court of Justice ruling in December. She also pointed
out that despite warnings that China would hold up
orders from Airbus, Air China had insisted that no
orders had been changed.
She expressed her confidence in finding a solution
either via the use of equivalent measures, which would
allow for the exemption of routes from countries that
put similar measures in place, or through the
International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), where
there was a 13-month window of opportunity for action
before airlines face the first bills, beginning in April
2013. “If the will is there, it is doable.”
Will stick to position
“Should nations engage in retaliatory action it would
not change the EU's position,” she warned. “It would
be unfortunate, and we think it would be wrong to use
such a tool but it would not change the European
position; we cannot deal like that.”
“They make it sound as though this will break the neck
of airlines but that's not true. They get 85 per cent of
emissions free this year and up to 2020 they will get 82
per cent free, the rest is put on the passenger.”“On a
Delhi or Mumbai route to London you are talking about
€2 or less. Far less than the fees for arriving in the
airport, far less than the security fees or a cup of
coffee.”While the dispute over the airline tax continues
to rage, the European Commission is also facing a
backlash over a forthcoming carbon tax on the
shipping industry. Ms Hedegaard is hopeful that here
too, the EU's actions will spur action at a global level.
“We are trying to encourage the International Maritime
Organisation to move forward and do to shipping what
the ICAO did not manage to do for aviation,” she says.
“There was a contradiction in international attitudes,”
she said. “Many countries ask Europe to take a
leadership role and set more ambitious targets than
the rest of the world, and here is one example where it
does this and then they say: ‘Not now please.'”
66

Business Line/ - Markets, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Retrospective change in tax laws grossly
unfair: Vodafone
New Delhi, March 30:
Vodafone on Friday said that any move by the
Government to retrospectively change the tax regime
was grossly unjust. The telecom major said the
proposed changes in the Finance Bill contradicts the
conclusions of the Supreme Court and hence raises
constitutional questions for India.
“The proposed changes seek to apply, on a
retrospective basis, tax liabilities which explicitly were
not in force at the time of the transaction between
Vodafone and Hutchison,” the British telecom major
said in a statement.
This is the first reaction from Vodafone after the
Finance Minister, Mr Pranab Mukherjee, moved
numerous amendments to the income-tax law to
reverse the Supreme Court ruling on the matter. If the
amendments were to be enacted into law, Vodafone
could face a tax bill of at least $2 billion for the near
$11.2-billion deal with Hutchison in 2007.
The Supreme Court had, in the Vodafone case, ruled
that gains derived from transfer of shares of a foreign
company cannot be taxed in India, even if the value of
shares is substantially derived from assets located in
India.
Now, the Government has come up with a spate of
amendments that too on a retrospective basis from
April 1962, to bring Vodafone-Hutchison type
transactions into the tax net. The amendments are
being proposed as part of the Finance Bill 2012.
“These facts have been examined in detail by the
highest court in the land, which delivered an
unambiguous judgment affirming that there is indeed
no tax due on the transaction,” Vodafone said adding
that since it was the acquirer in this transaction, the
company made no capital gain whatsoever.
“The proposed changes in the Finance Bill
fundamentally contradict the firm conclusions of the
apex court and as such raise important constitutional
questions for India as well as widespread and
profound concerns in the minds of international
investors,” Vodafone said. The telecom company said
that it was considering a number of courses of action,
both in India and internationally.
tkt@thehindu.co.in
67

New Delhi, March 30:
Business Line/ - Markets, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Powai township: No relief for
Hiranandani
The Supreme Court has allowed the Mumbai-based
Hiranandani Developers to withdraw its plea against a
Bombay High Court order, which restrained the
company from further developing a piece of land in the
city suburb Powai.
The High Court had earlier stopped the construction till
the company provided flats for people from
economically weaker sections.
In an order on Friday, a Bench comprising Mr Justice
H.L. Dattu and Mr Justice C K Prasad, “After arguing
the matter for quite some time, learned senior counsel,
Mr (Mukul) Rohatgi, requests the court to permit him to
withdraw the petitions.”
“Permission sought for is granted. Petitions are
disposed of as withdrawn,” the apex court said.
The apex court had earlier indicated that at this stage it
cannot interfere with the High Court order.
The High Court had observed that according to an
agreement between the State Government,
MMRDAand the original land owners, the development
of 230-acre plot under ‘Powai Area Development
Scheme' was for affordable houses of 400 and 800
square feet.
The agreement also had a provision for building
affordable houses for the poor. Public Interest
Litigations alleged violation this clause in the pact,
adding that the company circumvented this norm by
amalgamating such smaller flats or selling adjoining
flats to different members of the same family from
affluent classes.
68

Correo Peru/ - Política, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Poder Judicial entregará al MEF
propuesta sobre remuneración de jueces
Lima -
El presidente del Poder Judicial, César San Martín,
anunció que el próximo 9 de abril presentará al
Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas (MEF), la
propuesta de su institución para ejecutar el aumento
progresivo del sueldo de los jueces, en el marco de la
comisión creada por la Ley 29818 para analizar este
tema.
La propuesta tomará como base lo previsto en los
artículos 146°, inciso 4, de la Constitución; y 186°,
inciso 5, del Texto Único Ordenado de la Ley Orgánica
de Poder Judicial, que disponen que el sueldo de los
jueces superiores equivale al 90 por ciento del total
percibido por los magistrados supremos.
Asimismo, de acuerdo a esas normas la remuneración
de los jueces especializados debe equivaler al 80 por
ciento, mientras que el de los jueces de paz letrados,
al 70 por ciento de los magistrados supremos.
Según nota de prensa del Poder Judicial, San Martín
anunció la presentación de la propuesta en la clausura
del Primer Encuentro de Presidentes y
Administradores de las Cortes Superiores de Justicia
2012, que culminó esta tarde.
"En lo referido a las remuneraciones de los jueces el
Poder Judicial es enfático en resaltar que todo juez
tiene derecho a percibir una remuneración que le
asegure un nivel de vida digno de su labor, conforme
lo establece la Constitución y la Ley Orgánica del
Poder Judicial", subrayó.
Por otro lado, manifestó que el Poder Judicial, en
forma conjunta y coordinada, seguirá desarrollando en
el presente año una serie de acciones en otros ejes,
como el del acceso a la justicia, capacitación, lucha
contra la corrupción, descarga procesal, reforma
procesal penal, reforma procesal laboral, gestión y
tecnologías de la información, reformas legales y
unidades ejecutoras.
Remarcó que estas medidas tienen como objetivo
apuntalar una estrategia destinada al fortalecimiento
de la justicia y la tutela de la dignidad de los jueces.
Andina
69

El Dia/ - Noticia, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Admite Zaffaroni que hay en el país
"inestabilidad jurídica"
Lo subrayó en el marco de una charla en la que
insistió con su propuesta de sistema parlamentario de
gobierno
El juez de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación
Eugenio Zaffaroni defendió en nuestra ciudad el
modelo de gobierno parlamentario que impulsa y,
entre otros conceptos académicos e irónicas
reflexiones que despertaron hilaridad en la
concurrencia, argumentó en favor de "dar el debate
porque debemos pensar que no tenemos las mejores
instituciones del mundo y nuestra democracia tiene 30
años apenas: es como un auto que anduvo muy de
vez en cuando en otro tiempo pero que ahora hace 30
años que anda todos los días y entonces hace
algunos ruidos y por eso debemos discutir cómo lo
mejoramos". Y en ese marco, se detuvo en señalar lo
que definió como la "inestabilidad jurídica" que impera
en el país.
Zaffaroni fue ayer conferencista sobre "El ocaso del
presidencialismo y la alternativa parlamentaria" que
organizó en el Colegio de Abogados de nuestra ciudad
y el Instituto Panamericano de Derecho Procesal.
"Teníamos también una fuerte tradición colonialista
pero pudimos cambiarla", señaló el juez de la Corte
sobre la fuerte tradición presidencialista que existe en
el país.
Y al plantear la necesidad de "un mejor control de la
institucionalidad" en el país, puso como ejemplo la
"inestabilidad jurídica" que subsiste.
"Yo les explico la situación a mis alumnos -dijo sobre
esa cuestión- preguntándoles si me puedo fumar un
porro. Y les digo que en un juzgado de primera
instancia me van a decir que sí, en la Cámara Penal
que no, en la Cámara de Casación que no, y en la
Corte que sí. Y si a partir de esto un empresario me
pregunta si vale la pena invertir en eso, yo le diré: sí,
pero si se muere alguno en la Corte, no sé que puede
pasar con usted. Eso se llama inestabilidad jurídica".
PARODIAS DE DEMOCRACIA
¦Al insistir, luego, sobre los beneficios de un sistema
parlamentario Zaffaroni opinó que "fortalece a los
partidos políticos, mientras que el presidencialista los
debilita porque los atomiza; y además cuando las
cosas andan mal en el país se pone en riesgo a todo
el sistema institucional. Eso lo vimos en 2011, cuando
con un sistema parlamentario la crisis pudo haberse
resuelto con menos trauma y hasta quizá, creo, no
hubiésemos llegado a la situación inicial que se dio".
En otro pasaje de su conferencia, Zaffaroni sostuvo
que "nuestro sistema presidencialista es un modelo de
Estados Unidos, donde terminó avasallando al Poder
legislativo y subordinando al Poder Judicial, con
reelecciones indefinidas durante años y años. En
América latina ese modelo llevó a verdaderas parodias
de democracia como el gobierno de Alfredo Stroesner
en Paraguay o el curioso sistema que impuso el PRI
en México que superó en tiempo en el poder a la
Unión Soviética".
"VISION PENELOPISTA"
Y al trasladar su crítica a la historia argentina, sostuvo
que "las oligarquías vernáculas han elaborado un
discurso de legalidad en el marco del sistema
presidencialista y todos sabemos que Moreno, Bolívar,
Sucre, Monteagudo y tantos otros no murieron de
muerte natural", ironizó Zaffaroni, suscitando sonrisas
y el aplauso del público compuesto por abogados,
estudiantes y representantes de diversos ámbitos
locales, y entre quienes estuvo el intendente Pablo
Bruera.
"En tiempos en que América latina se une sobre la
base de la defensa de sus recursos energéticos, a esa
integración debemos fortalecerla con políticas de
Estado que duren varios mandatos, porque el
presidencialismo tiene esa visión penelopista de que
hay que destejer lo que tejió el gobierno anterior",
fustigó Zaffaroni, a la vez que consideró que "dicen
siempre que se necesita un gobierno fuerte pero
cuando ese gobierno no tiene mayoría parlamentaria
no es fuerte y cae por eso en la tentación de gobernar
con decretos de necesidad y urgencia".
70

El Peruano/ - Noticia, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Aplicación del nuevo Código Procesal
Penal
Edhín Campos Barranzuela Juez de la Sala Penal de
la Corte Superior de Áncash
El próximo 1 de junio debe entrar en vigencia el nuevo
Código Procesal Penal (NCPP) en los distritos
judiciales de Áncash, Santa, Huánuco y Cerro de
Pasco, y el 1 de octubre de este año en Loreto y
Ucayali. Así sumarán 23 los distritos en que regirá el
citado código, faltando solamente un tercio de las
jurisdicciones, en donde se encuentra la Gran Lima.
En tal sentido, corresponde realizar un balance de
esta fase, señalar sus defectos y bondades, y qué
mejor que los propios operadores jurídicos para dar un
valioso concepto sobre su inminente puesta en
vigencia a escala nacional. Existe coincidencia en
señalar que el NCPP viene transformando las viejas
estructuras inquisitivas del sistema procedimental
punitivo y viene abriendo paso a una nueva cultura
garantista, acorde con la nueva corriente procesal
penal en América Latina.
Al inicio, la mayoría de operadores jurídicos, es decir,
jueces, fiscales, abogados y policías se encontraban
un tanto preocupados y desconcertados por el
advenimiento de esta reforma judicial.
Se preguntaban: ¿qué cambiará en los paradigmas
procesales?, ¿se podrá cambiar de mentalidad de la
cultura litigiosa a la cultura de los acuerdos
reparatorios o de oportunidad?, ¿habrá mayor
garantía en las audiencias previas y juicios públicos en
los procesos penales? ¿Disminuirán los altos índices
de la delincuencia y el crimen organizado que se viven
en nuestra sociedad? ¿Existe realmente una agenda
judicial de seguridad ciudadana acorde con el nuevo
modelo procesal?
En efecto, en el terreno de los hechos se ha permitido
mayor celeridad en los procesos judiciales, pues las
causas son más cortas y se sustancian con todas las
garantías constitucionales de la tutela jurisdiccional
efectiva, derecho de defensa y del debido proceso.
Según reportes del Equipo de Implementación del
NCPP y del propio Consejo Ejecutivo del Poder
Judicial, en los distritos judiciales en donde se
encuentra en vigencia, para mencionar un ejemplo, el
índice delincuencial, si bien no ha disminuido
ostensiblemente, la aprobación al sistema penal de
justicia ha logrado el reconocimiento de la población,
que percibe que con este nuevo modelo procesal
acusatorio existe una mejor garantía procesal.
En tal sentido, es necesario profundizar esta reforma
judicial para que los procesos judiciales tengan una
sentencia justa y se resuelva el conflicto de fondo.
Este nuevo sistema procesal penal se caracteriza
porque existe una clara división de funciones, por
parte del ministerio de la defensa y del Ministerio
Público, reforzándose el principio acusatorio, a través
de la oralidad, la contradicción, inmediación y la
publicidad; además, se refuerza el principio de
imparcialidad judicial, pues el juez de la investigación
preparatoria o unipersonal debe encargarse de
resolver la causa judicial en audiencia, sin tratar de
sustituir a las partes.
Otro aspecto positivo del NCPP es que con su
implementación las denuncias de corrupción se han
reducido a cero, al igual que las recusaciones y quejas
contra los magistrados.
71

El Peruano/ - Noticia, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Pide medidas drásticas contra espionaje
telefónico
Demanda investigación exhaustiva para identificar a
responsables de ilícitos
El presidente del Consejo de Ministros, Óscar Valdés,
dijo ayer que el Ministerio Público y el Poder Judicial
deben adoptar acciones drásticas contra los
responsables de interceptaciones telefónicas para que
esas prácticas ilícitas no vuelvan a suceder en el
país.
"Nosotros deploramos que estas malas prácticas se
sigan dando en el Perú. Creemos que el Ministerio
Público y el Poder Judicial deben ser muy duros y
muy drásticos con aquellos peruanos que quieren
estar en la escucha de conversaciones privadas, a las
cuales todos los peruanos tenemos derecho", declaró.
En conferencia de prensa, ofrecida en Palacio de
Gobierno, tras culminar el Consejo de Ministros
número 48, Valdés consideró que las autoridades
respectivas tienen la obligación de tomar las medidas
necesarias para evitar que se continúe con las
interceptaciones telefónicas ilegales.
Pidió que se realice una investigación exhaustiva para
identificar a los responsables de esos actos ilícitos.
Cerrar filas
Todos debemos cerrar filas contra las interceptaciones
telefónicas y exigir a las autoridades que actúen con
firmeza y que caiga todo el peso de la ley contra los
responsables de esas prácticas ilegales, dijo la
vicepresidenta Marisol Espinoza.
Señaló que el Ministerio Público y el Poder Judicial
deben actuar frente a las denuncias de una red de
escuchas ilegales en el Callao."Y al Congreso le
corresponde asumir (también) esta tarea", puntualizó.
72

El dilema de la austeridad
Rajoy con pocas opciones. Foto: EFE MADRID.- Es
difícil lograr que una población se disponga a cumplir
con una huelga general en un país con un índice de
desempleo del 23 por ciento. De hecho, la huelga de
anteayer en España -cuyo objetivo era detener la
reciente reforma laboral del país- fue dispar y hasta
relativamente apagada en varios sectores.
Hasta ayer, flotaba ya una atmósfera de inevitabilidad
respecto del "drástico ajuste" que Soraya Sáenz de
Santamaría, la mano derecha de Mariano Rajoy,
anunció por la mañana junto con el primer
presupuesto anual del gobierno conservador.
Demasiada austeridad puede ser contraproducente e
incluso poco realista, pero el jefe de gobierno español
no tenía muchas opciones.
La escala de ajuste, en las cifras, resulta
desalentadora. El gobierno central ya registró un
déficit del 2% en los dos primeros meses del año,
contra un 1,3% registrado en el mismo período, en
2011.
Esta brecha se explica mayormente por una
aceleración de las transferencias financieras desde el
centro a las regiones, por el sistema de bienestar
social estatal.
El aumento del déficit subyacente estuvo
marginalmente por encima del registrado el año
pasado. El Estado puede consolarse porque algunas
de las subas impositivas anunciadas en diciembre
último empezarán a entrar en vigor en marzo. Rajoy
ya había anunciado en la semana algunas de las
medidas confirmadas ayer, como los recortes de
gastos en los ministerios y un congelamiento de los
salarios públicos.
Ahora también las empresas se preparan para pagar
más impuestos, ya sea debido a la eliminación de
deducciones o a subas impositivas directas. Pero
La Nacion/ - Política, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
persiste la preocupación por las finanzas de las
regiones, que fueron responsables de dos tercios del
déficit del año pasado. Recientemente España admitió
un déficit presupuestario del 8,5% del PBI en 2011,
contra el objetivo original previsto, del 6 por ciento.
Los economistas creen que a Rajoy le resultará difícil
reducir el déficit al 5,3% convenido para este año con
la Comisión Europea y otros miembros de la
eurozona. Ese objetivo parece casi imposible si el
gobierno persiste en su negativa a aumentar el
impuesto al valor agregado, que ayer mantuvo intacto.
Atenerse a la austeridad a cualquier precio puede ser
incluso contraproducente si hace que la economía
caiga en picada.
Pero Rajoy ya ha quemado capital político al
establecer unilateralmente su propio objetivo previsto
de déficit, y adoptando lo que sus socios de la
eurozona y el Banco Central Europeo percibieron
como una postura desafiante. No habrá un camino
fácil para resolver este dilema.
Traducción de Mirta Rosenberg
Máximo histórico de desalojos en 2011
MADRID (AFP).- Las expulsiones de propietarios e
inquilinos endeudados registraron un "máximo
histórico" en 2011 en España, según informaron ayer
las autoridades judiciales. "Los desalojos practicados
alcanzaron un máximo histórico en 2011: 58.241, con
un incremento del 21% respecto de 2010", anunció el
Consejo General del Poder Judicial en un
comunicado. Símbolo de la crisis en España desde el
estallido de la burbuja inmobiliaria, en 2008, y de la
disparada del desempleo, los desalojos afectan a los
inquilinos y propietarios de viviendas o locales
comerciales que dejaron de pagar sus alquileres o
créditos inmobiliarios..
73

La Repubblica/ - Cronaca, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Constitución)
Tre chiavi per aprire la gabbia della crisi
I PROBLEMI da risolvere sono tanti, economici e
politici, ma tre sovrastano tutti gli altri perché
rappresentano la chiave che può aprire la porta oltre la
quale c"è la salvezza, e sono: l"evasione fiscale, il
precariato, la creazione di nuovi posti di lavoro.Ce
n"era un quarto, la messa in sicurezza dei conti
pubblici e del debito sovrano, ma questi sono già stati
risolti nei primi tre mesi del governo Monti dalle
congiunte azioni dei due Mario, quello che lavora a
Palazzo Chigi e l"altro che sta a Francoforte nella sede
turrita della Bce. Le dimensioni dell"evasione appaiono
lampanti dalla tavola dei redditi resa nota nei giorni
scorsi, aggiornata al 2010. Di solito, nelle società dove
le imposte sono normalmente pagate, la distribuzione
del reddito configura una trottola con un vertice sottile,
una coda altrettanto sottile e un grosso corpo al
centro; i ricchi, i poveri e la grossa pancia dove si
addensa il ceto medio. Ma in Italia non è così, non è
mai stato così. In Italia la grossa pancia poggia quasi a
terra, sorretta da un piolo corto, mentre in alto si
impenna un sottilissimo vertice. La grande pancia di
questa trottola sui generis non si può definire ceto
medio perché la fascia dei redditi che la compongono
sta tra i 12 e i 20mila euro annui. Non sono
tecnicamente poveri ma stentano molto a campar la
vita e sono composti da pensionati, lavoratori
dipendenti, lavoratori autonomi con partite Iva e piccoli
imprenditori.Le prime due categorie pagano le imposte
fino all"ultimo
centesimo col sistema della ritenuta alla fonte cui non
possono sfuggire; le altre categorie dichiarano il loro
reddito e sono soggette agli accertamenti del
fisco.L"evasione è fondatamente stimata in 280
miliardi di reddito che equivalgono ad un minor gettito
fiscale di 130 miliardi. Le sue dimensioni ammontano a
un quinto del reddito nazionale. Criminalizzare
nominativamente i contribuenti collocati nelle suddette
categorie sarebbe scorretto, ma che gli evasori si
trovino lì, in quella vastissima pancia schiacciata verso
il basso nell"anomala trottola sopra descritta, è una
certissima realtà, inesistente negli altri Paesi di
capitalismo evoluto. Una lotta seria per recuperare il
maltolto che danneggia al tempo stesso il fisco e la
vasta platea dei contribuenti (forzatamente) onesti,
non è mai stata fatta ma fino agli anni Ottanta dello
scorso secolo la figura della distribuzione del reddito
aveva la forma della piramide.L"anomalia
dell"evasione di massa è diventata intollerabile negli
ultimi trent"anni e - vedi caso - è andata crescendo
di pari passo con la crescita del debito
pubblico.Evidentemente c"è un nesso tra questi due
fenomeni.Quest"anno i primi risultati della lotta contro
l"evasione sembrano positivi: 13 miliardi sono stati già
recuperati; la cifra prudenzialmente prevista
dall"Agenzia delle entrate è di 20 miliardi, ma potrebbe
essere anche di più. Il governo non vuole ipotecare la
sua distribuzione ma è logico pensare che il primo
obiettivo debba essere quello di evitare l"inasprimento
dell"Iva previsto - se necessario - dal prossimo
settembre. Altri obiettivi, non necessariamente
alternativi, potrebbero essere sgravi fiscali ai ceti
medio-bassi, riduzione del cuneo fiscale e contributivo,
infine una diminuzione delle aliquote Irpef cioè un
generale sgravio fiscale socialmente modulato.Il buon
risultato della lotta all"evasione costituisce dunque la
pre-condizione per risolvere le altre due emergenze: la
creazione di nuovi posti di lavoro e la lotta contro il
lavoro
precario. *
* *C"è un"altra verità da tenere molto presente per
avviarsi verso la porta oltre la quale c"è l"uscita dalla
crisi attuale: l"importanza di diminuire la pressione
fiscale. I conti pubblici sono stati messi in sicurezza, il
pareggio del bilancio sarà raggiunto senza altre
manovre, ma la pressione fiscale è poco diffusa
(evasione) e troppo alta.Purtroppo la diminuzione della
spesa corrente, che pure rappresenta uno degli
obiettivi dell"attuale governo, non si è verificata poiché
la sua diminuzione si è finora ottenuta soltanto
trasferendola a carico di Regioni e Comuni. Alcuni
autorevoli economisti (Boeri, Penati, Giavazzi, Alesina)
segnalano da tempo questo tema. Oggi certamente il
rigore è necessario ma tagliare la spesa è meglio che
accrescere la fiscalità. Spostare in futuro il peso delle
imposte da quelle dirette a quelle indirette è una
riforma da meditare con estrema cautela perché le
indirette di solito hanno effetti socialmente regressivi
per contrastare i quali sarebbe necessaria una
patrimoniale ordinaria a bassa aliquota. Comunque la
spesa corrente va contenuta, magari compensandola
con l"aumento degli investimenti pubblici attualmente
ridotti quasi allo
zero. * *
*Oltre a quelli economici incombono con crescente
urgenza alcuni problemi politici che richiedono un più
attento coordinamento per i prossimi appuntamenti
parlamentari e la riforma del lavoro che dovrebbe
finalmente decollare con i cambiamenti necessari a
recuperare una pace sociale gravemente turbata.Se
l"obiettivo di Monti e Fornero è quello di rassicurare gli
74

investitori sul fatto che la concertazione con le parti
sociali è ormai definitivamente archiviata, ci
permettiamo di osservare quanto segue: ai fini
dell"occupazione, della stabilità e dello sviluppo, la
concertazione tra il governo e le parti sociali è di
grandissima importanza purché non intacchi
l"autonomia e la responsabilità di ogni istituzione. Non
si deve confondere la concertazione con il
consociativismo. Quest"ultimo, indebolendo
l"autonomia e la responsabilità delle istituzioni, snerva
le decisioni e impedisce di chiamare l"opera di governo
con il suo nome appropriato che è "azione". Il
consenso invece - che proviene dalla concertazione -
è l"aria che deve sempre respirare un governo
democratico, specie in una democrazia complessa e
difficile che ha come riferimento economico il mercato
aperto. Gli accordi di concertazione sono stati, a
partire da quello del luglio 1992, la trama istituzionale
su cui si è raccolto il consenso del Paese.Leggete con
attenzione questa frase che viene subito dopo i due
punti.Non è mia, ma potrebbe esserlo tanto è attuale e
calzante con i fatti di questi ultimi giorni. Si tratta d"una
citazione letterale del discorso che Ciampi, ancora
presidente del Consiglio, tenne a Verona nell"aprile
1994, dopo aver già rassegnato le dimissioni a pochi
giorni dalle elezioni che dettero inizio all"era
berlusconiana: "La concertazione è la trama
istituzionale su cui si è raccolto il consenso del
Paese".Questo è il punto di fondo e fu un tecnico
emerito a dirlo dopo averne sperimentato gli esiti come
capo del governo. Ci auguriamo che su questa
inoppugnabile realtà meditino insieme Monti, i leader
dei partiti, i ministri Passera e Fornero e Susanna
Camusso. L"impasse sull"articolo 18 va superato con
un accordo imposto dalla logica. Se il lavoratore
licenziato per motivi economici ricorre al giudice com"è
suo diritto e il giudice non ravvisa l"esistenza di quei
motivi economici, la motivazione del licenziamento
cade e con essa viene meno la limitazione dei poteri
del giudice prevista dall"attuale bozza di legge. Il
giudice cioè ha la potestà di annullare il licenziamento
oppure di stabilirne l"indennizzo. Se questa potestà gli
fosse negata saremmo davanti ad un impedimento del
libero convincimento del magistrato, tutelato dalla
Costituzione.
* * *L"altro e anch"esso incombente problema politico
non riguarda il governo ma i partiti ed è la necessaria e
urgente riforma della legge elettorale.Anche qui c"è
una bozza che diventerà, stando ai reciproci impegni
La Repubblica/ - Cronaca, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Constitución)
dei tre partiti della "strana" maggioranza, una proposta
di legge entro il corrente mese d"aprile.Stando alla
bozza, si tratta d"un meccanismo elettorale che ha la
sua base nella proporzionalità del voto affidata a liste
di candidati in collegi a base territoriale limitata; una
soglia di sbarramento al 5 per cento, diritto di tribuna
per i partiti che non superano la soglia e, infine,
iscrizione sulla scheda elettorale del nome del leader
del partito. È abolito l"apparentamento di coalizione tra
partiti. Nulla invece si dice sul premio di maggioranza
al partito che ottenga il maggior numero di voti, ma
l"ipotesi più logica in un meccanismo dove ogni partito
si presenta da solo, è che il premio sia abrogato o
condizionato al raggiungimento d"un livello molto
elevato e prossimo alla maggioranza assoluta dei voti
espressi.Viene dunque sancita la fine del bipolarismo.
Le coalizioni si faranno nel nuovo Parlamento ad
elezioni avvenute poiché è fin troppo ovvio prevedere
che nessun partito da solo potrà mai raggiungere il
50,1 dei voti espressi.Gli elettori non voteranno la
coalizione ma il partito, il suo programma e i candidati
in liste non bloccate. Può dispiacere la fine del
bipolarismo, ma può piacere che in una legislatura con
forte impegno costituente il consenso popolare sia
equamente distribuito e la proporzionalità sia
moderatamente corretta in favore della
governabilità.Sembra però del tutto inutile e
inutilmente scorretto nei confronti del capo dello Stato
l"iscrizione sulle schede elettorali del nome di
riferimento dei leader di partito. A che cosa serve? A
nulla per quanto riguarda la formazione del governo
per la quale resta ferma l"indicazione costituzionale
che attribuisce la nomina del presidente del Consiglio
al capo dello Stato senza alcuna indicazione di
procedure consultative. È stata questa la procedura
adottata da Napolitano per la nomina di Monti e fu
questa la procedura adottata da Pertini per la nomina
di Spadolini e da Scalfaro per la nomina di Ciampi. Ci
auguriamo che continui ad esser questa fino a quando
l"attuale Costituzione sarà vigente e le sue norme non
saranno manipolate dalla partitocrazia nella prima
Repubblica e dal populismo nella seconda.. Formulo
gli auguri più sinceri e affettuosi a Pietro Ingrao in
occasione del compimento dei suoi 94 anni, nel corso
dei quali è stato dirigente autorevole del Partito
comunista italiano ed anche presidente della Camera
dei deputati al servizio dello Stato democratico e della
Costituzione.
75

Le Monde/ - Article, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Cour pénale internationale)
Alain Juppé et le réarmement moral de la
diplomatie
Le ministre des affaires étrangères français, Alain
Juppé, le 12 avril 2011. | AP/Geert Vanden Wijngaert
Voilà un homme érudit, reconnu de haute valeur,
apprécié à l"étranger, et qui, non sans un certain
mystère, charrie ses tourments - certains étant ceux de
la France. Le Rwanda ? Difficile de pénétrer les
défenses de d"Alain Juppé sur ce sujet, tant les
arguments paraissent rodés, le discours blindé.A
propos de sa mise en cause dans le drame du
Rwanda de 1994 quand il était au Quai d"Orsay, Alain
Juppé nous répondait, un jour d"août 2011 : "C"est un
sujet sur lequel je suis d"une hypersensibilité. S"il y a
une faillite à ce moment-là, ce n"est pas une faillite de
la France mais une faillite du Conseil de sécurité qui a
retiré la force de l"ONU et laissé le vide. Après, le vide
a été comblé par notre opération (Turquoise)."Il n"est
pas inutile de rappeler ce dossier d"abîmes - où les
Nations unies, pourtant présentes au Rwanda avec un
contingent, sombrèrent en n"empêchant pas
l"abomination - avant d"évoquer l"Alain Juppé
d"aujourd"hui, celui qui prit part en 2011 aux "guerres
justes" de Nicolas Sarkozy, en Libye et en Côte
d"Ivoire.Il est surtout utile de mentionner la Bosnie du
siège de Sarajevo et de l"enclave de Srebrenica,
bourgade que l"ONU - toujours elle - était censée
protéger des massacreurs serbes. Plus de 8 000
hommes et adolescents musulmans abattus à bout
portant en quelques jours par Mladic et ses reîtres,
tandis que les Casques bleus restaient l"arme au pied
non loin de là...A propos de ces crimes que l"Europe
ne sut empêcher, Alain Juppé a eu en 2011 ce
commentaire : "Je me suis aperçu que la mission de la
Forpronu (Force de protection des Nations unies), qui
consistait à regarder les gens se faire massacrer, était
insupportable. Dans une certaine mesure, ça m"a
traumatisé, outre le fait qu"on n"a pas fait pour
Srebrenica ce que nous avons fait pour Sarajevo. (...)
Le tournant a été le pont de Verbanja, quand Chirac a
dit : "On ne tire pas sur des soldats français sans que
nous ripostions." Cela, je n"aurai pas pu le faire avec
Mitterrand. C"est Chirac qui l"a fait."Lorsqu"il tient ces
propos - assis dans le salon de la Rotonde qui sert de
bureau aux ministres français des affaires étrangères,
et où, tapisseries, dorures et tableaux anciens aidant,
se respire une certaine France nostalgique de
grandeurs passées -, cela fait une semaine que la
capitale libyenne, Tripoli, a été "libérée" de la tyrannie
de Mouammar Kadhafi. L"ombre portée du Rwanda et
de Srebrenica plane assurément sur la façon dont
Alain Juppé a vécu l"épisode libyen.Ce ne fut rien de
moins qu"un réarmement moral de la politique
étrangère française, en phase avec un message
d"accompagnement de la vague d"aspirations
démocratiques dans le monde arabe - le grand
événement international, politique et stratégique de
l"année 2011. Kadhafi, s"il était resté au pouvoir,
terrorisant sans relâche, aurait représenté un danger
mortel pour la jeune révolution tunisienne voisine. Une
révolution que l"Elysée, parmi d"autres motivations,
voulut soudain "sécuriser" après l"avoir, on le sait,
totalement ratée.Sous l"égide de la "diplomatie Juppé",
c"est pour la Libye qu"a été activée, pour la première
fois, au moyen d"une opération armée, la
"responsabilité de protéger". Ce concept onusien est
destiné à empêcher que des crimes de masse se
perpétuent dans l"indifférence et l"inaction du reste de
la planète. Il a été élaboré, précisément, après le
Rwanda et la Bosnie.Cela ne se voit pas forcément sur
les photos officielles des grands rassemblements
diplomatiques, mais il existe une sorte de "club
bosniaque" secret, à l"échelle internationale. Il réunit
ceux des décideurs d"hier ou d"aujourd"hui qui portent
la mémoire d"années d"impuissance peu glorieuses
face à l"horreur. Hillary Clinton, témoin à l"époque des
hésitations de son mari Bill, en fait partie. Et Alain
Juppé, quoi qu"en dise Bernard-Henri Lévy, qui a
tendance à le taxer d"anti-interventionnisme
impénitent, figure aussi parmi ces endoloris.Il a été le
premier à souhaiter publiquement la chute du Guide
libyen, le premier à dire qu"il fallait activer la Cour
pénale internationale, le premier à annoncer - sur
son blog, sous l"intitulé "Notre honneur" - que les
soutiens nécessaires à une campagne de "frappes
ciblées" étaient en passe d"être trouvés à l"ONU. Mais
sans la décision d"entrer en guerre prise par Nicolas
Sarkozy, on peut se demander si Alain Juppé aurait
été laissé à ses tourments. C"est l"étrangeté de ce
couple politique, fait de contraires unis bien plus par
raison froide que par élan d"amitié. Alain Juppé a un
jour dit qu"il avait "servi" Jacques Chirac, tandis qu"il
"travaille aux côtés de" Nicolas Sarkozy. Nuance non
négligeable.Le "club bosniaque", on en retrouve un
autre membre éminent, aujourd"hui, sur la crise
syrienne : Kofi Annan. L"ancien secrétaire général de
l"ONU, traumatisé par les échecs dans les Balkans,
est chargé d"une médiation. Alain Juppé a fixé sur ce
dossier - où Nicolas Sarkozy en campagne électorale
paraît effacé depuis des mois - les règles d"une
diplomatie "en mouvement". Condamnations
stridentes, isolement du régime, sanctions et même
76

(ce jour-là, Alain Juppé semblait faire du Kouchner)
menace de "couloirs humanitaires sécurisés", y
compris sans l"assentiment de Damas... Rien n"y a
fait. Bachar Al-Assad est toujours là, qui poursuit son
oeuvre de mort. Et tout le monde redoute une
contagion guerrière.De là à en tirer la conclusion qu"en
matière de droits de l"homme les Etats ne passent de
la posture déclarative à l"action que lorsque cela
répond à leurs intérêts nationaux bien compris... Alain
Juppé a un jour glissé que le drame en Syrie
Le Monde/ - Article, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Cour pénale internationale)
l"empêchait de dormir. Lui le chiraquien avait, comme
l"ancien président français féru d"affaires orientales,
développé une aversion lucide pour le système Assad
bien avant l"année 2011. A 66 ans, Alain Juppé sait
aussi que son deuxième passage au Quai d"Orsay,
dans une carrière riche en rebondissements, pourrait
être jaugé par les historiens à l"aune de la capacité ou
non de la France à endiguer un embrasement sanglant
dans le Levant compliqué.
77

Reuters General/ - Article, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Iraqi-American murder highlights
anti-Muslim hate crimes
(Reuters) - The murder of an Iraqi-American mother in
a close-knit refugee community on the outskirts of San
Diego has brought attention to a rise in bias crimes
against Muslims, even as police caution against
definitively labeling her death a hate crime.
Shaima Alawadi, a 32-year-old stay-at-home mother of
five, was found brutally beaten in the dining room of
her rented home last week by her 17-year-old
daughter, police said. She died of her wounds on
Saturday.
Local police are investigating the killing as a possible
hate crime because of a note found next to Alawadi's
unconscious body that threatened the family and was
reported to have labeled her a terrorist. An FBI bias
crimes squad is assisting.
Alawadi's death comes at a time of renewed
anti-Muslim sentiment nationwide. The number of
anti-Muslim hate groups tripled to 30 in 2011,
according to a recent report by the Southern Poverty
Law Center, which advocates for civil rights.
There was a big jump in hate crimes against Muslims
after the September 11, 2001 attacks carried out by
Al-Qaeda, but the number subsided during the middle
of the decade of the 2000s.
Bias crimes are on the rise again, reaching 186
separate offenses in 2010, the highest in five years,
the FBI data show.
"We are considering the hate crime aspect, but we are
not labeling it as such," El Cajon Police Lieutenant
Mark Coit said. But he could not reveal any details on
the status of the case.
In a sign of how closely the case was being watched,
the U.S. State Department expressed condolences for
Alawadi's death, and Iraqi government representatives
attended the funeral.
Both law enforcement and Arab and Muslim lobby
groups, have stopped short of ruling out other
scenarios, and even Alawadi's family was uncertain of
what happened.
"The majority of the family believes that it could be
anything," said Nazanin Wahid, a friend who is serving
as a spokeswoman for the family. "But the fact that
they found a note and that the police said initially that it
resonates like a hate crime led them to believe that it
could be that."
Community activists point to a history of violence and
intimidation toward the local Muslim community, even
as they say they cannot recall ever such a severe
crime.
"Maybe this wasn't a hate crime. But I have cases that
are hate crimes," said Besma Coda, Culture Adviser
for Chaldean-Middle Eastern Social Services in El
Cajon.
Some of Coda's clients have suffered broken bones
and beatings in recent years, she said. One client had
to get 10 stitches in his head because of a
hate-motivated beating.
GROWING IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY
Since Alawadi's death, at least two members of El
Cajon's Muslim community have reported receiving
threatening phone calls, said Sadaf Hane, civil rights
director of the San Diego chapter of the Council on
American-Islamic Relations.
The Arab community in particular is prone to
under-reporting such discrimination because of a
distrust of the abuses of authorities, Hane added.
El Cajon is in the heart of East San Diego County,
which is home to the second largest Iraqi community in
the United States, behind Detroit. More than half of El
Cajon's 100,000 residents are of Middle Eastern
descent.
Like Alawadi's family, some of the city's Arab residents
are largely Shi'ite refugees from Iraq who arrived in the
United States in the 1980s and 1990s after fleeing
their homeland in the aftermath of Saddam Hussein's
1980 invasion of Shi'ite neighbor Iran and the long war
that followed.
But the town has seen an even larger surge of Iraqi
newcomers since 2008 through a U.S.-funded refugee
resettlement program, often joining relatives in the
area, said Michael McKay, Deputy Director of Refugee
Services at the Catholic Charities Diocese of San
78

Diego.
A friend of Alawadi's family, Sura Alzaidy, told the San
Diego Union Tribune newspaper the note found near
Alawadi read: "Go back to your own country. You're a
terrorist."
Alawadi and her husband arrived in the United States
in 1993 after spending years in a refugee tent camp
next to Majed al Hasan, who later became their
neighbor in El Cajon.
The Iraq they fled was terrifying, with secret police
torturing and killing perceived enemies of the state,
Hasan said. Alawadi, Hasan, and thousands of other
Iraqis were eventually granted asylum in the United
States, where they mostly settled in the San Diego and
Detroit communities.
"They come from a war-torn country," McKay said. "To
think that you're not safe, still, after coming this far is
scary."
HOODIES AND HIJABS
On one recent night, hundreds of mourners stood in
front of Alawadi's house in a quiet cul-de-sac nestled in
the hills as the sun set, lighting candles for a vigil in
her honor.
The crowd quietly murmured about the case until
Alawadi's mother arrived and her cries of sorrow
pierced the air, silencing those gathered before wails
erupted around her as she walked through the crowd,
sobbing and beating her chest.
Some mourners wore the traditional black cloak and
scarf worn by many devout Muslim women. Others
wore T-shirts that said "Justice for Shaima Alawadi"
above a silhouette of a woman wearing a Muslim
headscarf.
Alawadi wore such a headscarf, and advocates for the
Arab and Muslim community have suggested that her
scarf may have been a factor in drawing attention to
her as a perceived outsider, if indeed her killing was a
hate crime.
Reuters General/ - Article, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
"We're not going to cry, if that's what you wanted.
We're not going to take off our scarf, if that's what you
wanted," Alawadi's eldest daughter, Fatima, said at the
vigil, addressing her mother's killer.
Alawadi was buried in the holy Shi'ite city of Najaf,
roughly 100 miles south of Iraq's capital Baghdad, on
Saturday.
For many in El Cajon, the case has drawn parallels to
that of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed black teenager
shot in Florida last month by a Neighborhood Watch
volunteer in a killing that has also drawn outrage
because of its racial undertones.
"My condolences go out to the family of Trayvon,"
Alawadi's 15-year-old son Muhammed said at the vigil,
as tears welled up in his eyes. "My candle goes out to
you as well."
Some activists have begun linking the two cases on
social media, spurring a popular hoodiesandhijabs
hashtag on Twitter. Martin was wearing a hoodie when
he was killed.
Students at several college campuses from the
University of North Carolina-Asheville to the University
of Southern California held "Hoodies and Hijabs" rallies
on Thursday.
The two cases, despite their differences, highlight
broader questions of discrimination against black and
Muslim communities in America, said Abdulrahman
El-Sayed, a fellow at think tank Demos and an
epidemiologist at Columbia University.
As darkness fell in El Cajon at the recent vigil,
mourners raised their candles in the air and chanted
"We want justice."
(Editing by Dan Whitcomb, Cynthia Johnston and Greg
McCune)
79

Reuters General/ - Article, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Slain Iraqi-American woman buried in
Iraq
(Reuters) - An Iraqi-American woman who was beaten
to death in her U.S. home in a possible case of hate
crime was buried in her native Iraq on Saturday.
Relatives wept as the casket of Shaima Alawadi, a
32-year-old mother of five, was taken to the Valley of
Peace cemetery in the holy Shi'ite city of Najaf, 160 km
(100 miles) south of Iraq's capital Baghdad.
Alawadi was found unconscious in the dining room of
her rented home in California last Wednesday by her
17-year-old daughter. She was taken to a trauma
centre with a severe head injury and died last Saturday
after being taken off life support.
The killing is being investigated as a possible hate
crime because of a threatening note that was found
near her, police say.
"The martyr (Alawadi) used to love all, she made no
distinction between religions," Alawadi's father, Nabil,
told Reuters.
"Her husband told me that someone threw a note
saying 'go back to your own country, you're a
terrorist'... Who is the real terrorist, Shaima, or them,"
he said.
Alawadi's casket, draped in an Iraqi flag, was flown
into Iraq on Saturday. A police convoy transported the
coffin to the shrine of Imam Ali, a central figure of
Shi'ite Islam, where prayers were held for Alawadi
before she was buried.
Mourners carrying a banner calling for legal action.
"The motives behind the crime are racial ... We call on
concerned Iraqi institutions such as the Human Rights
Ministry, parliamentary committees and the Foreign
Ministry to follow up on the crime and find the
criminals," Alawadi's nephew, Haider Kadhim, said.
Alawadi lived in the San Diego suburb of El Cajon,
which, along with nearby areas, is home to some
50,000-60,000 immigrants and refugees of Middle
Eastern descent.
If hate is confirmed as a motive in the killing, it would
be the worst bias crime committed against Arabs or
Muslims in years in the area, according to Sadaf Hane,
civil rights director of the San Diego chapter of the
Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Police say the region has not experienced violent hate
crimes in the past.
The FBI is assisting the El Cajon Police Department in
the investigation, and has provided agents from a
squad that is specifically trained to conduct hate crime
investigations, FBI spokesman Darrell Foxworth said.
(Reporting by Baghdad newsroom; Writing by Serena
Chaudhry; Editing by Alison Williams)
80

Reuters General/ - Article, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Marchers again demand arrest in Trayvon
Martin case
By Barbara Liston
SANFORD, Florida | Sat Mar 31, 2012 4:31pm EDT
(Reuters) - Thousands of protesters marched through
Sanford, Florida, on Saturday demanding an arrest of
the neighborhood watch volunteer who shot and killed
an unarmed black teen a month ago.
"We want arrests ... shot in the chest," they chanted in
reference to 17-year-old victim Trayvon Martin, who
was shot in the chest.
Ben Jealous, president of the NAACP which organized
the march, and civil rights leader the Rev. Al Sharpton
denied media reports that Sharpton planned to call for
an economic boycott of Sanford or the surrounding
central Florida area, calling it a "media fabrication."
"Put to rest the rumor that there is any discussion of a
boycott of the community," Jealous told reporters.
Demonstrators called for the arrest of George
Zimmerman, the 28-year-old neighborhood watch
captain who admitted shooting Martin with a
semiautomatic handgun. Zimmerman, a white
Hispanic, had called 911 to report a "suspicious"
person and followed Martin against the dispatcher's
advice.
Zimmerman told police that he was walking back to his
vehicle when Martin attacked him and slammed his
head against the ground and that he shot in self
defense. Police declined to arrest Zimmerman citing
Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, which gives wide
latitude to use deadly force when a threat is
perceived.
The ensuing public outcry has prompted ongoing state
and federal investigations and charges of racial bias.
"We're here to say 'save our sons.' Bring Mr.
Zimmerman to justice," Jealous said.
With gospel music playing in the background,
protesters marched from a technical high school
campus through a predominantly black neighborhood
to a rally at the Sanford Police Station. The throng
stretched for blocks, weaving past homes, churches
and small businesses, many of them boarded up.
It was one of the largest demonstrations yet in
Sanford, where Martin was killed on February 26.
Speakers at the rally said they were committed to
non-violence and that Martin's death served as a
wake-up call on a number of issues. The issues
included the abundance of weapons on the street, the
level of violence in society and the struggle for racial
equality.
"It is not just racial profiling. It is bank profiling,
healthcare profiling," the Rev. Jesse Jackson said.
"The disparity in this country is growing ... there is a
meanness in our country today."
NAACP chapters from South Carolina, Georgia and
Alabama arranged buses to bring participants to the
rally, while others traveled by car.
"Because of the age of the young man and because of
the circumstances of his death, every community can
identify with that," said Bernard Simelton, president of
the Alabama state conference of the NAACP. "We've
had things like that happen in Alabama where
somebody gets killed and the police just sweep it
under the rug. It just touches everyone."
While insisting there was no call for a boycott,
Sharpton said there could still be unspecified action
against national groups that support the "Stand Your
Ground" laws like the one police cited when they
declined to arrest Zimmerman.
(Additional reporting by Harriet McLeod, writing by
Jane Sutton; Editing by Greg McCune)
81

Reuters General/ - Article, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
What Supreme Court? Obama defends
healthcare law, skirts debate
By Jeff Mason
Portland, Maine | Fri Mar 30, 2012 8:52pm EDT
(Reuters) - He didn't mention them by name, but they
seemed to be on his mind. President Barack Obama
defended his healthcare reform effort on Friday without
mentioning the Supreme Court justices who hold the
law's fate in their hands.
Obama's healthcare legislation, considered his
signature domestic policy achievement, dominated
headlines this week as the Supreme Court heard
arguments about its constitutionality.
The president was briefed about the proceedings but
did not comment on healthcare publicly until Friday,
during a series of fund raisers for his re-election
campaign in Vermont and Maine.
While listing the reform as evidence of the "change"
agenda he promised in 2008, Obama skirted the issue
of the Supreme Court's potentially game-changing
role.
"Change is the health care reform that we passed after
over a century of trying," he said to applause from a
crowd of donors at a campaign event in Burlington,
Vermont.
"Already millions of seniors are paying less for their
prescription drugs because of this law. Already,
Americans can't be denied or dropped by their
insurance company when they need care the most.
Already, they're getting preventive care that they didn't
have before. That's happening right now."
Republican presidential candidates have made
repealing what they call "Obamacare" a key promise of
their respective quests to win their party's presidential
nomination and challenge Obama in the November 6
election.
The Supreme Court could help their case and deliver
a major blow to the president if it nixes all or part of the
law in a decision expected by late June.
The justices held closed-door deliberations about the
law on Friday and were likely to have cast preliminary
votes.
Obama highlighted healthcare reform as one of his top
accomplishments at a second series of fund raisers in
Maine on Friday. Ticket prices for the final fundraising
event started at $5,000.
(Editing by Todd Eastham)
82

Süddeutsche Zeitung/ - Politik, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Widerwillen gegen Brokkoli und den
Obrigkeitsstaat
Ein Kommentar von Reymer Klüver
Obamas Gesundheitsreform hat die Amerikaner so tief
entzweit wie es seit Jahrzehnten kein innenpolitisches
Thema getan hat. Der erbitterte Streit rührt an Ängste,
die tief in der amerikanischen Psyche verankert sind:
Wie stark darf der Staat in das Leben des einzelnen
Bürgers eingreifen?
Jeder Amerikaner hasst Brokkoli. Generationen von
Müttern in den USA haben ihrem Nachwuchs den Kohl
aufgenötigt. Schließlich ist er so gesund. Und so war
die Frage nicht ohne Perfidie gewählt, die Antonin
Scalia, einer der fünf Konservativen unter den neun
Richtern am Supreme Court, in dieser Woche
während der Anhörung über die Gesundheitsreform
aufwarf: Könnte der Staat seine Bürger zwingen,
Brokkoli zu kaufen?
Verhandelt wird jene Reform von Präsident Barack
Obama, die einen krassen sozialen Missstand in den
USA zumindest teilweise beheben soll. Es geht um die
Pflicht zur Krankenversicherung für alle Amerikaner.
Etwa 50 Millionen Amerikaner sind bisher unversichert,
für etwa 30 Millionen von ihnen würde sich das bald
ändern. Die Reform aber hat das Land so tief entzweit
wie seit Jahrzehnten kein innenpolitischer Streit mehr.
Nach Obamas Vorstellung muss künftig jeder
Amerikaner eine private Krankenversicherung kaufen -
oder ein Strafgeld zahlen. Was, fragte Richter Scalia
also, würde sich der Staat danach noch erlauben?
Könnte er nicht genauso gut die Bürger zwingen,
Brokkoli zu kaufen? Ist am Ende nicht die Freiheit
eines jeden Amerikaners bedroht, wenn das Gericht
die Versicherung zur Pflicht erklärt? Der erbitterte
Streit über die Gesundheitsreform rührt an die
Tiefenschichten der amerikanischen Psyche, an
Ängste, die im nationalen Genom codiert sind.
Die USA wurden vor gut zwei Jahrhunderten
gegründet, weil es die Siedler satthatten, sich von
einer fernen Regierung jenseits des Ozeans gängeln
zu lassen. Hier liegt er begründet, der Widerwille
gegen jede Form von zentralstaatlicher Obrigkeit. Wie
ein roter Faden zieht er sich seitdem durch die
Geschichte.
Das London der Kolonialzeit wurde später durch
Washington ersetzt - der Leviathan war einfach nur
umgezogen. Die Südstaaten haben ihre Sezession
ideologisch auch damit gerechtfertigt, dass sie sich nur
durch Abspaltung dem Diktat einer fremd gewordenen
Zentralmacht entziehen könnten (die ihnen die
Sklavenhaltung verbieten wollte).
Feindbild "Feds"
Noch heute sind es, vor allem im ländlichen Amerika,
die Feds, die Repräsentanten der Bundesbehörden,
die als Eindringlinge empfunden werden. Sei es in
Form der Steuerbehörde, die auch noch für den Bund
das Geld eintreibt (obwohl man doch schon Abgaben
für die Kommune und den Bundesstaat zahlen muss).
Oder sei es durch FBI-Agenten, die sich in Dinge
einmischen, die man am besten untereinander regeln
sollte. Sarah Palin, die populistische Heldin der
Rechten, spielt virtuos mit den Ängsten konservativer
Amerikaner vor einem Diktat ferner Bürokraten. Auch
Obama hat mit dieser Haltung kokettiert, als er vor vier
Jahren versprach, den Wandel nach Washington zu
bringen.
83

The Economic Times/ - News, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Charge sheet against Y S Jaganmohan
Reddy is fraudulent, says YSR Congress
party
HYDERABAD: YSR Congress party Saturday termed
as "fraudulent" the charge sheet filed by the Central
Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in an alleged illegal
assets case against its leader Y.S. Jaganmohan
Reddy.
The party alleged that it was done in a hurry to prevent
bail for Vijay Sai Reddy, and said it is exploring legal
options to challenge the charge sheet.
"How can the CBI file a charge sheet when the
investigation process is not complete. The Supreme
Court has recently issued notices to the ministers,
senior bureaucrats and CBI seeking explanation and
even before giving a reply to the notice, the charge
sheet is filed," said the party's political advisor, D. A.
Somayajulu.
He asked when Jaganmohan Reddy, who is accused
number one in the CBI FIR, was not questioned even
once, how can the investigation process be complete.
He alleged the charge sheet was filed in a hurry as
Vijaya Sai Reddy would be getting bail since he cannot
be kept in jail for more than 90 days.
The Supreme Court recently issued notices to six
ministers and eight Indian Administrative Service (IAS)
officers asking them why they should not be
questioned with regard to 26 controversial government
orders issued by YSR government to benefit certain
companies which invested into Jagan's firms.
84

The Economic Times/ - News, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Pranab Mukherjee defends amendment of
IT Act with retrospective effect
KOLKATA: Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee today
defended the move to amend the Income Tax Act with
retrospective effect following which UK's Vodafone
may have to pay Rs 11,000 crore as tax for a buyout
deal involving Indian business.
"First the Supreme Court told in the Vodafone case
that it has to be clearly indicated the intention of the
legislature how it is going to tax," Mukherjee said at an
interactive session organised by Calcutta Chamber of
Commerce.
"We came to the conclusion that we will not be able to
tax on Indian assets purchased outside the country,"
he added.
UK-based mobile operator Vodafone purchased Hong
Kong-based Hutchison's telecom business, which
included operations in India, in 2007 for about USD
11.2 billion.
Indian income tax authorities said the deal will attract
tax on it and sought Rs 11,000 crore from Vodafone,
which challenged the move.
The Supreme Court ruling held that Vodafone wasn't
liable to pay tax on the deal, following which the
government has proposed to amend the tax laws
retrospectively to bring in the net such deals.
"I will now pose few questions. We will have to decide
whether India will be a no tax country or India will tax
... If the answer is yes that it will be taxed, then
whether to be taxed in India or at source of the
company. Then comes the question how it is being
protected from Double Tax Avoidance Agreement and
tax exchange information in India", Mukherjee said.
The legal remedy lay in bringing clarificatory
amendments and make clear the intention of the
legislature, he added.
"If I want to clarify the intention of the legislature in
respect of particular section passed in a particular
year, the relevant year is only that year," he said.
"But this does not mean that it gives the opportunity to
reopen the cases from 1962. There is the other
provision that no IT cases can be re-opened beyond
six years," the Union Finance Minister said.
The Income Tax Act came into force from 1962.
Mukherjee also said he had instructed the officers to
examine the transfer pricing mechanism so that no one
was harassed.
85

The Economic Times/ - News, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
"Frankenstein monster" Lokpal may
increase corruption : Justice Markandey
Katju
NEW DELHI: Press Council Chief Justice Markandey
Katju today urged Parliament to refer the Lokpal Bill to
a Standing Committee for further consideration so that
a workable corruption investigation machinery can be
created.
In its present state, the Bill can create a parallel
bureaucracy that could turn into a "Frankenstein
monster" and double or triple corruption, he said in a
statement.
Katju, a retired Supreme Court judged, said that
whether it was the Janlokpal Bill or the Sarkari Lokpal
Bill, the legislation envisaged overseeing the work of
some 55 lakh government employees in the country (of
which 13 lacs are in the Railways alone), from Prime
Minister to peon.
"Surely one person cannot enquire into the lakhs of
complaints which are bound to pour in. It will require
thousands of Lokpals, may be 50,000 of them to do
this," he said.
He also added that all these officers will have to be
given salaries and amenities like housing, offices and
staff.
"And then where is the guarantee that these will not
themselves become corrupt? In fact considering the
low level of morality prevailing in India, we can be fairly
certain that a large number of them will become
blackmailers," Katju said.
Justice Katju said that implications of creating Lokpal
were not rationally thought out and "some people
thought that all problems of corruption will be solved by
shouting 'Bharat Mata Ki Jai' or 'Inquilaab Zindadbad'
from Jantar Mantar or Ram Lila Ground He said while
Anna Hazare was an honest person, his ideas were
not scientific.
86

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
The Genius of the Mandate
WHEN the Obama White House set out to make the
liberal dream of universal health coverage a reality, it
faced two obvious political obstacles. The first was the
power of the interlocking interest groups — insurance
companies, physician associations, pharmaceutical
companies — that potentially stood to lose money and
power in a comprehensive reform. The second was the
price tag of a universal health care entitlement, which
promised to be high enough to frighten vulnerable
members of Congress.
The key to overcoming both obstacles, it turned out,
was the mandate to purchase health insurance.
In arguments before the Supreme Court last week,
the health care mandate was defended as a kind of
technocratic marvel — the only policy capable of
preventing the complex machinery of reform from
leaking smoke and spitting lug nuts.
But the mandate is actually a more political sort of
marvel. In the negotiations over health care reform, it
protected the Democratic bill on two fronts at once:
buying off some of the most influential interest groups
even as it hid the true cost of universal coverage.
The mandate offered the interest groups what all
entrenched industries desire: a fresh and captive
market for their products. For the insurance
companies, it promised enough new business to offset
the cost of covering Americans with pre-existing
conditions. For the health care sector as a whole, it
guaranteed that disposable income currently being
spent on other goods and services would be spent on
its instead.
This explains why the health care bill was ultimately
backed by so many industry lobbying groups, from the
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of
America to the American Medical Association. It
explains why the big insurers, while opposing the final
legislation, never attacked it as vigorously as they did
Bill Clinton’s ill-fated reform effort.
At the same time, by requiring the private purchase of
insurance, the mandate kept the true cost of the health
care expansion off the government’s books, and
largely out of the Congressional debate. As the Cato
Institute’s Michael Cannon has noted, during the
Clinton era the Congressional Budget Office scored an
individual mandate as a form of government spending,
which pushed the official cost of the Clinton bill into the
trillions. But the Obama White House was savvier in its
mandate design, and the C.B.O. was more compliant
in its scoring. As a result, a bill that might require over
$2 trillion in new health care spending — private as
well as public — over its first decade was sold with a
$900 billion price tag.
So the mandate was politically brilliant, in a sense. But
its brilliance was evanescent. Founding a new
entitlement on an insider-friendly sleight-of-hand made
the bill much easier to pass. But it’s made it harder to
defend thereafter, both in the court of law and the court
of public opinion.
The mandate’s constitutionality is a thorny issue, and
conservatives normally skeptical of judicial activism
should probably be a little less eager to see major
legislation set aside by a 5-to-4 majority. But the
provision is unpopular enough that it’s unlikely to
survive in the long run even if Anthony Kennedy flips a
coin and decides to uphold it.
Liberals are counting on the fact that “only” seven
million Americans will be initially exposed to the
mandate’s requirements. But as the economist Tyler
Cowen notes, there’s every reason to think that rising
health care costs will make the mandate more
burdensome with time. And a provision that’s already
become a symbol of government overreach seems
unlikely to become more popular once there are
thousands of individuals and businesses with concrete
grievances against it.
The reality is that the more treatments advanced
medicine can offer us (and charge us for), the harder it
becomes to guarantee the kind of truly universal, truly
comprehensive coverage that liberals have sought for
years. The individual mandate conceals these realities,
but it doesn’t do away with them. If it’s repealed or
swept aside, both left and right might be able to focus
on a more plausible goal: not a perfectly universal
system, but more modest reforms that would help the
hardest-pressed among the uninsured.
For conservatives, these reforms might look like the
proposals that James Capretta and Robert Moffit
outline in the latest issue of National Affairs — a tax
credit available to people whose employers don’t offer
insurance, better-financed high-risk pools and stronger
guarantees of continuous coverage for people with
pre-existing conditions.
Liberals, for their part, would probably focus on
gradually expanding Medicaid and Medicare to cover
87

more of the near-elderly and the near-poor, creating a
larger public system alongside the private
marketplace. Indeed, the White House apparently
considered switching to exactly this approach in the
aftermath of Scott Brown’s surprise Senate win.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
In the end, incrementalism wasn’t ambitious enough to
satisfy President Obama. But given the drift of last
week’s Supreme Court arguments, he may be wishing
that he’d settled for something less ideal, but more
sustainable, than the bill the mandate built.
88

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
The Roberts Court Defines Itself
For anyone who still thought legal conservatives are
dedicated to judicial restraint, the oral arguments
before the Supreme Court on the health care case
should put that idea to rest. There has been no court
less restrained in signaling its willingness to replace
law made by Congress with law made by justices.
This should not be surprising. Republican
administrations, spurred by conservative interest
groups since the 1980s, handpicked each of the
conservative justices to reshape or strike down law
that fails to reflect conservative political ideology.
When Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy were
selected by the Reagan administration, the goal was to
choose judges who would be eager to undo liberal
precedents. By the time John Roberts Jr. and Samuel
Alito Jr. were selected in the second Bush
administration, judicial “restraint” was no longer an aim
among conservatives. They were chosen because
their professional records showed that they would
advance a political ideology that limits government and
promotes market freedoms, with less regard to the
general welfare.
There is an enormous distinction to be made between
the approaches of the Roberts court and the Warren
court, which conservatives have long railed against for
being an activist court. For one thing,
Republican-appointed justices who led that court,
Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice William Brennan
Jr., were not selected to effect constitutional change as
part of their own political agenda.
During an era of major social tumult, when the public’s
attitudes about racial equality, fairness in the workings
of democracy and the dignity of the individual proved
incompatible with old precedents, those centrists led
the court to take new positions in carrying out
democratic principles. Yet they were extremely mindful
of the need to maintain the court’s legitimacy, and
sought unanimity in major rulings. Cooper v. Aaron,
the 1958 landmark case that said states are bound by
Supreme Court rulings, was unanimous. So was
Katzenbach v. McClung, the 1964 case upholding the
constitutionality of parts of the Civil Rights Act under
the commerce clause.
The four moderates on the court have a leftish bent,
but they see their role as stewards of the law,
balancing the responsibility to enforce the
Constitution through judicial review against the duty
to show deference to the will of the political branches.
In that respect, they and the conservatives seem to be
following entirely different rules.
That difference is playing out in the health care case.
Established precedents support broad authority for
Congress to regulate national commerce, and the
health care market is unquestionably national in scope.
Yet to Justice Kennedy the mandate requiring most
Americans to obtain health insurance represents “a
step beyond what our cases have allowed, the
affirmative duty to act, to go into commerce.” To
Justice Stephen Breyer, it’s clear that “if there are
substantial effects on interstate commerce, Congress
can act.”
Likewise, Justice Scalia’s willingness to delve into
health care politics seems utterly alien to his moderate
colleagues. On the question of what would happen if
the mandate were struck down, Justice Scalia
launched into a senatorial vote count: “You can’t
repeal the rest of the act because you’re not going to
get 60 votes in the Senate to repeal the rest.” Justice
Breyer, by contrast, said firmly: “I would stay out of
politics. That’s for Congress; not us.”
If the conservatives decide that they can sidestep the
Constitution to negate Congress’s choices on crucial
national policies, the court’s legitimacy — and the
millions of Americans who don’t have insurance — will
pay a very heavy price. Chief Justice Roberts has the
opportunity to avoid this disastrous outcome by forging
even a narrow ruling to uphold the mandate and the
rest of the law. A split court striking down the act will
be declaring itself virtually unfettered by the law. And if
that happens along party lines, with five
Republican-appointed justices supporting the
challenge led by 26 Republican governors, the court
will mark itself as driven by politics.
89

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Fighting Terrorism, French-Style
FRANCE and the United States have different notions
of liberty, equality and fraternity, though the words look
roughly the same in both languages. Methods of
combating homegrown terrorism — another French
word dating from 1789 — are also quite different,
stemming from different histories, legal systems and
conceptions of the state.
The horrors in Toulouse — the murders of seven
people in a bit more than a week by Mohammed
Merah, a 23-year-old French citizen of Algerian-born
parents who claimed membership in Al Qaeda —
created a fierce debate in France about whether the
police and security services failed to identify him in
time. The police also failed to take him alive, making it
harder to discover the true breadth of his contacts and
of his path to terrorism.
Mr. Merah clearly slipped through the French net,
which relies heavily on human intelligence and
judgment. The French are asking why, and whether he
might have been more easily identified by the more
automated — and expensive — American-style
reliance on computerized monitoring of phone calls
and the Internet. That question is unanswerable, of
course. But the differences between the two countries
and their methods are considerable.
“In the United States, it is the system that counts; in
France, it is the men,” says Marc Trévidic, a senior
investigating magistrate for terrorism in France.
After 9/11, the Americans threw enormous resources
of manpower, money and computer time into the
“global war on terrorism,” which was also about
tracking the potential terrorist at home, in a country
with a tiny and mostly well-integrated Muslim
population. The French, with a colonial history, have
been dealing with terrorism (and Islam) for much
longer. With the largest number of Muslims in Europe
— nearly 10 percent of the population, often
concentrated in poorer neighborhoods — and closer
proximity to the Middle East and North Africa, France
has focused more on preventing the recruitment of
potential terrorists through a regular infiltration of
mosques and radical Islamic networks.
Partly because of their history and partly because of
more limited budgets, the French rely more on human
contacts, local intelligence and human resources and
less on automated phone tapping and surveillance
than the Americans do. That can make the French well
informed but less systematic, less able to “connect the
dots” than the Americans, who have tried to learn from
their own failure to uncover the 9/11 plot before it
happened. In general, Judge Trévidic said, the French
have one-tenth of the resources of the Americans for
any given case.
The French state is highly centralized, not federal. Fed
up with a series of bombings in the 1980s, France tried
to better coordinate domestic and foreign intelligence
with the establishment in 1984 of the Unité de
coordination de la lutte anti-terroriste (the coordination
unit of the anti-terrorist struggle), or Uclat, and tried
something similar within the Justice Ministry.
French law governing intelligence was reformed in
1986 and refined again after 1995 and 2001, with
another reform in 2006 by Nicolas Sarkozy, then
interior minister, to give even more margin of
maneuver to the investigating judges and the police.
The Central Directorate of Domestic Intelligence was
founded in 2008 as a merger of the intelligence
services of the Interior Ministry, which were
responsible for counterterrorism and
counterespionage, and of the state police.
THE fight against terrorism is more decentralized in the
United States. That is not without complications. The
tensions among the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
the Central Intelligence Agency and local or state
agencies are legendary, especially between the F.B.I.
and the New York Police Department, which has its
own counterterrorism intelligence unit. That tension
forms a sometimes entertaining, sometimes
disconcerting spine for Christopher Dickey’s 2009
book, “Securing the City.”
“France is a country with only two police forces,” Mr.
Dickey notes, “both national, so there is less rivalry
among agencies.”
Legally, too, the French have centralized terrorism
cases in one court and tried to reintegrate procedures
for fighting terrorism into regular law, but with more
flexibility for terrorism investigations to act on
suspicion, order wiretaps or surveillance and hold
suspects for a longer period of time. The United States
is still trying to reconcile due process of law with
fighting terrorism — look at the difficulty in finally
shutting the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, or
whether to hold criminal trials or military tribunals for
detainees like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
While easy to oversimplify, the French state also has a
90

lot of power to pry into the lives of citizens and arrest
suspects in the name of pre-emption.
“France has a very aggressive system, and before
9/11 they were centralizing the intelligence process
and fixing laws to let them grab people very early to
disrupt anything in advance,” says Gary Schmitt, an
intelligence expert and resident scholar in security
studies at the American Enterprise Institute. “They do
a lot of things, including telephone intercepts, that
make the Patriot Act look namby-pamby. In the U.S.,
we talk of pre-emption in military terms, but the French
talk of it on the home front, to discover plots and
conspiracies.”
The French approach has been criticized for
overzealousness, racial bias and the abuse of civil
rights. And, when it fails, it faces scathing criticism.
Why were the authorities unable to stop the
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
cold-blooded murder of seven unarmed people, three
soldiers, three children and a rabbi, shot in cold blood
by a man who was already on France’s radar for his
trips to the Afghan-Pakistani border and his interest in
Salafist Web sites?
Not since 1995, when a spate of bombings terrorized
Paris, have the French faced an attack on the scale
that occurred in Toulouse — some things are clearly
working. Still, for the French, that is little consolation,
just as America’s success in preventing another 9/11
on its soil can do little to atone for the errors that
preceded it.
The Paris bureau chief of The New York Times.
Maïa de la Baume contributed reporting.
91

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Sense of Peril for Health Law Gives
Insurers Pause
As the Supreme Court considers the constitutionality
of the federal health care law, one option that had
seemed unthinkable to its designers and supporters
now seems at least possible: that the court could strike
down the entire law.
Although it would be folly to predict what the court will
conclude, policy experts, insurers, doctors and
legislators are now seriously contemplating the
repercussions of a complete change in course two
years after the nation began to put the law into place.
Their concerns were heightened after three days of
court arguments in which some justices expressed
skepticism about whether the full law could stand
without the individual mandate requiring almost
everyone to have insurance.
“Many of us did not get the bill we wanted, but I think
having to start over is worse than having to fix this,”
said Robert Laszewski, a health care industry
consultant and former insurance executive who
opposed the bill.
Others say, however, the last two years have made it
easier for Congress or the states to revisit the issue.
The effort was not a waste of time, said Christine
Pollack, vice president of government affairs at the
Retail Industry Leaders Association, a trade group that
represents large retailers and opposed the law. “There
has been an important dialogue that has happened
over the last three and a half years that has been a
long time coming,” she said.
The most ambitious provisions would be nearly
impossible to salvage, like the requirement that
insurers offer coverage even to those with existing
medical conditions and the broad expansion of the
Medicaid program for the poor. Popular pieces of the
legislation might survive in the market, like insuring
adult children up to age 26 through their parents’
policies, along with some of the broader changes
being made in the health care system in how hospitals
and doctors deliver care.
Abandoning the efforts and billions of dollars invested
since the law was passed in 2010 would result in
turmoil for hospitals, doctors, patients and insurers.
Many insurers would have difficulty changing course.
“The risk of repeal and starting from zero frightens
them infinitely more” than having to comply with the
law as written, said Michael A. Turpin, a former
insurance executive who is now a senior executive at
USI Insurance Services, a broker.
Maryland’s health secretary, Dr. Joshua M. Sharfstein,
said he was worried about the 50,000 people
nationwide who are enrolled in a federally financed
insurance program because they are seriously ill and
cannot find coverage otherwise. If the entire law is
thrown out, those people “don’t have other options,” he
said.
Numerous provisions in the law have already gone into
effect, like steps aimed at closing the coverage gap in
Medicare drug plans and some of the regulations
governing the profits of health insurers. The federal
government has also spent about three-quarters of a
billion dollars helping states set up new exchanges for
people to buy coverage in 2014 when the full law goes
into effect.
“The part I struggle with is how you undo two years
worth of implementation,” said Dr. Glen R. Stream,
president of the American Academy of Family
Physicians. “It would leave tremendous uncertainty
about what is the direction we’re going in and that
uncertainty would obviously affect the patients
directly.”
Health insurance companies, which would be freed
from some of the already existing regulations limiting
their profits, would have to readjust their thinking about
how best to compete. While companies would continue
to make money by carefully selecting which customers
to cover and would adjust their business accordingly,
many insurers say the health care market is deeply
flawed. “The system doesn’t work,” said Mark T.
Bertolini, the chief executive of Aetna. “Something has
to be done.”
The law, “while imperfect in a number of ways, was a
step forward,” Mr. Bertolini said.
If the law is overturned, some said Congress and the
states could act to restore some of the lesser-known
provisions. For example, the law reauthorized the
Indian Health Care Improvement Act, which finances
tribal health programs, allowed the Food and Drug
92

Administration to approve generic versions of the
complex and often expensive drugs known as
biologics and imposed a 10 percent tax on tanning
salons — all relatively minor provisions that could be
accomplished through legislation.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
But others were more pessimistic, noting that
Congress is so mired in election-year politics that even
such seemingly benign measures could be blocked.
93

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Constitutionality.)
Financiers and Sex Trafficking
THE biggest forum for sex trafficking of under-age girls
in the United States appears to be a Web site called
Backpage.com.
This emporium for girls and women — some under age
or forced into prostitution — is in turn owned by an
opaque private company called Village Voice Media.
Until now it has been unclear who the ultimate owners
are.
That mystery is solved. The owners turn out to include
private equity financiers, including Goldman Sachs
with a 16 percent stake.
Goldman Sachs was mortified when I began inquiring
last week about its stake in America’s leading Web site
for prostitution ads. It began working frantically to
unload its shares, and on Friday afternoon it called to
say that it had just signed an agreement to sell its
stake to management.
“We had no influence over operations,” Andrea
Raphael, a Goldman Sachs spokeswoman, told me.
Let’s back up for a moment. There’s no doubt that
many escort ads on Backpage are placed by
consenting adults. But it’s equally clear that Backpage
plays a major role in the trafficking of minors or women
who are coerced. In one recent case in New York City,
prosecutors say that a 15-year-old girl was drugged,
tied up, raped and sold to johns through Backpage and
other sites.
Backpage has 70 percent of the market for prostitution
ads, according to AIM Group, a trade organization.
Village Voice Media makes some effort to screen out
ads placed by traffickers and to alert authorities to
abuses, but neither law enforcement officials nor
antitrafficking organizations are much impressed. As a
result, pressure is growing on the company to drop
escort ads.
After my last column on this issue, 19 U.S. senators
wrote the company, asking it to stop abetting
traffickers. On Thursday, antitrafficking campaigners
protested outside the Village Voice newspaper (which
is owned by Village Voice Media). A petition on
Change.org criticizing the company has gathered
220,000 signatures.
In Washington State, the governor signed a bill into
law on Thursday that could expose Backpage to
criminal sanctions if it advertises under-age girls for
sex without verifying their ages. (There’s some
uncertainty about the constitutionality of the law.)
Village Voice Media has been able to resist pressure
partly because, as a private company, it doesn’t
disclose its owners. But I’ve obtained documents that,
with some digging, shed light on who’s behind it.
The two biggest owners are Jim Larkin and Michael
Lacey, the managers of the company, and they seem
to own about half of the shares. The best known of the
other owners is Goldman Sachs, which invested in the
company in 2000 (before Backpage became a part of
Village Voice Media in a 2006 merger).
A Goldman managing director, Scott L. Lebovitz, sat
on the Village Voice Media board for many years.
Goldman says he stepped down in early 2010.
Let’s be clear: this is a tiny investment by a huge
company, and I have no reason to think that
Goldman’s top executives knew of its connection to
sex trafficking. Goldman prides itself on its work on
gender: its 10,000 Women initiative does splendid
work supporting women in business around the globe.
Full disclosure: Goldman’s foundation was one of
about 15 funders of a public television documentary
version of a book that my wife and I wrote about the
world’s women.
That said, for more than six years Goldman has held a
significant stake in a company notorious for ties to sex
trafficking, and it sat on the company’s board for four
of those years. There’s no indication that Goldman or
anyone else ever used its ownership to urge Village
Voice Media to drop escort ads or verify ages.
Elizabeth L. McDougall, chief counsel for Village Voice
Media, told me Friday that she was “unaware of any
dissent” from owners.
Several lesser-known financial companies also hold
significant stakes in Village Voice Media, and one
person close to the company says that there are about
a dozen owners in all. One is Trimaran, an investment
company in New York. It wouldn’t disclose the size of
its stake but told me that it had “no influence
whatsoever” on management and is now trying to sell
its shares.
Two other companies, Alta Communications and
Brynwood Partners, did not respond to my repeated
inquiries about ties to Village Voice Media (Brynwood
94

may be an asset manager rather than an owner). One
thought: If the minority shareholders, Goldman
included, worked together instead of rushing for the
exits, they might be able to pressure Village Voice
Media to get out of escort ads.
There are no easy solutions to sex trafficking. I think
the most important single step is for prosecutors to
focus more on pimps and johns. Closing down the
leading Web site used by traffickers would complicate
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Constitutionality.)
their lives, and after so many years of girls being
trafficked on this site, it’s time to hold owners
accountable.
I invite you to comment on this column on my blog, On
the Ground. Please also join me on Facebook and
Google+, watch my YouTube videos and follow me on
Twitter.
95

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Why Gas Prices Are Out of Any
President’s Control
EVERYONE knows it’s dangerous to ingest gasoline
or to inhale its fumes. But I am starting to believe that
merely thinking about the price of gasoline can
damage cognitive processing. Thus I may be risking
some of my precious few remaining brain cells by
writing about that topic.
Here is a one-item test to see whether you are guilty of
cloudy thinking about gas prices: Do you believe that
they are something a president can control? Many
Americans believe that the answer is yes, but any
respectable economist will tell you that the answer is
no.
Consider a recent poll of a panel of economists
conducted by the University of Chicago Booth School
of Business, where I teach. (Disclosure: I am a
member of the panel; the other respondents are
well-respected economists from top universities with
varying political views.) The 41 panel members were
asked whether they agreed with the following
statement: “Changes in U.S. gasoline prices over the
past 10 years have predominantly been due to market
factors rather than U.S. federal economic or energy
policies.”
Not a single member of the panel disagreed with the
statement.
Here is why: Oil is a global market in which America is
a big consumer but a small supplier. We consume
about 20 percent of the world’s oil but hold only 2
percent of the oil reserves. That means we are, in
economics jargon, “price takers.” Domestic production
has increased during the Obama administration, but it
has had minimal effects on global prices because, as
producers, we are just too small to matter much. And
even if domestic oil companies further increased
production, they would sell to the highest global
bidder.
If you’re not convinced by economic theory or the
opinions of economists, consider some recent history.
Presumably, no one would call President George W.
Bush unfriendly to the oil industry. Yet the price of
gasoline rose steadily during most of his
administration. In February 2001, just after Mr. Bush
took office, the average price of regular gasoline was
$1.45 a gallon. By June 2008, that price had risen to
$4.05. Still think presidents and oil-friendly policies can
determine oil prices?
It’s true that by the end of the Bush presidency, prices
had fallen back to $1.69, as oil prices plummeted with
the rest of the global economy. But I think we can all
agree that a global financial crisis is too high a price to
pay for cheap gasoline.
Still, Republican presidential candidates are blaming
the policies of President Obama for the current high
level of gasoline prices. Mitt Romney has said that the
president should fire three of his cabinet members for
failing to get oil prices down.
(On Friday, the president moved forward in imposing
sanctions that are limiting the supply of Iranian oil in
world markets.)
Newt Gingrich, meanwhile, has promised us
$2.50-a-gallon gasoline. But if we can suspend the law
of supply and demand, why stop with gasoline? Why
not $2.50 for one-carat diamonds, steak dinners and
18-year-old Scotch whiskey?
Although the United States cannot unilaterally lower
the price of oil, it can reduce its consumption, by using
oil more efficiently and by developing alternative
sources of fuel. For example, the Obama
administration has raised the corporate average fuel
economy standards imposed on automakers. If
consumers buy more fuel-efficient cars and trucks,
demand for gasoline falls, as does the burden imposed
by high gas prices. But while such rules help, they are
not the best way of achieving societal goals.
A better approach would be to gradually raise the
gasoline tax to levels similar to those in Western
Europe, where fuel-efficient cars are the norm. N.
Gregory Mankiw — the Harvard economist who
advises Mr. Romney and is a fellow contributor to the
Economic View column — has long advocated such a
policy. I agree with him, as do most other economists.
For evidence, note that the economists in that same
University of Chicago poll were asked whether they
agreed with this statement: “A tax on the carbon
content of fuels would be a less expensive way to
reduce carbon-dioxide emissions than would a
collection of policies such as ‘corporate average fuel
economy’ requirements for automobiles.”
96

On this question, there was just a single negative vote.
Yet in our current political climate, making the sensible
suggestion that we gradually raise the tax on gasoline
— or impose a broader system of carbon taxes — is
ridiculed, and no one running for president can safely
make such a proposal. At least two of the candidates
have shown that they understand the underlying
economics. In the past, both President Obama and Mr.
Romney have acknowledged that higher gas prices
have an upside: they give car owners the right
incentives, and if the high prices stem in part from
higher fuel taxes, the deficit can be trimmed. But such
obviously true statements are now considered almost
unpatriotic, equivalent to cheering against the U.S.A. in
the Olympics.
THE confused public debate on this topic is
representative of a more general problem. The voting
public is not very good at attributing credit and blame
to presidents. They get too much credit when things go
well and too much blame when things go badly. The
same applies to coaches, C.E.O.’s, parents and
anyone else in charge. Leaders are important but not
omnipotent.
So, to evaluate a leader, we must determine the
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
factors over which that leader has a modicum of
control. If you hate the Obama health care program
and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, by all
means give the president a big share of the blame.
And if you love them, give him some credit. What
makes no sense is to blame the president for rising
gas prices, where he has virtually no control, but not to
give him some credit for rising stock prices and an
improved labor market, domains where his policies —
along with those of the Federal Reserve and Congress
— are more likely to have had an effect.
When we make our choice on Election Day, we should
consider that the winner will have an important impact
on policies in many areas: health care, distribution of
the tax burden, Supreme Court nominations, and
abortion rights. The candidates’ differences on those
issues should be driving our decision, not the wishful
thinking that a president can simply lower the price of
gasoline. Or Scotch, alas.
Richard H. Thaler is a professor of economics and
behavioral science at the Booth School of Business at
the University of Chicago. He has informally advised
the Obama administration.
97

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Rape-Case Juror Called District Attorney
‘Wonderful’ Friend in Note
In late 2008, Lloyd E. Constantine, a lawyer and
longtime adviser to former Gov. Eliot Spitzer, nearly
gushed with affection when he explained in a letter to
two candidates that he was not choosing one over the
other in the election for Manhattan district attorney.
Mr. Constantine called the candidates, Cyrus R. Vance
Jr. and Richard Aborn, “wonderful friends” and said in
the letter, which he released on Thursday, that he
looked forward to their “continuing friendship.”
But when Mr. Constantine was asked during the recent
jury-selection process for the trial of a police officer
facing rape charges whether he had any friends in law
enforcement, including in the district attorney’s office,
he did not mention Mr. Vance, who won the 2009
election. Mr. Constantine was chosen as a juror.
That omission became a central focus of the trial
during jury deliberations this week, when another juror
complained to the judge that Mr. Constantine had
mentioned that he was a former law partner of Mr.
Aborn. The other juror wondered whether Mr.
Constantine might be holding the prosecution to an
unduly high standard. It was then that Mr. Vance’s
office realized the Mr. Constantine on the jury
occasionally played tennis with the district attorney.
Since the juror’s complaint on Tuesday, State
Supreme Court in Manhattan has buzzed with
comments from lawyers critical of Mr. Constantine for
not divulging the relationship, which could have led to
lawyers on the case challenging his presence on the
jury.
“He knows better than this,” said Thomas J. Curran, a
defense lawyer and former prosecutor in the
Manhattan district attorney’s office. “By any objective
standard, that information should have been
volunteered.”
The jury convicted the officer, Michael Pena, of
criminal sexual assault and predatory sexual assault,
charges that could send him to prison for life, but it
deadlocked on two counts of rape and related charges
on which the judge declared a mistrial.
Mr. Constantine was one of three jurors who declined
to convict Mr. Pena on rape charges, according to one
member of the jury who spoke on the condition of
anonymity. In an e-mail on Friday, Mr. Constantine
challenged that account but declined to cite specifics
because, he said, the jurors had agreed not to discuss
their deliberations publicly.
The deadlock on charges so central to the case
frustrated other members of the jury, raised the
possibility of a retrial on those charges and resulted in
a painfully incomplete resolution for the 25-year-old
victim, a second-grade teacher who gasped and
buckled in the courtroom when the mistrial was
announced.
In mid-March, as the sides prepared for trial, dozens of
jurors were led through a questioning process. Each
received a list of questions to be answered orally in
front of the judge and lawyers.
Question No. 7 asked: “Do you have any friends or
relatives in law enforcement, i.e., police, F.B.I., district
attorney,” according to a copy obtained by The New
York Times.
A transcript of the jury selection has not been
completed. Mr. Constantine acknowledged, and others
confirmed, that he did not mention Mr. Vance.
After the other juror complained, Mr. Constantine
explained to the judge and the lawyers on the case
why he had decided not to do so. He said he had
weighed the issue and decided that his relationships
would not affect his assessment of the case. He also
said that he thought mentioning Mr. Vance or Mr.
Aborn would make it appear as though he was trying
to shirk jury duty.
The judge and the lawyers accepted his explanation,
and deliberations continued with Mr. Constantine on
the jury.
In an interview just after the trial ended, Mr.
Constantine said no question even came close to
soliciting a mention of his relationships with Mr. Aborn
and Mr. Vance.
“I wasn’t asked a question,” he said. “There weren’t
any close calls there. There wasn’t any hairsplitting.”
On Thursday, his office sent the 2008 letter to The
Times, in which Mr. Constantine wrote that if asked by
98

eporters whom he supported in the race, he would
reply, “I will simply say you both are close friends and
each would make a wonderful D.A.”
Asked to reconcile his description of Mr. Vance as a
friend with his decision not to report the relationship
during the jury questioning, Mr. Constantine
maintained that he had not been asked a direct
question about a relationship with the district attorney.
He also said that it was an “easily ascertainable fact
that I know and am friendly with many people,” and
that it was well known he had contributed to the
campaigns of Mr. Vance and Mr. Aborn.
“Do you think it’s hard for the D.A.’s office to keep track
of contributors at the $5k level?” he said by e-mail.
His relationships may have changed in recent years.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
After Mr. Spitzer resigned as governor, Mr.
Constantine wrote a book about his years as an
adviser. Many saw the book as a betrayal of trust. Mr.
Vance, for one, is said to have pulled away from Mr.
Constantine, and the two have not played tennis for
some time.
Still, Stephen Gillers, a legal-ethics professor at New
York University, said Mr. Constantine should have
revealed the relationship to allow the lawyers and
judge the opportunity to explore whether he should be
on the jury.
“The critical fact is that while Constantine may have
believed that the friendship was not so strong as to
disqualify him from the jury,” Professor Gillers said,
“the law gives others the right to make that decision.”
99

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
A Health Law at Risk Gives Insurers
Pause
As the Supreme Court considers the constitutionality
of the federal health care law, one option that had
seemed unthinkable to its designers and supporters
now seems at least possible: that the court could strike
down the entire law.
Although it would be folly to predict what the court will
conclude, policy experts, insurers, doctors and
legislators are now seriously contemplating the
repercussions of a complete change in course two
years after the nation began to put the law into place.
Their concerns were heightened after three days of
court arguments in which some justices expressed
skepticism about whether the full law could stand
without the individual mandate requiring almost
everyone to have insurance.
“Many of us did not get the bill we wanted, but I think
having to start over is worse than having to fix this,”
said Robert Laszewski, a health care industry
consultant and former insurance executive who
opposed the bill.
Others say, however, the last two years have made it
easier for Congress or the states to revisit the issue.
The effort was not a waste of time, said Christine
Pollack, vice president of government affairs at the
Retail Industry Leaders Association, a trade group that
represents large retailers and opposed the law. “There
has been an important dialogue that has happened
over the last three and a half years that has been a
long time coming,” she said.
The most ambitious provisions would be nearly
impossible to salvage, like the requirement that
insurers offer coverage even to those with existing
medical conditions and the broad expansion of the
Medicaid program for the poor. Popular pieces of the
legislation might survive in the market, like insuring
adult children up to age 26 through their parents’
policies, along with some of the broader changes
being made in the health care system in how hospitals
and doctors deliver care.
Abandoning the efforts and billions of dollars invested
since the law was passed in 2010 would result in
turmoil for hospitals, doctors, patients and insurers.
Many insurers would have difficulty changing course.
“The risk of repeal and starting from zero frightens
them infinitely more” than having to comply with the
law as written, said Michael A. Turpin, a former
insurance executive who is now a senior executive at
USI Insurance Services, a broker.
Maryland’s health secretary, Dr. Joshua M. Sharfstein,
said he was worried about the 50,000 people
nationwide who are enrolled in a federally financed
insurance program because they are seriously ill and
cannot find coverage otherwise. If the entire law is
thrown out, those people “don’t have other options,” he
said.
Numerous provisions in the law have already gone into
effect, like steps aimed at closing the coverage gap in
Medicare drug plans and some of the regulations
governing the profits of health insurers. The federal
government has also spent about three-quarters of a
billion dollars helping states set up new exchanges for
people to buy coverage in 2014 when the full law goes
into effect.
“The part I struggle with is how you undo two years
worth of implementation,” said Dr. Glen R. Stream,
president of the American Academy of Family
Physicians. “It would leave tremendous uncertainty
about what is the direction we’re going in and that
uncertainty would obviously affect the patients
directly.”
Health insurance companies, which would be freed
from some of the already existing regulations limiting
their profits, would have to readjust their thinking about
how best to compete. While companies would continue
to make money by carefully selecting which customers
to cover and would adjust their business accordingly,
many insurers say the health care market is deeply
flawed. “The system doesn’t work,” said Mark T.
Bertolini, the chief executive of Aetna. “Something has
to be done.”
The law, “while imperfect in a number of ways, was a
step forward,” Mr. Bertolini said.
If the law is overturned, some said Congress and the
states could act to restore some of the lesser-known
provisions. For example, the law reauthorized the
Indian Health Care Improvement Act, which finances
tribal health programs, allowed the Food and Drug
100

Administration to approve generic versions of the
complex and often expensive drugs known as
biologics and imposed a 10 percent tax on tanning
salons — all relatively minor provisions that could be
accomplished through legislation.
But others were more pessimistic, noting that
Congress is so mired in election-year politics that even
such seemingly benign measures could be blocked.
And there is little hope that Congress could devise an
alternative to the law anytime soon. “If this law is
completely thrown out, a lot of momentum to solve
some of these problems is going to be vitiated,” said
Helen Darling, the chief executive of the National
Business Group on Health, which represents
employers that offer health benefits.
How much the states could continue on their own is
unclear. “In this political environment, it’s going to be
exceedingly difficult,” said Mike Kreidler, the insurance
commissioner for Washington State, who supports the
law.
Some states like California and Maryland have made
progress in creating the exchanges, where people will
be able to more easily shop for policies. But many
questioned whether most states would be able to
proceed without federal funding.
“There might be some states that will go forward, but it
will be a crazy-quilt pattern,” said Ron Pollack,
executive director of Families USA, a consumer group
that supported the health care law. (He is no relation to
Ms. Pollack, the retail association official.)
Both insurers and employers predicted that most
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
insurance companies would continue popular policies
that were enacted under the law. Insurers have
already factored in the costs of allowing adults under
26 to be covered on their parents’ plans and
eliminating co-payments on preventive services, and
companies are also unlikely to reimpose lifetime limits
on coverage. “It’s more trouble to roll it back,” said Mr.
Laszewski, the health care consultant. “It’s part of the
market now.”
Other provisions in the law tried to experiment with
changes to how doctors and hospitals are paid,
moving away from the current system in which they
make more by performing more tests and procedures
to rewarding them more for delivering better care that
saves money by keeping patients out of the hospital
and emergency room.
But much of the ability of hospitals to change how they
care for patients, even as government programs like
Medicare and Medicaid pay them less, was dependent
on the tens of millions of new paying customers, said
Len M. Nichols, a health economist at George Mason
University who supports the law. “Everybody thought it
would buy them time to become as efficient as they
need to be,” he said.
Still many hospital executives and insurers say big
changes in how care is being delivered will continue
regardless of the law. “It’s been our experience and
observation that the health care system has been
undergoing reform for some time before this debate
and this bill of 2010,” said Richard J. Umbdenstock,
head of the American Hospital Association. “We’re
already making dramatic course changes.”
101

The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Tracking Twitter, Raising Red Flags
The business plan of Varsity Monitor is simple. Major
universities like North Carolina, Nebraska and
Oklahoma pay $7,000 to $10,000 a year and Varsity
Monitor keeps an online eye on their athletes.
Among the services the company and others like it
provide is a computer application that searches social
media sites that athletes frequent, looking for
obscenities, offensive commentary or words like “free,”
which could indicate that a player has accepted a gift
in violation of N.C.A.A. rules.
“Every school, we work to customize their keyword
list,” said Sam Carnahan, the chief executive of Varsity
Monitor, which has offices in Seattle and New York
and also provides educational programs to
universities. “We look for things that could damage the
school’s brand and anything related to their eligibility.”
Yet what may look to some like a business opportunity,
and to universities and their athletic departments like
due diligence, appears to others to be an invasion of
privacy.
“I think it’s violating the Constitution to have someone
give up their password or user name,” said Ronald N.
Young, a Maryland state senator who has sponsored a
bill that would make it harder for universities to monitor
their athletes online. “It’s like reading their mail or
listening to their phone calls.”
The debate on college campuses mirrors the larger
conversation throughout the country over how much
access to personal online activities private individuals
can be compelled to give to employers. University
administrators face a tricky situation when it comes to
their players’ activity on social media, balancing issues
of privacy while trying to guard against the possibility
that an errant posting on Twitter or Facebook could
result in trouble for an athlete or the athletic
department. On March 12, North Carolina’s football
program received a one-year bowl ban and lost 15
scholarships after an N.C.A.A. investigation that was
prompted by a Twitter message sent by a player.
In the N.C.A.A.’s statement about North Carolina’s
punishment, it hinted that institutions should be
tracking public information made available by
student-athletes if there is a “reasonable suspicion of
rules violations.” That has caused an increase in
business for Varsity Monitor and companies like
UDiligence and Centrix Social. Some colleges require
athletes to give them access to their Facebook or
Twitter accounts, either by downloading software to
monitor them or simply requiring that they let a coach,
an administrator or a third-party company “friend” them
on Facebook or follow them on Twitter.
“There’s this big gray area that we’re all going into right
now,” said Bill Voth, the co-founder of Spiracle Media,
a company that advises colleges about social media.
“Schools like North Carolina need to protect
themselves. But I can see the legal side with privacy
issues.”
The men’s basketball teams participating in this
weekend’s Final Four in New Orleans — Ohio State,
Kentucky, Louisville and Kansas — represent the
many ways that athletic departments are handling the
newest forms of mass communication. Kentucky
Coach John Calipari has more than a million Twitter
followers, while Louisville Coach Rick Pitino bars his
players from using Twitter during the season. Ohio
State’s star player, Jared Sullinger, stopped sending
Twitter messages in January to eliminate distractions.
With colleges worried about a situation similar to North
Carolina’s occurring on their campuses, lingering
questions remain: Where should the line be drawn?
Can colleges monitor athletes without being invasive?
And is it legal for a university to require that a student
make his private information available?
Carnahan says his company tailors its service to
whatever the university requests, allowing it to
determine to what extent social media activities are
monitored. But some college officials are
uncomfortable with the notion of monitoring their
athletes on social media, be it public or private
content.
“If the university is going to screen all students or all
prospective students or everyone that’s applied, we’ll
engage in that with the university,” Notre Dame’s
athletic director, Jack Swarbrick, said. “I can’t foresee
a time where they would.”
Bradley S. Shear, a lawyer based in Maryland who
works in sports law and social media, supports the bill
Young introduced in Maryland. He said that a key
difference in monitoring a student’s online activities, as
opposed to an issue like drug testing, was that the
content being searched for was inappropriate as
opposed to illegal.
“The Supreme Court has ruled over and over again
102

that students do not leave their constitutional rights at
the schoolhouse gate,” Shear said. He said that any
policy that required students to give access to
“password-protected electronic content” was “a clear
violation of their student’s First and Fourth Amendment
Constitutional rights.”
He added of companies that monitor athletes’ online
activities: “These companies are selling snake oil that
contains a major legal liability time bomb. To me,
there’s no difference in having to Facebook-friend a
coach than turning over user name and
Oklahoma’s athletic director, Joe Castiglione, said the
university required its athletes to friend coaches on
Facebook. He said that when athletes were questioned
about something that appeared on their Facebook
pages, they often responded, “Hey, you’re not
supposed to see that.” He said his answer was, “Well,
everyone else in the world can.”
Jeremy Foley, the athletic director at Florida, said his
department contracted with UDiligence to monitor only
the Gators’ football players.
“I’m not a big believer that it’s our responsibility to
monitor that 24-7,” Foley said. “If there’s an issue, we’ll
deal with it. We’re trying to run a business here. We’re
not trying to be Big Brother.”
Varsity Monitor’s Carnahan said that by allowing the
universities to determine how much access his
company gets, it leaves a “white space” for colleges to
make their own decisions. But Kevin DeShazo, the
founder of Fieldhouse Media, another company in the
expanding online monitoring field, said that his
company does not access private information and that
he is opposed to monitoring Facebook and forcing
athletes to download applications or give access to
The New York Times/ - Politics, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
password-protected content.
“To be forced to give you access, passwords or let
them be friends with you on Facebook — I get why
coaches feel like it’s necessary, but there has to be
some level of respect and trust with these kids,”
DeShazo said, adding that his company has focused
on educating athletes about the perils of social media.
At North Carolina, where a message on Twitter from
the former football player Marvin Austin in 2010
revealed that he was receiving impermissible benefits
and was a factor in his being suspended for the
season, the social media policy is strict.
Steve Kirschner, a spokesman for North Carolina’s
athletic department, said each of the university’s sports
teams had a coach or a staff member assigned to
monitor Twitter messages sent by its players.
Roy Williams, the men’s basketball coach, said he
recognized that social media were simply a fact of life.
His players are permitted to use social media sites,
though not without a warning.
“I tell the guys, ‘It’s America, you have freedom of
speech,’ ” Williams said. “If you say something and it
embarrasses me or the basketball program or your
family, I’m going to be disappointed.”
The legal questions are not as simple, however, and
the answers may not come from campuses but from
courtrooms and legislatures.
“These are murky waters,” Voth said, “and it’s a
problem that’s not going to be answered today or in a
few months or a year.”
103

USA Today/ - News, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
In Tenn., questions revived over Ten
Commandments displays
To Tennessee state Rep. Matthew Hill, his legislation
authorizing local governments to display the Ten
Commandments along with other historical documents
is not about religion. It's about history.
Just look around his office, he said. There's an original
Tennessee state flag. A framed copy of a David
Crockett letter. A painting of historic Jonesborough, his
hometown.
"We're not talking about holding a church service.
We're not talking about having a Bible study at the
courthouse," said Hill, a Republican. "What we're
talking about is remembering who we are, where we
came from and not being ashamed of that."
But not everyone agrees. The bill — HB 2658 — could
put Tennessee once again at the center of the ongoing
debate about whether it violates the U.S. Constitution
to display the Ten Commandments on public property.
Critics say the legislation is aimed at courting religious
voters and could violate the establishment clause of
the First Amendment.
"This bill is inviting Tennessee governments to walk
into a constitutional minefield and risk litigation," said
Alex Luchenitser, associate legal director for
Americans United for Separation of Church and State,
which wrote a letter of opposition to Hill's legislation.
For more than a decade, local governments across the
state and across the nation have grappled — and in
some cases battled in court — with the issue.
In Tennessee, Rutherford County officials put up the
Ten Commandments in 2002 only to have a federal
judge order the document's removal after the American
Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee sued. The county
later settled the lawsuit, and officials said last week
that it's too early to say whether they will try to put up a
new display.
Sumner County officials posted the Ten
Commandments in early 2002, but two years later said
they would remove them in the wake of court
challenges in other Tennessee counties.
And Hamilton County became the first county in
Tennessee to face a legal challenge after putting up a
stand-alone Ten Commandments monument after the
Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. A federal judge
ordered the tablets removed.
Last year, the Meigs County Commission in East
Tennessee put up a display featuring the Ten
Commandments along with the Bill of Rights and
Declaration of Independence.
Hill's new legislation allows the display of certain
documents, including the Ten Commandments, Magna
Carta, Mayflower Compact, Bill of Rights, Declaration
of Independence, and U.S. and state constitutions, that
"have been recognized to commemorate freedom" and
the nation's rich history.
Signature likely
The Tennessee House approved the bill 93-0 on
March 19, and the Senate followed with a 30-0 vote on
Monday.
The legislation now goes to Gov. Bill Haslam's desk for
review and signature. "I anticipate he'll sign it,"
spokesman David Smith said by e-mail Wednesday.
The legislation authorizes local governments to put up
displays containing the documents but does not
specify which ones or how many to include.
Hill said he introduced the bill after he kept reading
about groups such as the ACLU suing local
governments over the issue.
He said he believes his legislation will provide the
"statutory cover so that locals don't have to be afraid of
being intimidated anymore by these special interest
groups."
The ACLU did not voice opposition to the bill as it
worked its way through the General Assembly, Hill
said.
"I think that speaks volumes to the constitutionality and
how sound this legislation is," he said.
Context important
Whether the displays can pass legal muster will
depend largely on how local governments decide to
104

post the Ten Commandments, legal experts said.
The courts will look at not only what other documents
are included in the displays but also the intent and
legislative history in a particular county, said Kathleen
Flake, an attorney and professor of American religious
history at Vanderbilt University.
"This has become a kind of subtle display of religious
preference," she said. "Depending on how subtle it is,
they get away with it. If it is not so subtle, the court tells
them to go back and try again."
If the Ten Commandments are the only documents put
on display, the courts have generally considered those
an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. But if the
Ten Commandments are put up on equal footing with
other documents and the intent is to provide historic
context or education, the U.S. Supreme Court and the
federal 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears
Tennessee cases, have ruled those displays
constitutional.
For instance, the Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that a
McCreary County, Ky., display that included other
documents was unconstitutional because local officials
had a religious motivation behind putting up the Ten
Commandments, said Mathew Staver, founder and
chairman of Liberty Counsel, a conservative policy and
legal nonprofit.
In another Kentucky case, the 6th Circuit in 2010
upheld a very similar display — dubbed the
Foundations of American Law and Government —
constitutional since there was no history of religious
intent.
Staver, who argued the McCreary County case before
the U.S. Supreme Court, said there is evidence that
the Ten Commandments have played a historic role in
shaping law and policy.
The tablets are depicted in sculptures throughout the
U.S. Supreme Court's building in Washington, and a
Georgia county includes them in a seal, Staver said.
"It's because through time it has become a
synonymous symbol of the rules of law," he said.
National movement
It isn't just Tennessee and Kentucky that have dealt
with the issue. The Ten Commandments have gone up
across the nation. In a high-profile case, former
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore refused a federal
order to remove a Ten Commandments monument
from the state judicial building.
USA Today/ - News, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Legislation has been introduced in Alabama this year
that would change the state constitution to allow the
Ten Commandments on public property. Likewise, in
Georgia this year, the state House approved 161-0 a
bill allowing Foundations of American Law and
Government displays in public buildings. The Georgia
Senate approved the legislation 41-9 on Friday.
Staver said he fully expects the issue to at some point
return to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Still, Americans United will be watching how the issue
plays out, and so will the ACLU of Tennessee.
"Historical documents and what they mean to our
communities are very important, but you have to step
back. Why is there such a movement to get these
displays up on the wall of public buildings?" said Hedy
Weinberg, executive director of the ACLU of
Tennessee.
"Unfortunately, we need to remember when you post
religious documents in public buildings, you are
broadcasting a divisive message to the religiously
pluralistic community."
Issue often divisive
For those on both sides of the Ten Commandments
debate, the new legislation is either a welcome move
or a bad memory.
June Griffin, a Dayton, Tenn., activist who crisscrosses
the state urging the display of the documents, said she
resents how the courts have weighed in. Posting the
Ten Commandments is what Tennesseans want, she
said.
On Monday night, Griffin was in Marshall County
presenting county commissioners with a framed copy
of the Ten Commandments, Bill of Rights and
Declaration of Independence.
"I'm glad for it," she said of Hill's legislation. "It is a
breath of fresh air."
Not so for Murfreesboro resident Steve Cates. He was
one of the original plaintiffs when the ACLU sued
Rutherford County for putting up the Ten
Commandments.
"Put the Ten Commandments on your shirt. Put them
on your house. But leave public facilities alone," the
71-year-old retired teacher said. "We are a very
diverse community here, very diverse, and let's respect
the rights of others.
105

"I can't believe in 2012 I have lived to see this all play
out again," he said.
Hill said it is up to local governments to decide how to
proceed but he personally would like to see the Ten
Commandments put up throughout the state. They
USA Today/ - News, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
contain foundational principles, he said.
"That is not a religious statement," Hill said. "It is not
meant to set up a theocracy or convert anybody. It is
history."
106

USA Today/ - News, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Ariz. sheriff faces crossroads in civil
rights case
PHOENIX – America's self-proclaimed toughest sheriff
is fast approaching a crossroads where he must
decide either to settle claims that his officers racially
profiled Latinos in his trademark immigration patrols —
and overhaul his practices — or take his chances at
trial.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio faces an April 14
deadline for concluding talks with the U.S. Justice
Department to settle a wide range of civil rights
allegations, including that the sheriff launched some
immigration patrols based on letters from people who
complained about people with dark skin congregating
in a given area or speaking Spanish but never
reporting an actual crime. The sheriff has become
nationally known for his tough stance against illegal
immigration.
A settlement could lead to changes long sought by
Arpaio's critics and short-circuit a separate racial
profiling case set for trial this summer. Most police
agencies facing similar pressures from the Justice
Department opt to settle, but critics wonder whether
the sheriff's stubborn streak — a quality that endears
him to his supporters — will lead him to confront the
allegations in court.
"It makes him a hero," said Antonio Bustamante, a
Phoenix civil rights attorney and member of a group of
Latino and black leaders calling for an overhaul of
Arpaio's policies. "We have a different character as a
sheriff."
The Justice Department has accused Arpaio's office of
racially profiling Latinos, punishing Hispanic jail
inmates for speaking Spanish and having a culture of
disregard for basic constitutional rights. The sheriff's
office has denied allegations of systematic
discriminatory policing, and asked federal authorities to
provide facts. But it also conditionally agreed to talk
with the Justice Department about ways to correct any
violations.
The Justice Department is seeking an agreement that
would require the sheriff's office to train officers in how
to make constitutional traffic stops, collect data on
people arrested in traffic stops and reach out to
Latinos to ensure them that the department is there to
also protect them.
The federal agency has said it's prepared to sue
Arpaio and let a judge decide the matter if no
agreement can be worked out. Earlier in the three-year
investigation, the Justice Department filed a 2010
lawsuit against the sheriff, alleging that his office
refused to fully cooperate with a request for records
and access to jails and employees. The case was
settled last summer after the sheriff's office handed
over records and gave access to employees and jails.
After his lawyers attended a negotiation session in
early February, Arpaio's office said both sides agreed
to work on an agreement and were committed to
avoiding unnecessary litigation.
The status of negotiations since the February meeting
is unknown. Arpaio's lawyers didn't return messages
seeking comment, and the Justice Department
declined to provide an update, other than saying
negotiations are continuing.
Arpaio said he didn't know how the case would be
resolved, but that his lawyers are trying to cooperate.
"We'll just have to look at the big picture and see what
they want and see if we agree to it," Arpaio said. "I
presume that if we don't agree, they'll go to court."
Separate from the Justice Department's allegations, a
lawsuit that alleges that Arpaio's deputies racially
profiled Latinos in immigration patrols is scheduled for
a July 19 trial in federal court.
A small group of Latinos who filed the lawsuit alleged
that officers based some traffic stops on the race of the
drivers of in the vehicles, and made the stops so they
could inquire about the driver's immigration status.
Arpaio denies racial profiling, saying people pulled
over in the sweeps were approached because
deputies had probable cause to believe they had
committed crimes.
U.S. District Judge Murray Snow, who will decide the
lawsuit, has already imposed restrictions on Arpaio's
immigration powers and said at a March 23 court
hearing that a settlement in the Justice Department's
investigation might make the lawsuit moot.
But if Arpaio refuses to settle and the federal
government follows through on its threat to sue, the
profiling lawsuit will go to trial, ensuring that the
107

allegations would be publicly aired a few months
before voters would decide whether to give Arpaio a
sixth term as sheriff of the county covering the Phoenix
area.
Lawyers who've worked in the Justice Department's
civil rights division say the targets of such
investigations typically are not required to
acknowledge wrongdoing as part of settlements.
Brian Landsberg, a professor at the University of
Pacific's law school in California, who worked in the
Justice Department's civil rights division for more than
20 years and wrote a book about the division, said
Arpaio could reject settlement offers if he feels the
federal government's facts are incorrect, but that
approach carries risks.
USA Today/ - News, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
"If it goes to trial and they lose, then the court could
impose more onerous sanctions," Landsberg said,
noting that one incentive for settling a civil rights case
is so police agencies can help shape the settlements
they'll have to operate under.
Bustamante said the sheriff might decline a settlement
offer in hopes of seeing what becomes of the racial
lawsuit, which he can always settle if it isn't going well.
"He might regard it better to hang in there for a while
and see how close he can get to the election,"
Bustamante said.
As for the sheriff, he said his November re-election bid
isn't a factor in his consideration of whether to settle. "I
don't care about the politics," Arpaio said. "I don't plan
things for political reasons."
108

USA Today/ - News, Sáb, 31 de Março de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Ex-Obama aide Van Jones is back with
new book
Van Jones started out as a political outsider, turned
briefly into a political insider -- in the White House, no
less -- and is now back to his roots.
"I'm doing what I've always done," Jones said during a
book tour interview. "Fight for justice."
After resigning his post as a presidential adviser in
2009 amid criticism from conservative activists, Jones
is organizing, speaking, and writing on behalf of efforts
to "re-energize" the base supporters who backed
President Obama's election in 2008.
His new book, to be released Tuesday, is called
Rebuild The Dream, which is also the name of a
"strategy and action center" that Jones founded in
2011.
The book is more political prescription than memoir,
but Jones does write about his brief 2009 tenure as
special adviser for Green Jobs, Enterprise, and
Innovation at the White House Council on
Environmental Quality.
Conservative such as Glenn Beck, then at Fox News,
attacked Jones as an unelected "White House czar."
Jones was also accused of signing a so-called "truther"
petition accusing President George W. Bush of
involvement in 9/11, though Jones denied it and there
is no evidence he ever did.
On Sept. 6, 2009, Jones announced his resignation,
saying he didn't want to be a distraction from Obama's
agenda.
Now he is trying to push that agenda from the outside,
by seeking to better organize various progressive
movements that include the Occupy efforts, labor,
women, environmentalists, civil rights supporters, and
peace activists.
In the book Rebuild The Dream, Jones writes that his
aim is "to prepare citizens and community members at
the grassroots level to see their own power differently
-- and to exercise their own leadership more boldly.
Progress is the work of millions."
One goal is to break through the iron triangle of
"politicians, polls, and pundits" that dominate
discussion in Washington, D.C., Jones said in an
interview.
Speaking at a tea shop across Lafayette Square from
the White House where he once worked, Jones said
he still regards his government service as a great
honor.
"I didn't call them, they called me," Jones said. "You
don't turn the president's team down.
"When it was time to go," Jones added, "they didn't call
me -- I called them."
While some progressives are disappointed in
President Obama, Jones said he still "loves" him. "I do
not want a Tea Party president," he said.
But Obama's re-election "won't be enough," Jones
said. "You've got to re-energize the movements."
109

01/04/2012

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
01/04/2012
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
MTS to develop mobile app store for its customers, 113
Diário de Notícias Lisboa - Portugal
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Tribunal Constitucional
Deputado diz que novos estatutos do PS são ilegais, 114
Diario El Argentino - Noticias
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
En su paso por la ciudad el STJ se reunió con Aciverjus, 115
El Dia - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Podrán llamar a cualquier ciudadano como jurado en los juicios penales, 117
El Dia - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
"No opino sobre otros Poderes, tengo principios republicanos", 119
El Peruano - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Abanderadas de la inclusión social, 120
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama spielt den Beleidigten , 121
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Verfassungsgericht
Debatten im Bundestag Widerrede erwünscht, 123
La Nacion Chile - Portada Noticias
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Reforma Constitucional
Ley Antidiscriminación puede sufrir nuevo retraso este martes, 125
Le Monde - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Cour pénale internationale
Le procureur de la CPI encense la vidéo "Kony 2012", 126
Los Angeles Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Inglewood town hall meeting on Trayvon Martin draws local activists, 127
Los Angeles Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
The bizarre calculus of emergency room charges, 128
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Florida teenager's home town turns out in Miami protest, 130
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Insight: Chasing cheaper cancer drugs, 132
Reuters General - Article
111

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Trayvon lawyers want U.S. to review prosecutor's role, 135
The Economic Times - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
India not a tax haven: Pranab Mukherjee, 136
The Economic Times - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Ramdev announces launch of campaign against black money, 137
The Economic Times - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
After scrapped Israel visit, army chief Gen V K Singh's Nepal tour curtailed, 138
The Economic Times - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Has General V K Singh killed hope for reforms?, 139
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Can Privatization Kill?, 140
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Federal Reserve Seeks to Fine Firms Over Foreclosures, 142
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Police Are Using Phone Tracking as a Routine Tool, 144
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Anti-bias policies drive some religious groups off campuses, 146
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Letters: 'Stand your ground' laws are needed, 147
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Santorum: My plan offers a better way than ObamaRomneyCare, 148
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Ask an Expert: Entrepreneurs gain from health care law, 150
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
More U.S. employers tie health insurance to medical tests, 152
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Sanford, Fla., residents: 'We are good people here', 155
112

Business Line/ - Markets, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
MTS to develop mobile app store for its
customers
New Delhi, April 1:
Notwithstanding cancellation of its 21 licences by
Supreme Court, CDMA mobile service provider MTS
India is expanding its business and now looking to
partner with software and application vendors to
develop an application store for its subscribers.
“Everyone is launching phones but no one is creating
awareness on the use of internet on phone. We want
to work on the eco-system around smartphones and
provide applications specifically to be used by MTS
customers,” Chief Operating Officer Mr Shankar Bali
for Delhi NCR and Haryana Circle at MTS India told
PTI.
Sistema Shyam TeleServices Limited (SSTL)
nationally operates its telecom services under the MTS
brand.
Mr Bali said that MTS India will partner with application
service provider to develop applications for its
customers.
MTS recently announced its partnership with software
application provider 4Moles for a golf tournament.
SSTL is a venture involving equity participation by
Sistema of Russia, the Russian Federation and the
Shyam Group of India. Sistema holds 56.68 per cent
stake, Russian Federation holds 17.14 per cent stake
and Shyam Telelink has around 24 per cent stake in
the company.
Last week, SSTL held an Extraordinary General
Meeting (EGM) which passed resolution to double its
its authorised capital from Rs 6,000 crore to Rs 12,000
crore (approximately $2.36 billion) by issuing
Non-Convertible Redeemable Preference Shares to
the extent of Rs 6,000 crore.
Its licences figure among the 122 2G licences
cancelled by the Supreme Court in February. SSTL
had, however, expressed its intention to stay in the
country and bid for spectrum in the auction, to be held
by the government, as directed by the apex court.
Even after Supreme Court’s order, SSTL added
2,32,557 customers in the month of February 2012,
taking its total customer base to 15.43 million.
The parent company Sistema JSFC has sent a formal
notice to Indian Government notifying it of a dispute
under the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) between
the Russian Federation and India arising from the
decision of the Supreme Court of India issued on
February 2, 2012 regarding the cancellation of 122
telecom licences.
The Indian government is learnt to have responded to
the notice assuring the firm that it will take all possible
steps to protect foreign investments in the country.
113

Diário de Notícias Lisboa/ - Portugal, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Tribunal Constitucional)
Deputado diz que novos estatutos do PS
são ilegais
Escrevendo na sua página no Facebook, André
Figueiredo - ex-chefe de gabinete de José Sócrates no
PS - considerou que a aprovação ontem, numa
reunião da Comissão Nacional na Guarda, dos novos
estatutos do partido representa uma situação "grave",
"inadmissível, lamentável e sem precedentes". .
"A alteração estatutária aprovada está ferida de
ilegalidade, atento o facto de não se terem preenchido
os requisitos estatutários necessários para que a
revisão estatutária pudesse vir a ter lugar. Nem na
convocatória aos Delegados do Congresso constava
um qualquer ponto que referisse essa alteração
estatutária, nem o Congresso Nacional votou uma
qualquer proposta que mandatasse a Comissão
Nacional a fazê-la", escreveu o dirigente socialista -
que, embora membro da Comissão Nacional do
partido, faltou à reunião de ontem na Guarda.
Contestando o argumento da direção - a aprovação da
moção de Seguro no último congresso já previa uma
revisão estatutária -, André Figueiredo argumentou:
"Nenhuma moção de estratégia nacional tem força de
lei para ultrapassar uma qualquer norma estatutária.
Se assim acontecesse tal seria perigoso para a
democracia interna e revelaria 'tiques oligárquicos'.
O mesmo argumento levou dois outros deputados,
Renato Sampaio e Isabel Santos, a abandonar a
reunião da Comissão Nacional, sendo que Isabel
Santos ameaça mesmo levar o caso ao Tribunal
Constitucional, caso as instâncias jurisdicionais do
partido não dêem razão ao pedido de impugnação da
reunião que diz querer apresentar.
A Comissão Nacional do PS aprovou, sem votos
contra - mas com uma trintena de abstenções, uma
das quais a de Francisco Assis - uma proposta de
revisão dos estatutos. Foi necessário rever três vezes
o documento original para que se conseguisse um
documento que não suscitasse votos contra.
A direção foi forçada a recuar na ideia de eleições
diretas para as listas deputados sem método
proporcional e ainda na de sujeitar o grupo
parlamentar às orientações da Comissão Política
Nacional do PS. O mandato do secretário-geral foi
alargado para quatro anos mas essa norma só entrará
em vigor depois do próximo congresso, que deverá
ocorrer no final do Verão do ano que vem.
114

Diario El Argentino/ - Noticias, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
En su paso por la ciudad el STJ se reunió
con Aciverjus
El Supremo Tribunal de Justicia de la provincia,
estuvo en nuestra ciudad, para recibir a personas y
entidades locales. Aciverjus fue la única ONG que se
sentó frente al Alto Cuerpo a discutir mejoras de
infraestructura para la justicia local. Se pidió
capacitación para la Policía que trabaja en
criminalística.
El martes de esta semana el Superior Tribunal de
Justicia de la provincia recibió en audiencia a
entidades locales y personas que así lo requirieron. En
primer termino, antes del comienzo del Acuerdo, los
integrantes del Cuerpo se reunieron con los
integrantes de la Cámara de Apelaciones con
competencia en materia Civil y Comercial y Laboral de
Gualeguaychú.
Luego se recibió en audiencia a representantes del
Colegio de Abogados sección Gualeguaychú, a la
Asociación Judicial, a la Asociación Civil por Verdad y
Justicia, a magistrados y funcionarios del Poder
Judicial local.
En el encuentro estuvieron presentes la presidenta del
STJ, Leonor Pañeda, la vicepresidenta Claudia
Mizawak, y los Vocales Carlos Chiara Díaz, Daniel
Carubia, Germán Carlomagno, Bernardo Salduna,
Susana Medina de Rizzo, Emilio Castrillón, y Juan R.
Smaldone.
Aciverjus se presentó ante los magistrados para
plantearles como ya se lo hizo en Paraná hace mas de
un año, los problemas de retardo de Justicia o casos
impunes.
“Comencé mi introducción ante los vocales diciéndoles
que estaba en representación de Aciverjus”, explicó
Fátima Pereyra la presidenta de la ONG que hace dos
años y cuatro meses todos los 19 de cada mes se
manifiestan en una vigilia frente a Tribunales.
“Consideramos que el servicio de justicia es
deficiente”, agregó.
“Luego le entregue una nota donde le remarcamos
algunos de los homicidios impunes: Orlando Sturz año
2003, Oscar Barbieri año 2003, Sandalio Morales,
Venancio Vernet, Juan Egui, Yolanda Pradelli de los
cuales ya nadie habla y nunca la Justicia halló un
culpable.
Les hable de Sixto Caballero, asesinado en 2007 y el
juez todavía tiene la causa en la etapa de instrucción
al igual que el de Ramón Galante “Roni” año 2009 con
la espera de un ADN para sus supuestos restos;
también del chico Leonardo Herrera, asesinado en el
Camino de la Costa en 2011, después hablamos del
caso de mi hijo Enzo y les pedí que en algún momento
se pusieran en el lugar de familiares de víctimas,
cómo se hace para continuar, si además de lo que
significa semejante pérdida, estamos a tres meses de
que se cumplan cuatro años de su fallecimiento y
todavía la causa está esperando a despacho como
nos dicen en el STJ”, remarcó.
Los magistrados están en conocimiento de la causa
de Enzo a la que reconocieron su complejidad, dado
que las tres partes apelaron, tanto el fiscal de Cámara,
la querella y la defensa.
“Después pasamos a repasar los fallos de homicidios
culposos por los casos de muertes en hechos de
tránsito, que nosotros consideramos que no son
verdaderamente bien encuadrados ya que no importan
las circunstancias ni los agravantes y para la Justicia
de Entre Ríos todos son homicidios culposos. Les cité
el ultimo fallo en Paraná de la causa Yamila Rueda
donde, por primara vez un tribunal condena al
conductor a tres años y seis meses de prisión efectiva
y la mayoría de los vocales desconocían el caso”.
Asimismo la ONG planteó el deficiente control que
existe en la “aplicación de la Probatión” porque nadie
“las controla”, y hay deficiencias en verificar luego si
esa persona internalizó el daño causado, la conducta
asumida y el alcance de su responsabilidad.
El estado de la Morgue Judicial
Al plantear la necesidad de más persona y
mantenimiento de la infraestructura de la Morgue
Judicial que está en el cementerio Norte, Fátima
explicó que: “La doctora Pañeda recordó que en el
2010 nuestra ONG ya le había cursado una nota
denunciando todas estas anomalías que salieron a la
luz después de la denuncia pública del enfermero
encargado de la morgue. Me dijeron que ya habían
dejado una partida para su reacondicionamiento y que
además van a llamar a concurso para dotarla de un
técnico eviscerador para completar el equipo con los
dos médicos forenses que están”.
Este es un pedido que la ONG, ya anunció este mes
durante la vigilia en Tribunales y están a la espera de
que los reciba el juez Gustavo Britos quien es el que
debe administrar los recursos para el mantenimiento
de los edificios de los juzgados locales.
El último punto tratado por la ONG se discutió que en
la mayoría de las causas hay “graves deficiencias en
la recopilación de pruebas y distintas actuaciones” que
luego son las que utilizan los fiscales y los jueces para
115

la investigación de los casos.
“Esto es reconocido y señalado por los operadores
judiciales a la hora de nuestros reclamos. Solicitamos
respuestas urgentes para que se termine con la
escandalosa impunidad reinante en este sentido
Policía Judicial o capacitación de la Policía en el área
de investigación, criminalística o científica, a lo que
respondieron que sería importante llevar a cabo en
Diario El Argentino/ - Noticias, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Gualeguaychú, algo similar a lo que se realizó en
Concordia donde la Policía científica y de
criminalística se capaciten y se mantengan en sus
funciones durante su carrera y no que sean
trasladados a comisarías u otras dependencias
policiales”, concretó la presidente de Aciverjus.
116

El Dia/ - Noticia, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Podrán llamar a cualquier ciudadano
como jurado en los juicios penales
Serán sorteados en base al padrón electoral y la única
condición es un nivel mínimo de alfabetización. La
tarea será "carga pública"
Todos los ciudadanos bonaerenses que figuren en los
padrones electorales, con la única condición de que
cuenten con un mínimo nivel de alfabetización, podrán
ser convocados a integrar los jurados que deberán
dictar veredicto en procesos penales en los que se
juzguen casos de homicidios, lesiones, robos y abusos
sexuales, entre otras figuras. La participación en esos
tribunales será considerada "carga pública", es decir,
representará una prestación obligatoria, para la que se
prevé una retribución económica en función de la
cantidad de días que dure el juicio.
Así lo dispone el proyecto de ley que impulsa la
administración de Daniel Scioli para implementar en la
Provincia el mecanismo de Juicios por Jurados con el
objetivo de abrir la participación ciudadana en la
administración de Justicia y que implica una profunda
reforma en el desarrollo de los procesos penales.
Técnicos del ministerio de Justicia y Seguridad y de
la secretaría Legal y Técnica, junto a especialistas de
la Asociación Argentina de Juicios por Jurados, se
abocaron en los últimos días a pulir los detalles de la
iniciativa, que será girada a la Legislatura en los
próximos días, según trascendió.
El gobierno bonaerense tiene decidido avanzar con la
discusión e implementación de esta reforma,
reclamada desde diversos ámbitos y prevista en la
Constitución de la Provincia. La convicción oficial es
que, fomentando la participación ciudadana en la
administración de Justicia, "se ayudará a incrementar
los niveles de confianza y credibilidad" en estos
procesos.
Buena parte de las disposiciones del proyecto todavía
son materia de discusión entre quienes integran el
equipo de elaboración de la iniciativa y otros aspectos
serán definidos en la etapa de reglamentación de la
norma. Pero en sus lineamientos centrales, se
disponen modificaciones en el Código de
Procedimiento Penal de la Provincia de forma tal de
que contemple la actuación de jurados integrados por
ciudadanos en procesos penales.
SIN MAGISTRADOS NI ABOGADOS
En principio, se establecería que estos jurados
actuarán en procesos en los que se juzguen
homicidios, lesiones dolosas, abusos, robos y por
delitos vinculados al mal desempeño de las funciones
públicas. Con todo, la competencia será sometida a
debate legislativo y podría terminar de definirse en la
etapa de reglamentación de la norma.
Otro de los ejes centrales definidos es la elección por
el sistema anglosajón de jurados "puros", es decir
integrados exclusivamente por ciudadanos, a
diferencia del que se aplica en la provincia de
Córdoba, pionera en la aplicación de este mecanismo
en Argentina, donde los cuerpos están integrados
también por jueces de carrera.
Esta decisión responde a una de las principales
críticas que cae sobre el "modelo mixto", que señala
que la convivencia de jueces de carrera y ciudadanos
en un mismo jurado implica la posibilidad de que la
opinión de los magistrados termine ejerciendo una
influencia sobre el resto del cuerpo.
Por eso, el proyecto que elabora por estas horas el
Ejecutivo vedaría también la participación de
abogados en los jurados.
SORTEO Y VIATICOS
Según se prevé, la convocatoria a los vecinos
bonaerenses se hará a partir de un sorteo en base a
los padrones electorales. En una primera instancia, se
designarán a 48 candidatos a integrar los jurados más
seis suplentes. Esos nombres serán sometidos a un
proceso de selección para conformar un cuerpo de 12
miembros que participarán en los procesos y deberán
definir si los acusados son culpables o inocentes de
los cargos que se les imputan. De esa forma, los
jueces sólo deberán definir la calificación del delito y la
pena.
Mientras duren los procesos, los jurados deberán
asistir a todas las audiencias, lo que implica que
deberán dejar de lado sus obligaciones laborales;
razón por la que el proyecto de ley también prevé una
retribución monetaria de acuerdo a la cantidad de días
que se extiendan los juicios, en concepto de viáticos.
Y en ese sentido se evalúa establecer una mecanismo
de equivalencias con los haberes de los empleados
117

del Poder Judicial.
Los ciudadanos que integren los jurados podrían
El Dia/ - Noticia, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
requerir medidas de protección, aunque en principio
no se prevén mecanismos de "aislamiento".
118

El Dia/ - Noticia, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
"No opino sobre otros Poderes, tengo
principios republicanos"
"No comento lo que hacen el Poder Legislativo ni el
Poder Judicial; es parte de mi espíritu y mis principios
republicanos".
Con ese concepto, Daniel Scioli evitó dar su opinión
sobre el pedido de informes que aprobó la Cámara de
Diputados provincial sobre los contratos entre el
Estado provincial y la empresa de juegos de azar
Boldt SA. El Gobernador deberá responder "a la
brevedad" un detallado cuestionario que presentó el
propio bloque oficialista, por impulso de los referentes
ultra K de la bancada, y que refiere a la firma
denunciada por Amado Boudou como "la usina" de las
denuncias en su contra.
"No voy a andar comentando un pedido de informes,
son cuestiones institucionales que se canalizan por
donde corresponde, y yo soy respetuoso de las
instituciones", agregó, y dio por concluido el tema.
La misma línea recorrió el Gobernador cuando el
diario lo consultó sobre las versiones sobre la renuncia
de su ministro de Seguridad y Justicia, Ricardo Casal,
que desde hace dos semanas llegan cotidianamente a
las redacciones periodísticas dando por hecho el
alejamiento del funcionario.
"A esta altura de 15 años de experiencia política, no
tengo tiempo de andar corriendo atrás de los chismes.
Ni me detengo a analizar si se trata de una 'acción
organizada' contra mi política de Seguridad. No creo
que sea importante saber de dónde vienen esas
versiones, forman parte muchas veces de los juegos y
las intrigas de la política. La gente nos quiere más que
nunca ocupándonos de sus problemas. Siempre le
digo a los ministros que no se dejen llevar por los
dimes y diretes, los chusmeríos, las versiones ni las
operaciones", dijo.
Y cerró: "si hay algo que la gente reconoce en Casal
es que es un hombre muy trabajador, con una gran
vocación de servicio y de compromiso con esta lucha
que estamos dando contra el delito".
119

El Peruano/ - Noticia, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Abanderadas de la inclusión social
Con toda justicia, el presidente de la República,
Ollanta Humala Tasso, ha reivindicado a la mujer
peruana como agente de cambio social y sostén de la
familia, aun en las circunstancias más adversas, a la
vez que ha anunciado que el Gobierno buscará
mecanismos más efectivos para integrarla a todas las
áreas de nuestra sociedad, inclusive la política.
En una ceremonia en que se condecoró a diez
mujeres peruanas con la Orden al Mérito de la Mujer
2012, señaló que ellas son un ejemplo de lucha y
perseverancia, "y a través de ellas queremos
reconocer a todas las madres trabajadoras".
"Quiero reconocer a todas las mujeres peruanas, a
esas mujeres batalladoras que llevan adelante la
economía popular, y esperemos que también
construyamos los mecanismos para que tengan un rol
mayor, más importante y más preponderante en
distintas áreas, como la política", manifestó el Jefe del
Estado.
En efecto, de las experiencias de las últimas décadas
surge la mujer del campo, de las más remotas y
pobres localidades del país, así como de los barrios
pobres de nuestras ciudades, como indomable
luchadora por la sobrevivencia y la unidad de su
familia.
Y en la etapa actual en que el Gobierno del presidente
Ollanta Humala impulsa grandes cambios para
derrotar a la pobreza, la mujer peruana, en los pueblos
más humildes, aparece nuevamente a la vanguardia
como una auténtica abanderada de la inclusión social.
En los pocos meses de gestión, el Gobierno viene
dando pasos efectivos para incluir plenamente a la
mujer de los sectores menos favorecidos de nuestra
sociedad y para empoderarla frente a la marginación y
la discriminación que aún la agobian, frente a
agresiones constantes e intolerables como el
feminicidio, la violación sexual y la sobreexplotación
laboral, entre otras.
En ese campo, el Ejecutivo está decidido a terminar
con la discriminación y maltrato contra la mujer; para
tal efecto, viene coordinando nuevas acciones con el
Congreso de la República, el Poder Judicial, el
Ministerio Público y la Policía Nacional.
En esa misma línea, la ministra de la Mujer y
Poblaciones Vulnerables, Ana Jara, informó que este
mes el Ejecutivo presentará al Congreso de la
República el proyecto de Ley de Alternancia, a fin de
incluir a más mujeres peruanas en la vida política del
país.
Dicha iniciativa propone que la conformación de las
listas de los partidos políticos esté en orden
correlativo, un hombre y una mujer, con el propósito
de que la elección se produzca en igualdad de
condiciones para ambos géneros.
Así también se busca fortalecer la democracia desde
los partidos políticos y promover una mayor
participación de las mujeres en cargos de elección
popular, como regidores, alcaldes, consejeros y
presidentes regionales.
Si el Congreso de la República, en uso legítimo de su
potestad constitucional. aprueba este proyecto, el país
estará dando otro paso importante a favor de la
reivindicación de la mujer y de la equidad entre
peruanos.
120

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama spielt den Beleidigten
Das Oberste Gericht Amerikas entscheidet über die
Gesundheitsreform. Die fünf konservativen Richter
werden als Vollstrecker der Republikaner hingestellt.
Aber auch zwei Drittel der Amerikaner halten nichts
von dem Mammutprojekt.
Von Matthias Rüb
Die Obersten Richter wissen es schon: Am Freitag
haben die drei Frauen und sechs Männer im
holzgetäfelten Konferenzraum des „Supreme Court“ in
Washington ihre Entscheidung zur Gesundheitsreform
gefällt. Aber sie werden die Nation und die Welt bis
zum Ende der Sitzungsperiode des Obersten Gerichts
im Juni warten lassen. In Washington sickern
vertrauliche Informationen noch aus jedem Ministerium
und zumal aus dem Weißen Haus an die Öffentlichkeit
durch. Die Obersten Richter und ihre jeweils vier
Assistenten aber nehmen ihren Schwur auf die
Geheimhaltung ernst.
Viele wollen aus dem Verlauf der dreitägigen
Anhörungen herausgehört haben, dass die
Gesundheitsreform vom „Supreme Court“ als im
Ganzen oder zu Teilen verfassungswidrig verworfen
wird. Tatsächlich stellten die fünf konservativen Richter
dem Rechtsvertreter der Regierung so scharfe Fragen,
dass an ihrer ablehnenden Haltung zum Kernstück der
Reform kaum Zweifel bestehen können: Der mit einer
Strafzahlung bewehrte Zwang zum Abschluss einer
Krankenversicherung ist nach ihrer Ansicht ein
verfassungswidriger Übergriff der Regierung auf die
Entscheidungsfreiheit des Bürgers. Die vier
linksliberalen Richter sprangen Obamas
Generalstaatsanwalt immer wieder bei, suchten sein
mitunter unverständliches Gestammel in
verfassungsrechtlich klare Argumente für die
Gesundheitsreform zu übersetzen.
Zwar gibt man sich im Weißen Haus weiter
zuversichtlich, dass die Verfassungsrichter das
wichtigste innenpolitische Vorhaben von Präsident
Barack Obama nicht vollständig demontieren werden.
Doch die Wahlkampfstrategen in seiner Demokratische
Partei haben schon eine Taktik erarbeitet, wie sie eine
mögliche Niederlage vor dem „Supreme Court“ im
Wahlkampf ausschlachten wollen. Die fünf
konservativen Richter sollen als Erfüllungsgehilfen der
gierigen Versicherungswirtschaft und als Vollstrecker
der Republikaner hingestellt werden. Mit diesem
Argument wollen die Demokraten die „kleinen Leute“
und die Parteisoldaten für die Präsidenten- und
Kongresswahlen im November mobilisieren.
Der „Supreme Court“ war und ist der Anwalt der
Freiheit
Es ist aber verlogen, den Benachteiligten oder
Beleidigten zu spielen, wenn das Oberste Gericht die
Position des Gegners einnimmt. Als der „Supreme
Court“ 2006 und 2008 der Regierung unter dem
Republikaner George W. Bush die unbefristete
Internierung von Terrorverdächtigen im
Gefangenenlager Guantánamo ohne Rechtsmittel für
die Inhaftierten untersagte, applaudierten die meisten
Demokraten noch. Doch was seinerzeit recht war,
kann heute nicht unbillig sein: Der „Supreme Court“
war und ist der Anwalt der Freiheit und der Rechte des
Einzelnen im Kampf gegen die Machtanmaßung und
Regulierungswut des Staates. Manchem Europäer,
dem der Glaube an den wohltätigen „Vater Staat“ von
der Wiege bis zur Bahre eingetrichtert wird, mag das
Bekenntnis zum „wilden“ Individualismus fremd
erscheinen. Es ist ihm fremd, weil es uramerikanisch
ist.
Präsident Obama kann für sich nicht in Anspruch
nehmen, dass er mit der Gesundheitsreform die
universalen Interessen „des Volkes“ gegen die
vielgescholtenen Eigeninteressen „der Mächtigen“
verteidigt hätte. Denn auch das Volk will die
Mammutreform nicht. Eine Umfrage im Auftrag der
„New York Times“ und eines Fernsehsenders hat
jüngst ergeben, dass zwei Drittel der Amerikaner für
eine vollständige oder teilweise Revision der
Gesundheitsreform durch das Oberste Gericht sind.
Immerhin 26 der 50 Bundesstaaten haben gegen die
Gesundheitsreform geklagt. Kein einziger
republikanischer Abgeordneter oder Senator hat für
„Obamacare“ gestimmt. Selbst in Obamas eigener
Partei sprechen sich nur 56 Prozent dafür aus. Das ist
nicht gerade ein überzeugendes Mandat für eine
Reform, deren Kosten die überparteilichen
Rechnungsprüfer des Kongresses auf 1,76 Billionen
Dollar für zehn Jahre veranschlagt haben - fast doppelt
so hoch wie Obamas Schätzung von 900 Milliarden
Dollar.
Bisher besteht das innenpolitische Vermächtnis
Obamas wesentlich aus dem Konjunkturpaket von
2009 mit einem Umfang von knapp 800 Milliarden
Dollar. Doch die Arbeitslosenquote blieb nicht dank der
schuldenfinanzierten Investitionsspritze unter acht
Prozent, sondern stieg auf über zehn. Und jetzt steht
auch noch die Gesundheitsreform vor einer mehr als
ungewissen Zukunft.
121

Gewiss, die amerikanische Wirtschaft erholt sich. Die
Arbeitslosenquote sinkt stetig, liegt aber noch immer
bei gut acht Prozent. Die Amerikaner schauen wieder
zuversichtlicher in die Zukunft. Doch ein Schuldenberg
von 15,5 Billionen - das entspricht in etwa der
gesamten Wirtschaftsleistung der Vereinigten Staaten
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
- steht im Weg. Obama wollte im Wahljahr 2012 vom
Aufschwung durch sein Konjunkturpaket und von
seiner Jahrhundertreform im Gesundheitswesen
sprechen. Jetzt wird wohl eher von Schulden, Defizit
und Reformruinen die Rede sein.
122

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Verfassungsgericht)
Debatten im Bundestag Widerrede
erwünscht
Jeder hat das Recht, anders zu denken. Die Debatte
lebt von Rede und Gegenrede. Wer aus Machtpolitik
andersdenkende Abgeordnete mundtot macht,
beschädigt die Demokratie.
Wie gehen wir mit Minderheiten um? Darin zeigt sich
die Qualität einer Demokratie. Jeder hat das Recht,
anders zu denken, das Recht, anders zu reden. Das
Wort ist frei. Wenn man ein Wort verbieten sollte, dann
das Wort „alternativlos“. Es ist undemokratisch.
Alternativlos glaubte sich der Sozialismus. Für ihn war
Freiheit die Einsicht in die Notwendigkeit. Dann gibt es
nichts mehr abzuwägen. Dann sind Debatten
überflüssig. Das Wort „alternativlos“ macht mundtot.
In der parlamentarischen Demokratie wäre eigentlich
die Opposition für die Alternative zuständig. Schließt
sie sich diese der herrschenden Meinung an, wie in
der Eurodebatte, droht die Minderheit nicht mehr zu
Wort zu kommen. Zweifel an der Euro-Rettungspolitik,
wie die Regierung sie nennt, äußern nur noch die
Linkspartei und wenige Dissidenten der
Regierungsparteien. Diese werden „Abweichler“
genannt. Das Suffix „Ler“, an den Verbstamm
angehängt, hat eine negative, abwertende Bedeutung.
Neutral wäre: Abweicher. Ein Abweichler ist ein
Störenfried, ein Querulant, ein Ärgernis.
Es verlangt Mut
In der Diktatur kann es lebensgefährlich sein, der
herrschenden Meinung zu widersprechen. In der
Demokratie verlangt es Mut, von der
Mehrheitsmeinung der eigenen Partei abzuweichen.
Nach außen gewinnen „Abweichler“ zwar
Aufmerksamkeit, sogar Prestige. In der Partei selbst
setzen sie sich Ausgrenzung und Sticheleien aus bis
hin zur offenen Beschimpfung. „Ich kann deine Fresse
nicht mehr sehen!“ raunzte Kanzleramtschef Ronald
Pofalla Wolfgang Bosbach an.
Bei Bundestagsdebatten steht das
Abstimmungsergebnis in der Regel im Vorhinein fest.
Es geht nicht mehr darum, die Gegner zu überzeugen.
Trotzdem lebt die Debatte von Rede und Gegenrede.
Lassen aber die Fraktionen, die ihre Redner aufstellen,
die Andersdenkenden nicht zu Wort kommen, gibt es
keine Gegenrede mehr. Sie können zwar in einer
Erklärung ihre Meinung begründen. Aber von der
Debatte sind sie ausgeschlossen.
Das, so befand im Herbst Bundestagspräsident
Norbert Lammert, könne für eine Entscheidung über
211 Milliarden Euro nicht richtig sein. So ließ er kraft
seines Amtes zwei Andersdenkende von CDU und
FDP zu Wort kommen, obwohl sie von ihren
Fraktionen nicht als Redner auserkoren worden waren.
In jeweils fünf Minuten konnten Klaus-Peter Wilsch
und Frank Schäffler darlegen, warum sie den
Rettungsschirm für falsch halten. Die
Fraktionsführungen waren erbost. Der Ältestenrat
erteilte Lammert eine Rüge. Der ließ sich nicht beirren.
Bei nächster Gelegenheit gab er Wilsch und Schäffler
abermals das Wort zur Widerrede.
Lammert kann sich auf das Grundgesetz berufen
Jetzt geht der Machtkampf zwischen den
Fraktionsführungen und dem Parlamentspräsidenten
in eine neue Runde. Auf Anweisung des Ältestenrats
wurde beantragt, Lammert per Geschäftsordnung
Einhalt zu gebieten. Dem Bundestagspräsidenten soll
es künftig nicht mehr erlaubt sein, ohne Absprache mit
den Fraktionen Redner zu benennen. Wenn es nach
dem Ältestenrat geht, soll dieses Verbot natürlich
möglichst geräuschlos ohne Debatte und Widerrede
beschlossen werden. Lammert will sich widersetzen
und sieht das Bundesverfassungsgericht auf seiner
Seite: Karlsruhe hatte schon einmal festgestellt, dass
es sehr wohl zulässig ist, dass einzelne Abgeordnete
gegen den Willen der Fraktion Rederecht erhalten.
Lammert kann sich auf Artikel 38 des Grundgesetzes
berufen. Danach sind die Abgeordneten „an Aufträge
und Weisungen nicht gebunden und nur ihrem
Gewissen unterworfen“. Einen Fraktionszwang, sich
der Mehrheitsmeinung der Fraktion anzuschließen,
gibt es nicht. Das Grundgesetz sieht nicht einmal die
Fraktionen vor. Sie sind nur ein Mittel, um die
parlamentarische Arbeit zu erleichtern.
Der Konflikt zwischen der Unabhängigkeit der
Abgeordneten und der Notwendigkeit, verlässliche
Mehrheiten zu organisieren, gehört zum politischen
System. Aber er muss mit Augenmaß ausgetragen
werden. Das Argument, wenn man jedem zu reden
erlaube, wie er wolle, ließe sich Parlamentsarbeit nicht
mehr organisieren, ist vorgeschoben. Wenn hin und
wieder ein Andersdenkender zu Wort kommt, blockiert
das nicht das Parlament. Dessen Arbeitsfähigkeit wird
als Vorwand benutzt, um Minderheiten zum
Schweigen zu bringen. Leichtfertig aus
123

machtpolitischen Erwägungen die Grundprinzipien des
Parlamentarismus zu unterhöhlen beschädigt die
Demokratie.
Denn die Abgeordneten sind nach dem Grundgesetz
nicht die Vertreter ihrer Partei oder Fraktion, auch nicht
ihres Wahlkreises. Sie sind die Vertreter des ganzen
Volkes. In der Eurodebatte sind sie verpflichtet, auch
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Verfassungsgericht)
dessen Bedenken und Besorgnis zu Wort kommen zu
lassen. Das Gleiche hätte für den Einsatz der
Bundeswehr im Afghanistan-Krieg gegolten. Und ein
nächster Fall könnte deutsche Unterstützung für Israel
im Falle eines Militärschlags gegen Iran sein. Wer
Abgeordnete mundtot macht, macht das Volk mundtot.
124

La Nacion Chile/ - Portada Noticias, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Reforma Constitucional)
Ley Antidiscriminación puede sufrir
nuevo retraso este martes
Proyecto tiene suma urgencia, esto es, un plazo
máximo de 15 días para su despacho, pero si los
diputados le hacen nuevas modificaciones, su
tramitación pasará a comisión mixta y volverá a
retrasarse. Iniciativa fue ingresada en marzo de 2005.
La muerte de Daniel Zamudio reactivó la Ley
Antidiscriminación que lleva 7 años de discusión en el
Congreso. El 22 de marzo de 2005, el gobierno de
Ricardo Lagos ingresó el proyecto a la Cámara de
Diputados, aunque algunos parlamentarios ya habían
presentado mociones para una reforma constitucional
en esta materia.
Este jueves, tras conocerse el fallecimiento del joven,
el Presidente Sebastián Piñera anunció que le pondrá
suma urgencia a la tramitación de la iniciativa (plazo
de 15 días). El proyecto se discutirá nuevamente este
martes, pero si vuelve a tener modificaciones, su
trámite pasará a comisión mixta y su despacho sufrirá
una nueva postergación.
En estos 7 años de discusión, el proyecto ha tenido
varias modificaciones que demoraron su tramitación.
Uno de los artículos más polémicos, incorporado por
parlamentarios de la UDI, RN y DC, es el Nº 18. Éste
establece que "los preceptos de esta ley no podrán ser
interpretados como derogatorios o modificatorios de
otras normas legales vigentes". Es decir, la Ley
Antidiscriminación no podrá ser invocada para el
matrimonio de dos personas del mismo sexo.
EL CONCEPTO DE DISCRIMINACIÓN ARBITARIA
La disposición más importante de esta ley, que se
encuentra en su tercer trámite legislativo en la
Comisión de Constitución de la Cámara, es el
concepto de discriminación arbitraria. El 8 de
noviembre pasado, el proyecto fue aprobado en su
segundo trámite legislativo en el Senado y estableció
la siguiente definición:
“Se entiende por discriminación arbitraria toda
distinción, exclusión o restricción que carezca de
justificación razonable, efectuada por agentes del
Estado o particulares, y que cause privación,
perturbación o amenaza en el ejercicio legítimo de los
derechos fundamentales establecidos en la
Constitución Política de la República o en los
tratados internacionales sobre derechos humanos
ratificados por Chile y que se encuentren vigentes”.
El proyecto menciona expresamente que los motivos
para la discriminación arbitraria pueden ser “la raza o
etnia, la nacionalidad, la situación socioeconómica, el
idioma, la ideología u opinión política, la religión o
creencia, la sindicación o participación en
organizaciones gremiales o la falta de ellas, el sexo, la
orientación sexual, la identidad de género, el estado
civil, la edad, la filiación, la apariencia personal y la
enfermedad o discapacidad”. En el proyecto original
también se incluía la estructura genética, pero el
Senado sacó este motivo.
NUEVO RECURSO Y SANCIONES DE MULTAS
El proyecto también crea un recurso nuevo, el de la
acción de no discriminación arbitraria, que podrá ser
presentado por el afectado en el juzgado de Letras
que le corresponda. El mensaje original establecía que
este recurso debía presentarse en una Corte de
Apelaciones, para hacerlo equivalente con los otros
contemplados en la Constitución. Sin embargo, el
Senado consideró que los juzgados de Letras son los
tribunales apropiados para ejercer esta acción.
Al presentarse la denuncia, el tribunal podrá emitir una
orden de no innovar para detener la acción
discriminatoria y pedirá un informe al denunciado. En
caso de condena, el infractor deberá pagar una multa
a beneficio fiscal de hasta 50 UTM (casi $2.000.000),
pero si la acusación es infundada y se rechaza, el
denunciante podría ser multado en hasta 20 UTM
(actualmente unos $791.000). Los fallos por Ley
Antidiscriminación podrán ser revisados por las Cortes
de Apelaciones.
125

Le Monde/ - Article, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Cour pénale internationale)
Le procureur de la CPI encense la vidéo
"Kony 2012"
"Je pense que Invisible Children va provoquer
l'arrestation de Joseph Kony cette année". C'est par
ces termes que le procureur de la Cour pénale
internationale (CPI) Luis Moreno-Ocampo a encensé
la campagne de l'ONG américaine lancée début mars
et qui a fait sensation sur le Web.
Luis Moreno-Ocampo était à Los Angeles, où il a
rencontré les réalisateurs de la vidéo. "C'est la force
de leur campagne. La vidéo de Invisible Children
sensibilise le public et oblige par là même les
institutions à parvenir à des résultats", a-t-il ajouté.
Au-delà de son succès, la campagne médiatique
d'Invisible Children avait été critiquée pour son
discours simpliste et hollywoodien.
Lire le décryptage Derrière la vidéo "Kony 2012", le
marketing de l'émotion
A propos l'arrestation de Joseph Kony, le procureur de
la CPI a estimé: "Je ne pense pas que les militaires
américains vont l'arrêter. L'armée ougandaise
soutenue par les Américains avec la République
centrafricaine vont le faire". Il y a huit jours, le
représentant spécial de l'ONU pour l'Afrique centrale
Abou Moussa avait estimé que le chef de l'Armée de
résistance du Seigneur (LRA) se trouverait en
République centrafricaine à la tête de quelques
centaines d'hommes.
Kony a pris en 1988 la tête de la LRA dont l'objectif
était de mettre en place un régime fondé sur les Dix
commandements. Il est inculpé de viol, mutilations,
meurtres et recrutement d'enfants par la CPI et
plusieurs armées de la région sont à sa poursuite
depuis 2008, pour l'heure sans succès.
126

Los Angeles Times/ - Politics, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Inglewood town hall meeting on Trayvon
Martin draws local activists
As 1,000 protesters outraged at the shooting death of
Trayvon Martin marched in Florida’s Goldsboro
community Saturday, hundreds gathered on the other
side of the country for a town hall meeting in
Inglewood to discuss the unarmed teenager’s death.
The meeting, hosted by radio station KJLH-FM, was
titled “Black Men Standing Our Ground: Justice for
Trayvon Martin.” Speakers included John Mack of the
Los Angeles Police Commission, civil rights attorney
Connie Rice of the Advancement Project and actress
and musician Yolanda Whitaker.
Trayvon, 17, was killed Feb. 26 in Florida by
neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman,
who said the teenager looked suspicious because he
was wearing a hooded sweatshirt. Zimmerman has
claimed self-defense in the shooting and has not been
arrested.
Trayvon did not have any weapons and was carrying a
bag of Skittles and an Arizona Iced Tea when he was
shot.
One speaker at the town hall meeting, attorney Brian
Dunn of the Cochran Firm, told the audience: “The
only thing that’s really unusual about this case is the
fact that people are finally paying attention to what has
been going on for years and years.”
“When we’re starting to talk about Travyon Martin,
what we’re seeing is -- not only by your presence here,
but by the national outcry -- people are getting tired of
this phenomenon, and I think that that cannot be
understated because this kind of thing happens all the
time,” Dunn said.
“But now I think people are starting to stand up and
realize that,” Dunn said, “this is not something that can
keep going on.”
127

Los Angeles Times/ - Politics, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
The bizarre calculus of emergency room
charges
Debbie Cassettari had outpatient foot surgery to
remove a bone spur. She arrived at the surgery center
at 8 a.m., left at 12:30 p.m., and the bill came to
$37,000, not counting doctor fees. In recovery now
from sticker shock, she's waiting for her insurance
company to do the tango with the clinic and figure out
who owes what to whom.
Gary Larson has a $5,000 deductible insurance plan,
but has found that his medical bills are cheaper if he
claims he's uninsured and pays cash. Using that
strategy, an MRI scan of his shoulder cost him $350.
His brother-in-law went to a nearby clinic for an MRI
scan of his shoulder, was billed $13,000, and had to
come up with $2,500.
Steve Lopez Bio | E-mail | Recent columns Also
Healthcare's high court test For a classmate in need, a
lesson in generosity and community L.A. Fire
Department's smoke and mirrors on response time
Weary L.A. firefighters speak up Looking out of state
for what California once offered Beutner talks softly,
carries a big business plan Kaiser member Robert
Merrilees had a colonoscopy at an affiliated surgery
center, which charged $7,500. His co-pay was $15,
Kaiser picked up $470, the rest of the bill "just went
away." Merrillees was left scratching his head over the
crazy math in medical billing.
There is lots of head-scratching out there, and stories
like these have poured in from across Southern
California and beyond since I wrote last week about an
11-year-old girl and her $5,000 trip to an emergency
room with a stomachache.
I heard from medical professionals who said fear of
lawsuits leads to lots of play-it-safe tests and
procedures. And some doctors and nurses argued that
emergency rooms have to charge high prices because
it's extremely expensive to operate them 24 hours a
day.
No doubt. But the larger point in last week's column
was that the calculus for medical charges in general is
beyond comprehension, with outrageously high fees
used as a starting point in a bizarre game of
bargaining. Glenn Melnick, who teaches hospital
finance at USC, told me it's as crazy as if he asked to
buy the TV in my living room, and I gave him a price of
$1 million to start the conversation.
This is the kind of insanity that exists when medicine
and medical insurance are about private profit rather
than public health, when 50 million people are
uninsured, when Medicare and Medicaid
reimbursements don't always cover true costs and
when polarized politics prevent the kind of reasonable
discussions that could lead to solutions.
In the case of Ella Moser, her grandfather — a
physician and Yale professor who has written about
medical overcharging —questioned the procedures
that were done and the fees that were charged when
she was treated in October at Providence Tarzana
Medical Center. You can't talk about rising healthcare
costs and healthcare reform, he argued, without
making both of those elements part of the discussion.
Ella's father, John Moser, had a $5,000 deductible plan
with Cigna, and had taken Ella to the hospital to rule
out appendicitis. Nothing serious was diagnosed, and
Ella went home to a quick recovery. Her dad got a bill
for nearly $5,000 from the hospital, as well as bills for
$540 from a pathologist and $309 from the doctor who
treated her.
Like Moser, lots of patients are surprised to get
separate bills like that, unaware that a hospital's
doctors can be independent contractors. It's like going
to a Laker game, paying $150 for a ticket, and later
getting an additional $75 bill in the mail from Kobe
Bryant.
Because of Moser's deductible, Cigna paid no part of
his bill. But the company's contract with the hospital
includes agreed-upon discounts, and those were
passed on to Moser.
Just entering the emergency room had been billed at
$1,288, for instance, but Moser paid Cigna's
negotiated rate of $682.64. The total charges, nearly
$6,000, ended up costing him closer to $3,000.
But like his father, the doctor, Moser was left with lots
of questions. How can you trust a business that bills
you $1,288 but is happy to collect $682.64? Is the
second number also arbitrary and perhaps artificially
high? Hospitals argue that list prices are high to
compensate for patients who don't pay, but how can
any patient on that spectrum know whether he's
getting a break or being ripped off?
A single-payer system would address some of this
nonsense, but forget it. Even President Obama's
watered-down healthcare reform act, which may well
die on the Supreme Court's operating table, couldn't be
passed if it came up for a vote now.
Joseph Mondy, a Cigna spokesman, had some tips for
anyone trying to avoid medical bankruptcy from an
emergency room visit. Contact your health plan's
on-call nurse for advice on whether you need to visit
an emergency room, consider a less expensive urgent
care clinic if one is available, go to an in-network
128

emergency room if possible and ask the doctor to
explain why certain tests and procedures are
necessary. Good advice I'm sure, but there's not
always time for all that in a genuine emergency.
Dr. Phil Schwarzman, medical director of the
emergency department at Providence St. Joseph
Medical Center, said 15 million of the nation's
uninsured people live in California, and he sees lots of
them. From his front-line perspective, he finds it
unconscionable that so many Americans have been
driven into bankruptcy from medical costs, and he
thinks mandated healthcare for everyone would
restore some sanity to pricing.
And he speaks not just as a physician, but as a
consumer.
Schwarzman has an insurance plan with a high
Los Angeles Times/ - Politics, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
deductible ($7,000). Like Gary Larson (the guy at the
top of this column), Schwarzman also paid about $350
for a scan on himself that would have cost much more
if he went with his insurance company's negotiated
rate. A couple of years ago, his daughter needed an
ultrasound for a possible gallstone. If he'd gone
through his insurance company, he would have been
charged $3,200, with insurance paying $1,500, leaving
him a $1,700 bill. He chose instead to leave insurance
out of the equation and pay cash instead. The price
was $250.
"It's outrageous," Schwarzman said. "I don't know
where they're coming up with these numbers. Are they
picking them out of a hat?"
steve.lopez@latimes.com
129

Reuters General/ - Article, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Florida teenager's home town turns out in
Miami protest
(Reuters) - Thousands of protesters gathered in a
downtown bayfront park on Sunday demanding the
arrest of the neighborhood watch volunteer who shot
and killed an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin,
in central Florida a month ago.
Civil rights leaders were joined by local politicians,
pastors and Martin's parents, who made their first
major public appearance in their hometown since last
month.
Sunday's protest came a day after one of the largest
demonstrations in Sanford, the central Florida town
where Martin was killed.
A crowd of about 5,000 gathered in an amphitheater
with a "Justice for Trayvon" poster behind the stage to
hear speeches from civil rights leaders Rev. Al
Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, as well as Martin's
parents. Grammy Award-winning singers Chaka Khan
and Betty Wright also attended.
Sharpton received a standing ovation when he called
for the arrest of George Zimmerman, the 28-year-old
neighborhood watch volunteer who shot Martin with a
semiautomatic handgun.
"I didn't come to Florida ... to convict Zimmerman. I
didn't come to try Zimmerman," he said after
questioning why the police were not able to find
probable cause to make an arrest in the shooting and
let the courts decide if a crime had been committed.
"I came to say, what is good for one, is good for all.
Zimmerman, tell it to the judge," he added. "We cannot
live in a nation where some of us go and are arrested
on probable cause, and others are released because
they told an improbable story."
Zimmerman, a white Hispanic, was in his car about to
drive to a store on February 26, when he noticed
Martin.
CASE HAS SPARKED PUBLIC OUTCRY
Zimmerman called 911 to report that Martin was
wearing a hoodie sweatshirt and looked "suspicious"
and followed him against the dispatcher's advice.
Martin was walking back to his father's fiancée's home
after buying candy and iced tea.
Zimmerman later told police that he was walking back
to his vehicle when Martin attacked him and that he
fired his weapon in self-defense after he was punched
in the nose, knocked down and had his head slammed
against a sidewalk.
Police refused to arrest Zimmerman citing Florida's
controversial "Stand Your Ground" law, which allows
the use of lethal force outside the home when a
reasonable threat is perceived.
The case has sparked a public outcry from celebrities,
politicians, civil rights activists and ordinary citizens
who believe Zimmerman judged Martin to be
suspicious because of his skin color and should have
been arrested for the shooting.
More than 2 million people have signed a petition on
Change.org to demand justice in the case. President
Barack Obama weighed in on the matter, comparing
Martin to a son he might have had and calling for "soul
searching" over how the incident occurred.
A special state prosecutor is examining the case and
could decide as soon as this week whether charges
should be filed. Federal investigators are looking into
charges of racial bias.
Martin was visiting Sanford while serving a 10-day
suspension from Dr. Michael M. Krop Senior High
School in north Miami. His parents are divorced, but
both still live in Miami. His mother is a county housing
agency employee and his father is a truck driver.
'AM I DANGEROUS TOO?'
Martin was reportedly a good student and was taking
after-school classes in the hopes of becoming an
aviation mechanic.
At the rally, vendors sold $10 t-shirts with slogans such
as "My hoodie does not make me a criminal," and
"Hoodies don't kill, guns do," promising to contribute
30 percent of proceeds to the Martin family's legal
fund.
Many in the crowd were mothers with their children,
eager to show their solidarity with the Martin family.
130

Tania Richardson brought her four daughters. "I
wanted to show my kids it could be one of them," she
said. "I would want people to come out and support me
in a time of need."
Ruth Jeannoe, 26, a Haitian American youth counselor
who came with her sister and 3-year-old daughter,
Jazzy. "It's not a black and white thing. It's a justice
thing," she said. "I have this girl and I want her raised
in a just and fair society."
She added that middle school students she counsels
"talk about Trayvon a lot. They are scared. They didn't
know this law exists," she added referring to Florida's
"Stand Your Ground" self-defense law.
"Am I Dangerous Too?" 11-year-old Cazemba
Reuters General/ - Article, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Ramirez, painted on a poster. "Trayvon was just
minding his own business. So does that mean I am
dangerous too because of my color?" he asked.
Betty Wright, a Grammy Award-winning R&B artist and
Miami native treated the crowd to a rendition of a song,
"Dry Well," written to honor her 21-year-old son,
Patrick Parker, who was fatally shot in 2005. She
dedicated the song to "all the Trayvons, and all the
parents of slain black boys."
Turning to Martin's parents, she sang: "When you kill
someone's one, it leaves a dry well ... We ain't going to
let you suffer. We're going to get you justice."
(Reporting by David Adams; Editing by Stacey Joyce)
131

Reuters General/ - Article, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Insight: Chasing cheaper cancer drugs
(Reuters) - In a nondescript suburb south of London,
tucked away behind a big hospital, Paul Workman and
fellow scientists are celebrating victory in the "World
Cup" of cancer drug research for their work in
discovering a stream of new medicines.
But the win is bitter-sweet. One of the new drugs
behind the coveted prize from the American
Association for Cancer Research (AACR) has been
deemed too costly to use in state-run British hospitals
like the one next door.
It is a stark example of the pricing crisis now facing
cancer medicines across the globe.
In developed and developing countries alike, patients
and governments are struggling to pay for modern
drugs that are revolutionizing cancer care but may cost
tens of thousands of dollars a year for each patient.
"It's very frustrating," says Workman, who heads up
the drug discovery unit at the Institute of Cancer
Research (ICR), which is funded in large part by
charities.
What is needed, he believes, is a new model that
takes advantage of the highly specific nature of
modern targeted therapies to slash drug development
timelines and costs.
In the long term, Workman is convinced that will
happen. But for the moment the world is caught in a
pinch point as global drug companies put sky-high
price tags on cancer medicines in a bid to recoup
development costs for drugs aimed at a relatively small
number of cancer sufferers.
The strains are growing - whether in Europe, where
austerity has savaged healthcare budgets, or in the
United States, where out-of-pocket costs can bankrupt
patients, or in the developing world, where price tags
of around $5,000 for a month's drug supply are simply
out of reach.
INDIA LOSES PATIENCE
India, a country with a long history of making cheap
off-patent drugs and a sometimes brittle relationship
with Western drugmakers, has finally lost patience.
New Delhi shocked the global drugs industry in March
by effectively ending Bayer's monopoly on kidney and
liver cancer drug Nexavar and issuing its first-ever
compulsory license, allowing local generic firm Natco
Pharma to produce and sell the drug cheaply in India.
In a move to head off the same threat to its patented
drugs, Roche, the world's biggest maker of cancer
medicines, plans to offer significantly cheaper locally
branded versions of two other cancer treatments,
Herceptin and MabThera, under an alliance with
Emcure Pharmaceuticals.
Further showdowns with Big Pharma seem inevitable.
Novartis, for example, is challenging a decision not to
grant a patent for its leukemia drug Glivec in a case
that will go to the Indian Supreme Court on July 10.
Michelle Childs, head of policy at Medecins Sans
Frontieres and a critic of many industry practices, says
the approach taken by Big Pharma to date of excluding
the vast majority of people living in developing
countries - barring a small but growing middle class - is
not sustainable.
She expects powerful countries like India and China,
both of which have capacity to make cheap generic
drugs, to flex their muscles more in future as the battle
over access to medicines enters a new phase.
"Traditionally, the focus has been on drugs for
infectious diseases like HIV and tuberculosis, but
increasingly developing countries are facing a double
burden of disease as we see the rise of chronic
diseases like cancer and diabetes," she says.
The issue is not confined to poorer countries - as
Workman at the ICR knows all too well.
His team spent many years working on a novel
prostate cancer pill that won special recognition in the
citation for the AACR prize awarded in Chicago on
Sunday (April 1), only to find that Britain's National
Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)
considers it too costly to be used.
If the cost-effectiveness watchdog does not change its
mind, Zytiga, which is marketed by Johnson &
Johnson and costs 2,930 pounds ($4,700) for a
month's supply, will be off-limits for Britons on standard
132

state healthcare.
Significantly, NICE also thinks Bayer's Nexavar is too
expensive - highlighting the common concerns about
costs shared by healthcare authorities in different parts
of the globe.
Such tough calls are inevitable when budgets are
limited, according to NICE chairman Mike Rawlins,
who says it is time to challenge drug companies about
the high prices they seek for products that sometimes
offer only modest benefits.
$85 BLN SALES BY 2016
The debate over how to price cancer medicines
matters intensely for the pharmaceuticals industry and
society at large.
Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide,
accounting for 7.6 million deaths in 2008 and predicted
to top 13 million in 2030, according to the World Health
Organisation. Some 70 percent of deaths occur in lowand
middle-income countries.
For drugmakers, the disease is a rich seam of sales
and profits. Cancer medicines overtook cholesterol
fighters as the biggest-selling selling prescription drug
class five years ago and sales are set to hit $85 billion
in 2016, up from $58 billion last year and a mere $8
billion in 2000, according to consensus forecasts
compiled by Thomson Reuters Pharma.
Cancer is particularly attractive commercially as
patents expire and profits wane on drugs in other
areas.
Privately, though, even some drug company
executives wonder if the industry will be charging such
high prices in a few years time.
The price tags on a flurry of new entrants have
certainly pushed the envelope, with Bristol-Myers
Squibb's melanoma treatment Yervoy costing
$120,000 for a four-infusion course and Dendreon's
Provenge for prostate cancer priced at $93,000 for a
three-dose course.
In the United States, some cancer patients have
abandoned medical care because of their bills or else
face a significant risk of bankruptcy, according to
studies presented at the American Society of Clinical
Oncology last year.
Europe's more socialized healthcare system creates
different strains. Cash-strapped governments have
slashed drug prices, racked up close to $20 billion in
Reuters General/ - Article, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
unpaid bills for treatments and, crucially, are becoming
increasingly reluctant to pay for innovative new drugs.
Andrew Witty, chief executive of GlaxoSmithKline,
says European governments are making a false
economy by delaying the introduction and
reimbursement of promising new treatments,
especially for cancer, in their short-term drive to save
money.
Pfizer CEO Ian Read told Reuters last month there
was a serious "disconnect" between the marketplace in
Europe and the desire of governments to sustain a
vibrant research base. "Europe is not paying its fair
share of innovation," Read said.
SMALLER, SMARTER TRIALS
From his office at the ICR behind the Marsden hospital
in Sutton, Workman has an unusual vantage point
across the cancer landscape. With a staff of 160, his
team is as large as the oncology departments of some
Big Pharma companies and in the past six years has
discovered 16 innovative cancer drugs.
Thanks to rapid advances in genetics, scientists now
have a fundamental understanding of the workings of
tumor cells that did not exist in the days when toxic
chemotherapy was the only tool in the medicine chest.
However, the lion's share of the $1 billion or more it
takes to bring a new drug to market is not chewed up
by scientists working in the lab but by the cost of
running clinical trials. It is the high failure rate of these
studies that pushes up the price of those few drugs
that do succeed.
Still, there is light at the end of the tunnel. The ability to
target modern cancer treatments to the genetic profile
of individual patients means trials can now be
designed with far fewer patients, reducing costs
dramatically.
Workman predicts that in five years the average
success rate for a cancer drug starting out in
early-stage clinical development will be 50 percent, up
from 5 percent now.
"It is no longer a lottery," he says.
"Trials in future will be smaller, quicker and cheaper.
The failure rate will go down and the economic model
will rebalance. That means the R&D costs that
companies need to recoup when they sell a new drug
will come down and those savings should be passed
on to the patients."
133

There are already encouraging signs. Roche's new
melanoma drug Zelboraf, for example, which is
designed for patients with one type of abnormal gene,
was approved in 2011 less than five years after the
start of its first clinical trials - far shorter than the
timescale for most drugs.
Even so, modern cancer drugs are never likely to be
affordable to the poor of Asia, Africa and Latin America
under the current patent-protected system - one
reason why MSF's Childs says governments need to
investigate new models for rewarding innovation,
possibly via a system of upfront payments.
Reuters General/ - Article, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Back at the ICR, Workman's colleague Johann de
Bono, who led much of the clinical research on Zytiga,
says it is clear something in the current system has to
give:
"I'm a Christian, so human life to me is very valuable.
But how do you value a human life? It's very difficult."
($1 = 0.6285 British pounds)
(editing by Janet McBride)
134

Reuters General/ - Article, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Trayvon lawyers want U.S. to review
prosecutor's role
(Reuters) - Thousands of protesters gathered in a
downtown bayfront park on Sunday demanding the
arrest of the neighborhood watch volunteer who shot
and killed an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin,
in central Florida a month ago.
Civil rights leaders were joined by Martin's parents who
were making their first major public appearance in the
family's home city since a news conference on the
steps of the Baptist Church where the funeral for their
son was held last month.
Sunday's protest came a day after one of the largest
demonstrations yet in Sanford, the central Florida town
where Martin was killed.
The crowd gathered in an amphitheater with a "Justice
for Trayvon" poster behind the stage.
Protesters called for the arrest of George Zimmerman,
the 28-year-old neighborhood watch volunteer who
shot Martin with a semiautomatic handgun.
Zimmerman, a white Hispanic, was in his car about to
drive to a store when he noticed Martin walking back to
his father's fiancée's home after buying candy and iced
tea on Oscar night, February 26.
Zimmerman called 911 to report that Martin looked
"suspicious" and followed him against the dispatcher's
advice.
He later told police that he was walking back to his
vehicle when Martin attacked him and that he fired his
weapon in self defense after he was punched in the
nose, knocked down and had his head slammed
against a sidewalk.
Police refused to arrest Zimmerman citing Florida's
controversial "Stand Your Ground" law, which allows
the use of lethal force outside the home when a
reasonable threat is perceived.
The case has sparked a public outcry from celebrities,
politicians, civil rights activists and ordinary citizens
who believe Zimmerman had judged Martin to be
suspicious simply on the color of his skin and should
have been arrested for the shooting.
More than two million people have signed a petition on
Change.Org to demand justice in the case. President
Barack Obama weighed into the matter in personal
terms, comparing Martin to a son he might have had
and calling for "soul searching" over how the incident
occurred.
A special state prosecutor is examining the case and
could decide as soon as this week whether charges
should be filed. Federal investigators are looking into
charges of racial bias.
Martin was visiting Sanford while serving a 10-day
suspension from Dr. Michael M. Krop Senior High
School in north Miami. His parents are divorced but
both still live in Miami where his mother is a county
housing agency employee and his father is a truck
driver.
Martin's former classmates have held several smaller
protests, including a school walkout by more than
1,000 students last month. Martin's mother, Sybrina
Fulton, later urged students not to protest with
walkouts, but to sign petitions, take part in organized
rallies and pray.
Martin was reportedly a good student and was taking
after-school classes in the hopes of becoming an
aviation mechanic.
Betty Wright, a Grammy Award winning R&B artist and
Miami native was scheduled to sing at Sunday's rally in
support of the Martin family. "It is something where we
need to stop and realize that this is like 2012 and it's
unacceptable," she told NBC.
Wright, whose has an album due to be released on
Wednesday, will be singing "Dry Well," a song written
to honor her own 21-year-old son, Patrick Parker, who
was fatally shot in 2005. His killer was also never
arrested.
"And if I can lend a celebrity voice to it, because when
my son died, the way I got through it was through the
power of family and the power of prayer," Wright told
NBC. "And I began to write it out, as I have always
done the pain in my life."
(Reporting By David Adams; editing by Christopher
Wilson)
135

The Economic Times/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
India not a tax haven: Pranab Mukherjee
KOLKATA: Defending the proposed amendment of the
Income Tax (IT) Act with retrospective effect, union
Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee Sunday said India
cannot be a tax haven.
"India is not a no-tax country; it has a determined tax
rate. Our country is not and cannot be a tax haven. If
you pay tax in your country of origin, you don't have to
pay tax, if we have double taxation agreement with
your country of origin," Mukherjee said here at an
interactive session organised by the Bengal Chamber
of Commerce.
"The proposed amendment aims to ensure there is no
double taxation," added Mukherjee.
Allaying apprehension regarding the retrospective
effect of the proposed amendment, he said: "It does
not mean all cases will be reopened from 1961 and
1962 when the IT Act came into force. There is no
reason for being apprehensive about the proposed
law."
As per the IT Act, the government cannot reopen tax
cases beyond six years.
The proposed IT amendment aims at taxing overseas
mergers and acquisition relating to domestic assets
with retrospective effect. The proposed changes in the
I-T Act evoked sharp reactions from industry which
argued that the move will hurt foreign investment.
The proposed amendment comes in the wake of the
Vodafone case where the Supreme Court Jan 20
dismissed a $2.2 billion tax demand from authorities
raised over the British company's acquisition of
Hutchison's Indian mobile assets in 2007.
136

The Economic Times/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Ramdev announces launch of campaign
against black money
HARIDWAR/ DEHRA DUN: Yoga guru Ramdev today
announced a fresh agitation against black money and
corruption and said he will stage a one-day dharna on
June 3 at New Delhi to mark the first anniversary of the
police crackdown on his supporters at Ramlila
grounds.
Ramdev got support for his fresh campaign, which
kicked off today, from Anna Hazare who said they
have decided to carry out the fight against corruption
together. Hazare said he would go to Delhi on June 3 if
he gets a "messsage" from the yoga guru.
He told reporters in Haridwar that plans for a "bigger"
agitation in August will be announced on June 3 during
his one-day dharna at Jantar Mantar.
"We have announced the launch of a country-wide
peaceful movement against black money and
corruption from today," Acharya Balkrishna, a close
associate of Ramdev, said in Dehra Dun.
Balkrishna said Hazare would also be giving his
support to the movement.
"We have already made it clear that both Anna Hazare
and Baba Ramdev will give support to each others'
campaigns," he said.
Asked whether he would go to Delhi to join Ramdev on
the day of his dharna on June 3, Hazare said, "Yes.
When he will give me the message I will go to Delhi."
"We will meet soon. We have decided to carry this fight
(against corruption) together" Hazare told reporters in
Ralegan Siddhi in Maharashtra.
The Supreme court blamed both the Delhi Police and
Ramdev for the midnight crackdown on the intervening
night of June 4-5 at the Ramlila Maidan last year
during the protest demonstration. However, the court
noted the cops had assaulted sleeping victims and that
the police and the state could have avoided the
incident.
137

The Economic Times/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
After scrapped Israel visit, army chief
Gen V K Singh's Nepal tour curtailed
Amid the controversy surrounding the Army chief Gen
V K Singh, the Defence Ministry has cut short duration
of his stay and size of the delegation for a visit to
Nepal scheduled this week. Gen Singh is scheduled to
take part in a regional two-day disaster management
and counter terrorism seminar being held in
Kathmandu from April 4 and chaired by the Nepalese
Army Chief. Last month also, the Defence Ministry had
cancelled Gen Singh's four-day visit to Israel citing the
prevailing political situation in the west Asian and
Middle East for the cancellation of the visit. The stay
and size of the delegation for the visit was curtailed as
it was for a seminar only and not a bilateral visit by the
Chief, Defence Ministry sources said here. There was
no requirement to stay there beyond the duration of
the seminar, they said. Army headquarters ruled out
any possibility of the Army chief cancelling the visit in
view of the curtailment of the duration and downsizing
of his delegation. The Army chief is scheduled to visit
Kathmandu on Wednesday and return on April 6, they
said. After the General lost his battle on the age row in
Supreme Court in February, the Defence Ministry and
the Army chief were mired in fresh controversy over
Gen Singh's claims that he was offered a Rs 14 crore
bribe and he had informed Defence Minister A K
Antony about it. The relations further strained after the
leakage of a top secret letter from the Army chief to the
Prime Minister on poor state of preparedness of the
forces for which the political parties had blamed Gen
Singh. Antony will hold a meeting this week to review
the preparedness of the services and the shortfalls in
specific arms and services.
138

The Economic Times/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Has General V K Singh killed hope for
reforms?
General Vijay Kumar Singh is no ordinary wielder of
the officer's baton. A man with a keen intellect, Singh's
ability to endure odds are almost folklore in the army -
even as a young officer, he was much admired for his
skills in making the impossible, possible.
Many years ago, Singh was handpicked for the 61-day
Rangers Course of the US Army, perhaps the world's
toughest combat course where cadets are forced to
starve and stay awake for days, and where even the
toughest ones give up.
The first time he tried, Singh, too, said enough is
enough, after falling ill. But he stayed back. In the next
attempt, he was adjudged the best trainee. That
explains why he went on to become the only Indian to
be inducted into the Hall of Fame of the US Army War
College.
Without doubt, Singh, India's 26th chief of army staff, is
a born fighter. But, for all his outstanding qualities, he
is hogging the limelight for the wrong reasons. And the
controversy in which he is the key player throws up
very pertinent questions about our civil-military ties.
Good Start
He started off as a man with a mission. When Singh
assumed office in 2010, there were high expectations
of him cleaning up the dirt in the system. His initial
comments on the army's "internal health" offered much
hope: "For any organisation to do well, it must ensure
that the internal health is good."
His no-nonsense stance on Adarsh and Sukhna scams
also went down well with those who wanted the army
purged of factionalism and corruption. After his
predecessor Deepak Kapoor's lacklustre tenure,
overshadowed by numerous graft charges, Singh was
seen as a reformer, someone who would, as defence
analysts put it, "de-colonise and modernise structures".
He also introduced steps to ensure the welfare of
non-officers in an entity largely biased in favour of
officers.
The RTI on Age
And then an Right to Information ( RTI) petition landed
up at the army headquarters in October 2010,
requesting details of Singh's date of birth. The army
headquarters obtained a legal opinion, and claimed
that it was May 10, 1951 -which clashed with the
official document with the Ministry of Defence which
said May 10, 1950.
Surprisingly, the chief, too, argued for 1951, and in an
unprecedented act, went to the Supreme Court.
Soon, the age row was destined to destroy the rapport
he enjoyed with bureaucrats - and also with the
soft-spoken defence minister, AK Antony. The
government contested Singh's claim, saying he had
previously accepted 1950 as his year of birth.
Everyone knows what followed.
Call it an irony, but the ultra-professional Singh got
trapped in his own personal battle, ruining not only his
reputation but also that of the army. Interestingly, it
was also an outcome of skewed decision-making
structures at the army HQ. General JJ Singh, who was
army chief in 2006 when the issue first cropped up,
should have solved the issue, but didn't.
139

The New York Times/ - Politics, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Can Privatization Kill?
ON Oct. 12, 2010, Jimmy Mubenga was deported from
Britain. The 46-year-old Angolan had come to the
country as a refugee 16 years earlier. But after his
involvement in a pub brawl and a subsequent criminal
conviction, the government ordered his deportation.
Three private security guards escorted him through
Heathrow Airport and onto British Airways Flight 77 to
Luanda, Angola. The exact details of what followed are
still unclear and currently subject to criminal
investigation.
Several passengers onboard the plane reported that
Mr. Mubenga repeatedly complained that he could not
breathe and that he was being held down with his
head between his knees by security guards. As the
airplane taxied to the runway in London, Mr. Mubenga
lost consciousness and later died.
Immigration control has traditionally been viewed as an
inalienable sovereign function of the state. But today
migration management has increasingly been taken
over by private contractors. Proponents of privatization
have been keen to argue that the use of contractors
does not mean that governments lose control. Yet,
privatization introduces a corporate veil that blurs both
public oversight and legal accountability.
Despite efforts to introduce outside supervisors,
performance reports and other monitoring
mechanisms, the private nature of these companies
breaks the ordinary administrative chain of command,
placing both governments and the public at a
disadvantage in terms of ensuring transparency.
Private companies seldom have an interest in securing
public oversight, as any criticism may entail negative
economic consequences. Australasian Correctional
Management, which ran detention centers in Australia
from 1998 to 2004, was known to require medical staff
members or teachers entering its facilities to sign
confidentiality agreements preventing them from
disclosing any information regarding detainees or the
administration of the centers. Being foreigners,
migrants and refugees have always had a hard time
gaining access to outside complaint mechanisms and
advocacy institutions. As an employee in charge of
reviewing disciplinary cases at a Corrections
Corporation of America facility in Houston once told a
reporter from this paper, “I’m the Supreme Court.”
The corporate veil also distorts lines of legal
responsibility. Human rights law is largely designed on
the presumption that it is states and not private
companies that exercise sovereign powers like
detention or border control. Legally holding
governments accountable for human rights violations
by contractors requires an additional step showing that
it is the state and not just the corporation or individual
employee that is responsible for the misconduct.
Mr. Mubenga’s case is not unique. Numerous reports
have been filed about misconduct, violence and abuse
perpetrated by contractors carrying out migration
functions. The three security guards responsible for
deporting Mr. Mubenga worked for the Anglo-Danish
security company G4S. Before Mr. Mubenga’s death,
G4S held the exclusive contract with the U.K. Border
Agency to provide escorts for immigration detainees
deported from the country. The firm subsequently lost
this contract, but this didn’t end its involvement in
managing migration.
As the world’s largest security company with more than
650,000 employees, G4S is involved in a plethora of
migration functions all over the world, from operating
immigration detention centers in Britain to carrying out
passenger screening at airports in Europe, Canada
and the Middle East. In America, G4S operates a fleet
of custom-built fortified buses that serve as deportation
transports for illegal migrants caught along the United
States-Mexico border. Just last month, the U.K. Border
Agency signed a new contract with G4S worth up to
$337 million to house asylum seekers.
G4S’s success in this market shows that deportation,
detention and border control have become big
business. Boeing’s current contract to set up and
operate a high-tech border surveillance system along
the United States-Mexico border is worth $1.3 billion
and involves nearly 100 subcontractors. The
Florida-based Geo Group — one of G4S’s main
competitors — manages 7,000 detention beds in the
United States and, until recently, at the Guantánamo
Bay detention center, where migrants intercepted in
the Caribbean are transferred. N.G.O.s and
international organizations profit, too. In 2010, the
International Organization for Migration was paid $265
million to assist governments in returning migrants to
their home countries, among other activities.
The migration control industry covers not only
detention and deportations but also border control.
Many airlines today employ former immigration officers
or themselves contract security companies to perform
the document, forgery and profiling checks required by
destination states. In Israel, the West Bank
140

checkpoints are gradually being transferred to private
security companies.
Placing responsibility at lower levels may serve to
insulate governments from lawsuits. In the Mubenga
case, the three private security guards involved in the
deportation were initially arrested. Following
accusations from G4S employees that senior
management had repeatedly ignored internal warnings
about poor training and unsafe restraint techniques,
charges against the company are now being
considered. Yet none of these lawsuits are likely to
address whether the U.K. Border Agency should face
criminal liability for Mr. Mubenga’s death because of its
decision to outsource deportations in the first place.
Even if governments want to re-establish state control
over migration, it isn’t so easy. Political promises to
renationalize immigration detention centers in Britain
have so far remained unfulfilled despite repeated
reports of abuse and mistreatment. And privatization,
once pursued, is difficult to reverse.
The United States discovered this when, in the
aftermath of 9/11, it was faced with the challenge of
The New York Times/ - Politics, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
hiring 45,000 employees for the newly established
Transportation Security Administration to recoup
sovereign control over previously private airport
security. And private contractors work to shape policy
as well. When Arizona’s notorious SB 1070
immigration bill was passed, 30 out of 36 co-sponsors
had received donations from private prison companies
or their lobbyists.
Today, government outsourcing has given rise to an
industry that encompasses nearly every aspect of
migration management in countries across the globe.
This shift comes at a price: It eliminates government
accountability and runs roughshod over the rights of
those subjected to private corporations’ control. And
unless governments reassert control over what used to
be a core sovereign function of the state, many more
Jimmy Mubengas are likely to die.
Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen is a senior researcher at
the Danish Institute for International Studies and a
co-editor of the forthcoming book “The Migration
Industry.”
141

The New York Times/ - Politics, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Federal Reserve Seeks to Fine Firms
Over Foreclosures
Federal regulators are poised to crack down on eight
financial firms that are not part of the recent
government settlement over home foreclosure
practices involving sloppy, inaccurate or forged
documents.
Last week, a senior Federal Reserve official
recommended fines for these additional firms, raising
questions about how deep foreclosure problems run
through the banking industry.
In addition, judges, lawyers and advocates for
homeowners say that people are still losing their
homes despite improper documentation and other
flaws in the foreclosure process often involving these
firms.
The eight firms cited by the Federal Reserve —
HSBC’s United States bank division, SunTrust Bank,
MetLife, U.S. Bancorp, PNC Financial Services,
EverBank, OneWest and Goldman Sachs — should be
fined for “unsafe and unsound practices in their loan
servicing and foreclosure processing,” Suzanne G.
Killian, a senior associate director of the Federal
Reserve’s Division of Consumer and Community
Affairs, told lawmakers last month in a House
Oversight Committee hearing in Brooklyn.
The recommendation is the culmination of an
investigation begun nearly two years ago over
accusations that bank representatives had been
churning through hundreds of documents a day in
foreclosure proceedings without reviewing them for
accuracy, a practice known as robo-signing.
Some see the Fed’s recommendation as an attempt to
push these firms to agree to the terms of the broader
mortgage settlement involving the state attorneys
general and federal officials. During those settlement
talks, federal regulators contacted other institutions in
hopes that they would also agree to the terms,
according to people briefed on the negotiations.
Much of the foreclosure attention has focused on the
five largest mortgage servicers — Bank of America,
Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Ally
Financial — which agreed to the $25 billion settlement
this year without admitting wrongdoing.
Despite the pledges of the giant servicers to amend
their practices, there are signs that foreclosure cases
with other companies remain problematic. An
examination of dozens of court cases by The New
York Times found questionable documents involving
some of the eight institutions cited by the Fed.
Arthur M. Schack, a New York State Supreme Court
judge in Brooklyn, has cracked down on fraudulent
documentation and said he was concerned that
foreclosures moving through the courts continued to
be flawed. Even after mortgage servicers have been
excoriated by a judge in one state, they still use similar
documents in other cases in other states, according to
the examination.
For example, last December, Judge Schack tossed out
a foreclosure lawsuit filed by U.S. Bancorp after
determining that a bank employee, Kim Stewart, had
identified herself in two conflicting ways in documents
throughout the lawsuit.
In 2008, Ms. Stewart signed an assignment of
mortgage — which gives the mortgage servicer the
right to foreclose — to U.S. Bancorp, identifying herself
as assistant secretary of Mortgage Electronic
Registration Systems. Yet in 2009, Ms. Stewart signed
a separate document in the lawsuit as vice president of
U.S. Bancorp, court records show.
The judge, in a derisive tone, suggested that perhaps
the bank and its law firm “do not want the court to
confront the conflicted Ms. Stewart,” according to a
transcript. U.S. Bancorp strongly disagreed with the
judge’s ruling and planned to appeal the decision, said
Teri Charest, a spokeswoman for the bank. She added
that Ms. Stewart was an officer of the bank and had
“signed all documents appropriately.”
George Babcock, a lawyer in Pawtucket, R.I., who
represents homeowners, estimated that roughly 300 of
his clients were being threatened with foreclosures that
included documents signed by Ms. Stewart.
A similar problem has cropped up on the West Coast,
where an employee of a mortgage servicing firm
whose signature appeared in a lawsuit filed by one of
the eight firms had already been flagged as
problematic.
Phillip Bennett, a retired schoolteacher in California,
142

was evicted last month from the home he shared with
his wife in Rancho Cucamonga.
Mr. Bennett said he thought he might be able to save
his home, despite falling behind on his loan payments,
because the mortgage assignment was signed by a
mortgage company employee, Marti Noriega, who was
previously involved in a foreclosure that had been
halted.
In October 2010, Garr M. King, a senior judge with the
United States District Court in Oregon, blocked a
foreclosure after spotting a suspicious document from
Ms. Noriega. In that lawsuit, Ms. Noriega, acting as
vice president of Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, signed an assignment of mortgage.
The problem, court records show, was with the date.
Ms. Noriega’s signature transferring the mortgage from
Mortgage Lenders Network USA to LaSalle National
Bank (now part of Bank of America) was dated 15
months after Mortgage Lenders Network halted its
operations.
Some foreclosures include documents from people
who have testified to being robo-signers in other
courts.
In July 2010, Erica Johnson-Seck, whose signatures
appeared in foreclosure cases filed by OneWest,
acknowledged, in a deposition in state court in Palm
Beach County in Florida, having signed 750 mortgage
documents a week, usually with only a cursory review.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Yet Carla Duncan, a social worker, is fighting a lawsuit
over the foreclosure on her three-bedroom home in
Cleveland Heights, Ohio. The lawsuit, which was filed
in March 2010 in Ohio state court, includes a
document signed by Ms. Johnson-Seck.
“It’s so totally unfair,” said Ms. Duncan.
A spokesman for OneWest declined to comment on
Ms. Duncan’s lawsuit.
Last November, federal banking regulators forced the
nation’s largest servicers, including the eight cited by
the Fed, to comb through foreclosure records and to
rectify any problems.
As part of that process, consumers who believe that
they have experienced “financial injury” have until July
31 to request an independent review of their
foreclosure and potentially receive compensation.
But Matt Englett, a lawyer in Orlando, Fla., who
defends struggling homeowners, said that many
people who had already lost their homes were
focusing on simply staying afloat and did not realize
they could ask for an independent review.
So far, more than 128,000 people have requested a
review, according to the Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency.
“These are the forgotten homeowners,” Mr. Englett
said.
143

The New York Times/ - Politics, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Police Are Using Phone Tracking as a
Routine Tool
WASHINGTON — Law enforcement tracking of
cellphones, once the province mainly of federal
agents, has become a powerful and widely used
surveillance tool for local police officials, with hundreds
of departments, large and small, often using it
aggressively with little or no court oversight,
documents show.
The practice has become big business for cellphone
companies, too, with a handful of carriers marketing a
catalog of “surveillance fees” to police departments to
determine a suspect’s location, trace phone calls and
texts or provide other services. Some departments log
dozens of traces a month for both emergencies and
routine investigations.
With cellphones ubiquitous, the police call phone
tracing a valuable weapon in emergencies like child
abductions and suicide calls and investigations in drug
cases and murders. One police training manual
describes cellphones as “the virtual biographer of our
daily activities,” providing a hunting ground for learning
contacts and travels.
But civil liberties advocates say the wider use of cell
tracking raises legal and constitutional questions,
particularly when the police act without judicial orders.
While many departments require warrants to use
phone tracking in nonemergencies, others claim broad
discretion to get the records on their own, according to
5,500 pages of internal records obtained by the
American Civil Liberties Union from 205 police
departments nationwide.
The internal documents, which were provided to The
New York Times, open a window into a
cloak-and-dagger practice that police officials are wary
about discussing publicly. While cell tracking by local
police departments has received some limited public
attention in the last few years, the A.C.L.U. documents
show that the practice is in much wider use — with far
looser safeguards — than officials have previously
acknowledged.
The issue has taken on new legal urgency in light of a
Supreme Court ruling in January finding that a Global
Positioning System tracking device placed on a drug
suspect’s car violated his Fourth Amendment rights
against unreasonable searches. While the ruling did
not directly involve cellphones — many of which also
include GPS locators — it raised questions about the
standards for cellphone tracking, lawyers say.
The police records show many departments struggling
to understand and abide by the legal complexities of
cellphone tracking, even as they work to exploit the
technology.
In cities in Nevada, North Carolina and other states,
police departments have gotten wireless carriers to
track cellphone signals back to cell towers as part of
nonemergency investigations to identify all the callers
using a particular tower, records show.
In California, state prosecutors advised local police
departments on ways to get carriers to “clone” a phone
and download text messages while it is turned off.
In Ogden, Utah, when the Sheriff’s Department wants
information on a cellphone, it leaves it up to the carrier
to determine what the sheriff must provide. “Some
companies ask that when we have time to do so, we
obtain court approval for the tracking request,” the
Sheriff’s Department said in a written response to the
A.C.L.U.
And in Arizona, even small police departments found
cell surveillance so valuable that they acquired their
own tracking equipment to avoid the time and expense
of having the phone companies carry out the
operations for them. The police in the town of Gilbert,
for one, spent $244,000 on such equipment.
Cell carriers, staffed with special law enforcement
liaison teams, charge police departments from a few
hundred dollars for locating a phone to more than
$2,200 for a full-scale wiretap of a suspect, records
show.
Most of the police departments cited in the records did
not return calls seeking comment. But other law
enforcement officials said the legal questions were
outweighed by real-life benefits.
The police in Grand Rapids, Mich., for instance, used a
cell locator in February to find a stabbing victim who
was in a basement hiding from his attacker.
“It’s pretty valuable, simply because there are so many
people who have cellphones,” said Roxann Ryan, a
144

criminal analyst with Iowa’s state intelligence branch.
“We find people,” she said, “and it saves lives.”
Many departments try to keep cell tracking secret, the
documents show, because of possible backlash from
the public and legal problems. Although there is no
evidence that the police have listened to phone calls
without warrants, some defense lawyers have
challenged other kinds of evidence gained through
warrantless cell tracking.
“Do not mention to the public or the media the use of
cellphone technology or equipment used to locate the
targeted subject,” the Iowa City Police Department
warned officers in one training manual. It should also
be kept out of police reports, it advised.
In Nevada, a training manual warned officers that
using cell tracing to locate someone without a warrant
“IS ONLY AUTHORIZED FOR LIFE-THREATENING
EMERGENCIES!!” The practice, it said, had been
“misused” in some standard investigations to collect
information the police did not have the authority to
collect.
“Some cell carriers have been complying with such
requests, but they cannot be expected to continue to
do so as it is outside the scope of the law,” the
advisory said. “Continued misuse by law enforcement
agencies will undoubtedly backfire.”
Another training manual prepared by California
prosecutors in 2010 advises police officials on “how to
get the good stuff” using cell technology.
The presentation said that since the Supreme Court
first ruled on wiretapping law in 1928 in a
Prohibition-era case involving a bootlegger, “subtler
and more far-reaching means of invading privacy have
become available to the government.”
Technological breakthroughs, it continued, have made
it possible for the government “to obtain disclosure in
court of what is whispered in the closet.”
In interviews, lawyers and law enforcement officials
agreed that there was uncertainty over what
information the police are entitled to get legally from
cell companies, what standards of evidence they must
meet and when courts must get involved.
A number of judges have come to conflicting decisions
in balancing cellphone users’ constitutional privacy
The New York Times/ - Politics, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
rights with law enforcement’s need for information.
In a 2010 ruling, the United States Court of Appeals for
the Third Circuit, in Philadelphia, said a judge could
require the authorities to obtain a warrant based on
probable cause before demanding cellphone records
or location information from a provider. (A similar case
from Texas is pending in the Fifth Circuit.)
“It’s terribly confusing, and it’s understandable, when
even the federal courts can’t agree,” said Michael
Sussman, a Washington lawyer who represents cell
carriers. The carriers “push back a lot” when the police
urgently seek out cell locations or other information in
what are purported to be life-or-death situations, he
said. “Not every emergency is really an emergency.”
Congress and about a dozen states are considering
legislative proposals to tighten restrictions on the use
of cell tracking.
While cell tracing allows the police to get records and
locations of users, the A.C.L.U. documents give no
indication that departments have conducted actual
wiretapping operations — listening to phone calls —
without court warrants required under federal law.
Much of the debate over phone surveillance in recent
years has focused on the federal government and
counterterrorism operations, particularly a once-secret
program authorized by President George W. Bush
after the Sept. 11 attacks. It allowed the National
Security Agency to eavesdrop on phone calls of
terrorism suspects and monitor huge amounts of
phone and e-mail traffic without court-approved
intelligence warrants.
Clashes over the program’s legality led Congress to
broaden the government’s eavesdropping powers in
2008. As part of the law, the Bush administration
insisted that phone companies helping in the program
be given immunity against lawsuits.
Since then, the wide use of cell surveillance has
seeped down to even small, rural police departments
in investigations unrelated to national security.
“It’s become run of the mill,” said Catherine Crump, an
A.C.L.U. lawyer who coordinated the group’s gathering
of police records. “And the advances in technology are
rapidly outpacing the state of the law.”
145

USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Anti-bias policies drive some religious
groups off campuses
NASHVILLE – One of the largest student religious
groups at Vanderbilt University is leaving campus in a
dispute over the school's non-discrimination policy
that bars student groups from requiring their leaders to
hold specific beliefs.
Leaders of Vanderbilt Catholic, which has 500
members, says the rule make no sense. P.J. Jedlovec,
the group's president, says their meetings are open to
all students, but only people who share the group's
beliefs can be leaders.
"If we were open to having non-Catholics lead the
organization, we wouldn't be Catholic anymore,"
Jedlovec says.
STORY: At religious campuses, atheist groups operate
underground
Vanderbilt Provost Richard McCarty says religious
groups are free to choose their leaders but must allow
any student to be a member and to run for office, no
matter their beliefs.
Similar disputes have taken place in California, New
York and North Carolina. The University of Buffalo
suspended the InterVarsity Christian Fellowship in
December after the group asked a gay member to step
down as treasurer.
The University of North Carolina-Greensboro refused
to recognize a Christian group called Make Up Your
Own Mind because it discriminated on the basis of
faith for leaders. The school relented after being sued.
Jeremy Tedesco, legal counsel for the Scottsdale,
Ariz.-based Alliance Defense Fund who represented
Make Up Your Own Mind, expects conflicts to grow.
"The non-discrimination policies are meant to protect
religious groups, but instead, they are being used to
discriminate against religious groups," he says.
The Supreme Court has upheld campus
non-discrimination rules, most recently in a 2010
decision known as Christian Legal Society v.
Martinez.
That dispute was at Hastings College, part of the
University of California. The school has an "all comers"
policy, which bans student groups from restricting
membership in any way. The campus chapter of the
Christian Legal Society sued to challenge the rule and
lost.
Vanderbilt has cited the case in defending its
non-discrimination policy.
Vanderbilt Catholic isn't the only religious group at
odds with Vanderbilt. Four others are on provisional
status for violating the policy.
The groups must decide in a few weeks whether to
drop their faith-based requirements or leave campus.
Smietana also reports for The Tennessean in
Nashville. Contributing: Chas Sisk, The Tennessean.
146

USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Letters: 'Stand your ground' laws are
needed
You editorial on "stand your ground" laws shoots first
and asks questions later ("Editorial: 'Stand your
ground' is a recipe for tragedy").
First, unless you are part of one of the agencies
investigating this case, you don't have all the facts.
Second, the law is intended so people can legally
defend themselves without the worry of some
"wanna-be politician" district attorney looking to better
his or her own career at the expense of someone's
life.
I live in Florida, and the stand-your-ground law is here
to stay.
Walt Todd; Riverview, Fla.
Court reflects divided U.S.
Your editorial on the health care law debate was, I
believe, fairly reasonable and balanced until the final
paragraph. It states: "Another 5-4 decision along
ideological lines would taint the court's credibility. The
court would do itself, and the nation, a service by
upholding the mandate" ("Editorial: Health care, yes.
Broccoli, no.").
Based on the rest of the editorial and most reports
about the hearing, the decision is likely to be 5-4
whichever way the court goes. The comment above
seems to imply a 5-4 ruling in support of the law will do
less damage to the court's credibility than a 5-4
against.
Or is the editor suggesting that one side or the other,
presumably the conservative, should give in for the
sake of a credibility-building unanimous decision?
I have not done a statistical analysis of Supreme
Court decisions, but many of the landmark cases I
remember came from ideologically divided courts,
usually reflecting deep ideological divides in the
country at large.
Frank Jemmison; Portsmouth, Va.
Use common sense on mandates
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wants to know
about the difference between health insurance and
broccoli mandates.
The answer is simple. There is no chance that
individuals will have to be forced to buy broccoli to
save their lives, and there is no chance that the other
customers in the grocery store will be forced to chip in
for the cost of someone else's life-saving broccoli.
Christoph Bull; Los Angeles
147

USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Santorum: My plan offers a better way
than ObamaRomneyCare
As the Supreme Court considers the constitutionality
of the individual mandate in the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act, we Americans need to remember
that we have the freedom to make choices for
ourselves. We, not our government, choose the food to
eat, the clothes to wear, the ideas to believe.
"ObamaCare" is the opposite of freedom. Under
ObamaCare, the government, not the individual, has
freedom. We can do better.
Just ask the Congressional Budget Office. It forecast
that as many as 20 million Americans could lose their
employer-provided health insurance under
ObamaCare, and that premium costs will rise over the
next decade.
ObamaCare — based on RomneyCare, the plan
Massachusetts adopted when Mitt Romney was
governor — tells insurance companies which benefits
their policies must offer and what range of prices they
could charge. It requires that individuals buy
conforming policies, and cuts $500 billion from
Medicare. The Independent Payment Advisory Board
will limit what treatments doctors can prescribe.
Consistent with the principles upon which our country
was founded, Americans know that ObamaCare is bad
policy, bad medicine, bad for the country and badly
needs repeal. Republicans need a nominee with the
credibility to take on President Obama on an issue vital
to voters, and a president who will repeal ObamaCare.
I will be that president.
My plan offers a better way to combine fiscal
responsibility and health care reform. Americans
should have access to high-quality, affordable health
care with health care decisions made by patients and
their physicians, not bureaucrats.
Our wise Founding Fathers didn't give the government
control over your health. The government has done
little right these past few years, and President Obama
wants to inflict this incompetence on your personal
life.
Under my plan (see my website for more details),
Americans will be able to buy health insurance with
pre-tax dollars, or continue to receive insurance
through their employer. All licensed insurance plans
would be eligible. Companies would be encouraged to
compete over state lines, and Americans would have a
choice of different plans and premiums, just like with
auto and home insurance. Health insurers could offer
high-deductible plans with lower premiums combined
with health savings accounts, or more traditional
managed care or fee-for-service plans. Low-income
individuals would get tax credits so they could buy the
same kind of health care as other Americans.
The contrast with ObamaCare could not be starker.
ObamaCare prohibits health savings accounts, and
turns the insurance industry into a federally controlled
public utility. My plan would allow all Americans to
shop around and get their health insurance on the
open market — just like they buy other kinds of
insurance.
Our health system's costs are high, in part, because of
frivolous lawsuits. One major objective of my reform,
unlike ObamaCare, is promoting health care liability
reform in the states and as it relates to federal
programs like Medicare.
What about Americans who are born with health
conditions that make insurance companies unwilling to
take them, such as my little daughter Bella? In a nation
of 313 milliion people, about 2 million to 4 million
people a year have uninsurable conditions.
First, my plan encourages affordable coverage, so
there will be fewer uncovered families with uninsurable
conditions. If people are already insured, their insurer
covers them when their health changes, or when they
have sick children. That was the law even before
ObamaCare.
Once people have insurance, they would be able to
switch to another plan immediately if they have not
allowed coverage to drop. If they have a break in
coverage, it would be more expensive to sign up
afterward. That gives people an incentive to keep
coverage.
In order to enable insurance companies to be able to
offer low-cost premiums, those with severe illness
need to be offered special health insurance programs
through the state, known as risk pools. Some states
already have them.
We don't want to destroy America's advantage as the
148

world's leader in innovative medicine. Since the
mid-1970s, American residents hold more medical
technology patents and have won more Nobel Prizes
in medicine than residents of other countries
combined.
America has forever been the world's last bastion of
freedom. For generations, we have fought to preserve
the principles of liberty. Freedom and liberty are at the
USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
core of my health care proposal. Individuals, not the
government, can and should make health care choices
for themselves.
Rick Santorum, a former representative and senator
from Pennsylvania, is seeking the Republican
nomination for president.
149

USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Ask an Expert: Entrepreneurs gain from
health care law
Q: Steve: I own my own micro-business and was
wondering whether you care to weigh in o the health
care debate before the Supreme Court. I just don't get
how Congress could pass a law that makes me buy
health insurance. Personally, I think it is un-American.
— Teddy
A: The easy, the visceral, thing to do in this case is to
say — "Congress doesn't have the right!" Right?
But actually, it just might have that right.
COLUMN: Index of Steve Strauss' Ask an Expert
columns
Today, let's look at those few fascinating words in the
Constitution that make up the doozy called the
commerce clause, because that is the crux of this
whole enchilada, and before you get bored and surf on
after reading the words "commerce clause" let me
suggest that understanding it is not only vital for an
informed electorate, but in fact insofar as small
business goes, just may be the simple, few words that
change forever how you buy health insurance for you
and your staff.
Lets start with the easy stuff:
You have to buy auto insurance if you want to drive,
don't you? And you have to wear a seat belt, don't
you? And you have to stop at red lights, right? There
are all sorts of things legislatures tell you to do and not
do. That is what a law is: It is a directive that you can
or cannot do something.
Is telling you to buy health insurance all that different?
Maybe, but maybe not.
Consider: In 1964, Congress passed the Civil Rights
Act. There it told individuals and businesses that they
could not discriminate based on race, color, religion or
national origin.
And that then begs the question: Is telling someone
they have to sell coffee to someone really that different
than telling someone they have to buy insurance from
someone?
The question goes to the heart of the clause. It comes
from Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution.
It says that Congress shall have the power to "regulate
Commerce . . . among the several States." The
commerce clause has, almost since our founding,
been adjudicated to mean that Congress has broad
powers to regulate interstate activities.
How broad are those powers? That is the debate
today, and has been for some time. The broad scope
of the commerce clause was first enunciated in 1824,
in Gibbons v. Ogden, when the Court ruled that the
power to regulate interstate commerce was broad
enough to include the power to regulate interstate
navigation over water.
In 1914, in Houston E&W Texas Railway Co. v. U.S.,
the Court said that,
[I]n all matters having such a close and substantial
relation to interstate commerce . . . it is Congress, and
not the State, that is entitled to prescribe the final and
dominant rule, for otherwise Congress would be
denied the exercise of its constitutional authority and
the State, and not the Nation, would be supreme within
the national field.
In subsequent years, the Court, when liberal,
expanded powers under the commerce clause, and
then, beginning with the Rehnquist court in the '80s,
began to limit those powers.
So the issue today is two-fold:
1. Does Congress have the power under the
commerce clause to enforce an individual mandate,
and
2. Are there individual liberties at stake that trump that
power?
That the decision to buy or not buy health insurance
substantially impacts interstate commerce almost goes
without question. And that then brings us to No. 2, the
hard stuff. Even if the commerce clause is applicable,
is this one of those places where it needs to be
limited?
You have your opinion, I have mine. Before I share
mine, I would also like to share two short, illustrative
health care stories I recently heard:
150

1. A good friend just got back from Southeast Asia.
While there, she met several Americans who travelled
there as "dental tourists." One was there to get some
work done that would cost her $10,000 out of pocket
here in the States, at about 1/10th of the price.
2. A self-employed acquaintance here went in for a
nuclear stress test. He and his wife budgeted $5,000
for this, as that is their deductible for the year.
So clearly something needed to be done, the question
is — was this it?
While I think the law is a gargantuan mess in some
ways, it seems that our health care system is even
more so. I further believe that we are all in this
together, that we are one nation, not just a bunch of
individuals, and insofar as health care goes, your
decision not to buy it directly effects how much I will
pay when I do buy it.
So, especially given the fact that Romneycare in
Massachussets has seemd to both cover more people
and lower costs, and while I hold my nose, I am glad
USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
that Congress tried to tackle one of the most significant
issues small businesses face — health care costs and
deliverability.
I hope the law is upheld.
Today's tip: Want to promote constitutional values in
our society? Here is one way: My brilliant daughter is
part of an incredible program that reaches 6 million
high school students every year, called We the People:
The Citizens and the Constitution. The program just
lost all of its federal funding.
This vital program is a national competition wherein
student are given constitutional issues to analyze and
then spend upwards of a year studying the
constitution, case law and history. They then compete
against one another in front of judges, lawyers, and
civic leaders. The program is continuing on through
private donations. If you want to help, go to
http://new.civiced.org/about/give/donate. (And as the
national finals are coming up this month, let me just
say, go Lincoln!)
151

USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
More U.S. employers tie health insurance
to medical tests
Once a year, employees of the Swiss Village
Retirement Community in Berne, Ind., have a checkup
that will help determine how much they pay for health
coverage. Those who don't smoke, aren't obese and
whose blood pressure and cholesterol fall below
specific levels get to shave as much as $2,000 off their
annual health insurance deductibles.
At Chicago-based Jones Lang LaSalle, a real estate
firm, workers can earn up to $300 in cash for having a
physical and hitting certain medical goals, or
completing health coaching programs.
Gone are the days of just signing up for health
insurance and hoping you don't have to use it. Now,
more employees are being asked to roll up their
sleeves for medical tests — and to exercise,
participate in disease-management programs and quit
smoking to qualify for hundreds, even thousands of
dollars' worth of premium or deductible discounts.
Proponents say such plans offer people a financial
incentive to make healthier choices and manage
chronic conditions such as obesity, high blood
pressure and diabetes, which are driving up health
care costs in the USA. Even so, studies of the effect of
such policies on lifestyle changes are inconclusive.
And advocates for people with chronic health
conditions, such as heart disease and diabetes, fear
that tying premium costs directly to test results could
lead to discrimination.
MORE: Kaiser Health News
Employee reaction has also been mixed. "It's an
invasion of privacy," says Bradley Seff, 54, a court
reporter who in August 2010 filed a lawsuit against his
employer, Broward County, Fla., for introducing such a
plan.
Nonetheless, such plans appear to be the wave of the
future. Faced with crippling health care costs, the
number of employers embracing such programs
inched up from 49% in 2010 to 54% last year — and
more say they expect to do so soon, according to a
survey by consultants Aon Hewitt. Big-name
participants include insurer UnitedHealthcare, car
rental firm Hertz, postage meter maker Pitney Bowes
and media owner Gannett, owner of USA TODAY.
More employers are expected to adopt them starting in
2014, when the health law — if the Supreme Court
upholds it — would allow them to offer larger
incentives or penalties.
"We're seeing a big move in this direction driven by
employers' concern about rising health costs and their
sense that employee behavior has a lot to do with high
costs," says Kevin Volpp, a professor at the University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, who has studied
the use of such incentives.
Cost savings seen
Leaders at Swiss Village credit their 8-year-old
wellness program, along with a high-deductible
insurance plan and an on-site fitness center, with
slowing health care cost increases. Indeed, workers
saw no increase in premiums from 2005 to 2011.
"We continue to embrace what we're doing," says
Daryl Martin, executive director of the non-profit
organization. Even so, a few high-cost medical issues
among its 230 covered employees and their
dependents last year caused Swiss Village to raise
employee costs 14% this year. What's important,
Martin says, is that the company's approach keeps
health "at the forefront of what people are thinking
about."
Of the employers who offer such programs, about
one-third offer financial incentives to those who
undergo specific medical tests, according to the Aon
Hewitt survey. And 5% of those tie the financial
rewards or penalties to meeting specific medical-based
standards. The survey also found an expansion of
such tests is on the horizon: 57% of employers said
they planned to add incentives for spouses and
dependents in the next three to five years.
"A lot of costs come from spouses, but only 29% had
incentives for spouses," says Cathy Tripp, a senior
vice president at Aon.
Employers will still have to craft plans to comply with
federal and, in some cases, state requirements, Volpp
says. The programs must be voluntary — meaning an
employer can't require a worker to participate as a
condition of coverage — and the employer must offer a
"reasonable alternative" to qualify for the reward, or to
avoid the penalty for those who can't achieve the
152

goals.
But Dick Woodruff, vice president of federal relations
for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action
Network, worries that there's no definition of what a
reasonable alternative must include.
Some workers also complain that the programs are an
intrusion into their private lives.
"They portrayed it as voluntary, which it isn't, because
if you don't participate, they fine you every paycheck,"
says Seff, the former Broward employee who is suing
over the program. He has since retired on disability
with back and neck problems. "I don't think any
employer should do it."
In an effort to slow rising costs, Broward County in
2009 began asking workers to fill out a health
information form and have a finger-stick blood test
each year to check blood sugar and cholesterol levels,
according to court filings. Workers who declined were
docked $40 a month. Those who participated were
offered disease-management programs if they had
asthma, high blood pressure, diabetes, congestive
heart failure or kidney disease. The county stopped
docking those who declined to participate Jan. 1, 2011,
after Seff's lawsuit was filed, court documents show.
The lawsuit, which argues that the county's program
violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, is likely the
first of its kind in the nation, says Seff's attorney,
Daniel Levine in Boca Raton, Fla. Without ruling on
whether the wellness effort was voluntary, a federal
district court judge backed the county in April of last
year, saying the plan fell under provisions of the law
meant to protect bona fide benefit programs. The case
is now on appeal. Broward County attorneys did not
return requests for comment.
Some state lawmakers are also concerned about the
potential for discrimination. Colorado passed
legislation in 2010 that requires wellness programs to
be accredited, bars penalizing workers for not
participating or failing to meet a health standard — and
allows appeals if an employee is denied an alternative.
A similar bill was brought unsuccessfully in California
last year, according to a February report by
Georgetown University's Health Policy Institute.
Concern for consumers
While supporting wellness programs in general,
several patient advocacy groups warned the Obama
administration last March that additional consumer
protections are needed. Tying medical test results to
financial incentives or penalties in premiums or
USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
deductibles could discriminate against some workers,
especially those who already have health problems,
the groups said.
"When you start increasing premiums or pumping up
the deductibles, you're making it more expensive and
harder for people to access insurance," says the
Cancer Society's Woodruff, who adds that offering gift
cards or bonuses are a better way to reward people for
participation.
Employers argue, however, that since they're on the
hook for the bills, they can ask workers to take more
responsibility.
"House money, house rules," says Ken Sperling,
global health care practice leader at Aon Hewitt.
The first worker wellness programs, which began
about a decade ago, rewarded simple participation:
attending a health fair or filling out "health risk
assessments," with the worker perhaps receiving a
$25 gift card in return.
Today, many offer discounted premiums to workers
who meet standards related to blood pressure,
cholesterol and weight, with the value of those
discounts running between $30 and $60 a month, says
Jim Pshock, founder and CEO of Bravo Wellness in
Avon, Ohio. Bravo administers such programs for
about 220 employers nationwide, including Colorado
construction firm Oakwood Homes and Nashville's
Ardent Health Services.
Although employers may set specific goals — such as
a body mass index (BMI) below 30, the level
considered obese — many also reward achievement
of less daunting targets. One employer rewarded
workers if their test results didn't worsen, Pshock
says.
At Swiss Village, workers get $500 off their deductible
for each of these measures: not smoking, having a
BMI of 27.5 or less, a low-density lipoprotein
cholesterol level (LDL) of 130 milligrams per deciliter or
less, and blood pressure of 130/85 or less. LDL levels
above 129 are associated with higher risk of heart
disease, while blood pressure greater than 120/80 is
considered a risk factor for heart attack and stroke.
A second tier of awards allows employees who
approach those ranges to earn $250 per category. The
testing takes place at an on-site health fair or at a
doctor's office, with the results gathered by an
independent insurance firm that runs the company's
program.
153

The information is generally gathered by firms that run
wellness programs or insurance plans.
UnitedHealthcare, which offers its "Personal Rewards"
program to large, self-insured clients, says it does not
use the information to set premiums.
But do they work?
Given the available data, it's hard to parse how much
of the reported savings from such programs come from
improved health, and how much from the frequent
pairing of such programs with high-deductible policies.
"We just don't know how effective (incentives) are,"
Volpp says. There is pretty good evidence they help
smokers quit, he says, but less that they prompt
workers to lose weight and keep it off.
Volpp says the medical literature shows they work best
when participants have choices: get below a certain
BMI, or lose 5% of current body weight, for example.
And, he says, rewards should be immediate. "If you
want the employee to do a health assessment or
(medical) screening, you should give them the reward
right after they do it," Volpp says.
At Jones Lang LaSalle, workers who make a pledge —
on the honor system — that they don't smoke, or will
take a stop-smoking class, and achieve a healthy
weight, get 10% off their contribution toward insurance
premiums.
USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
In 2010, the firm added a cash bonus program,
offering $50 to workers who get a physical and another
$50 for every one of four medical tests they take:
weight, blood pressure, glucose and cholesterol, plus
an extra $50 if they do all the tests. If they meet
specified goals — or complete a coaching program —
they receive the money as a cash bonus. Spouses and
domestic partners are also eligible, says Howard
Futterman, senior vice president of benefits.
Last year, 65% of employees participated. While it's
early, he says, indications are the program is having
an impact on costs: Health spending rose 6% in 2010,
but only 3% in 2011.
"Our long-term goal is to make health and well-being
part of our culture and everyday values," Futterman
says. "When people start doing it naturally and you
don't have to pay them for it, that's when you know
you've succeeded."
Kaiser Health News is an editorially independent
program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, a
non-profit, non-partisan health policy research and
communications organization not affiliated with Kaiser
Permanente.
154

USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Sanford, Fla., residents: 'We are good
people here'
SANFORD, Fla. – Thao Boyd, a Vietnamese immigrant
in this small city at the center of a national uproar over
racial profiling, wants people to know one thing about
her adopted community:
"Everybody knows Sanford now, but don't be scared
about Sanford," says Boyd, 37, who owns a nail salon
downtown. "Come visit us whenever you are ready."
In the 15 years that Boyd has lived here, she says, she
has never felt discriminated against. What's more, she
says, she can drive the 15 minutes from her house to
the salon and know a family on almost every block
where she could stop and ask for help if she ever
needed it.
PHOTOS: Thousands rally for Trayvon Martin
"We are good people here," she says.
Over the past two weeks, this city of 54,000, once
known for its vast celery fields, is now known as the
place where an unarmed 17-year-old black teen
walking home from the store with a bag of candy in his
pocket was shot and killed by a neighborhood watch
volunteer.
Trayvon Martin died on Feb. 26. Police did not arrest
the shooter, George Zimmerman, 28. Zimmerman is
white and Hispanic.
The Orlando Sentinel reported Sunday that two voice
identification experts it contacted said the person
overheard on a 911 call that night was not
Zimmerman, who told police he was the one
screaming for help. Martin's mother says it was her
son's voice.
As Trayvon's family, activists, celebrities and ordinary
folks across the country call for Zimmerman's arrest,
the community has been overwhelmed with news
trucks, reporters, high-profile civil rights leaders
including Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and
thousands of protesters. Another rally was held
Sunday in Miami.
At a meeting with city commissioners March 26,
Sharpton warned that Sanford risks becoming the 21st
century's Selma or Birmingham, two Southern cities
that became synonymous with racial hate during the
1960s civil rights movement.
But residents here say the comparison is unfair.
"Sanford is not a racist town, it's just not," says Nancy
Kruckemyer, 57, who is white. "Everybody wants
justice."
As the investigation continues into the shooting, "I feel
there is a heaviness in town," Kruckemyer says.
Some black residents, too, say Sanford is no longer a
community with flagrant racial tension between black
and white residents. About a third of the city's
residents are black.
Pastor Valarie Houston agrees that the races generally
get along fine in Sanford. She says the tension that
exists sits squarely with the police department and
how it treats members of the black community.
"The police department is not fair to the
African-American community," she says. She says
police investigations are weak or non-existent when
black people are killed.
The Trayvon Martin case, she says, "is just one of
many."
At a community meeting with the NAACP last week,
more than a dozen families complained of unfair
treatment by the police. Their allegations ranged from
an officer hitting a 10-year-old boy to what they see as
a poor investigation and failure to arrest Zimmerman.
Those are the frustrations the Trayvon Martin case has
tapped, Houston says.
Thousands of protesters chanting "Justice for Trayvon"
marched to the police department Saturday in the
latest of several rallies here. The department did not
return phone calls requesting comment.
"It's a beautiful city and we have a lot of good qualities,
but if this is the publicity the city needs to straighten
things up as far as the law, then so be it," says
Lazarus Mitchell, 30, who coaches youngsters in a
football athletic league at Fort Mellon Park, the site of
one of the largest rallies for Trayvon. Mitchell, who is
black, has white and black children on his teams.
155

City manager Norton Bonaparte, Sanford's first black
manager, says he understands the anger of the black
community and wants the city to repair its trust.
He has called on the Justice Department, which is
investigating Trayvon's death, to look into other cases
where residents have raised concerns about police
treatment. He also wants people to contact the federal
officials with their complaints.
"We need to address this head-on," Bonaparte says.
"The shooting has had a polarizing effect … but it's
based on something that's been going on longer than
the Trayvon Martin case."
Bonaparte, a transplant from Topeka, is still getting to
know Sanford. He was on the job for five months when
Trayvon was killed. He was smitten when he came for
a job interview in July.
"I drove down this beautiful waterfront, people were out
walking, there were people of all races," he says. "It
was a weekday and they were all out enjoying
themselves. It seemed idyllic."
He doesn't want the negative publicity to shatter that
image and the city's small-town charm. The city has
hired a crisis management firm to help deal with the
fallout from the shooting.
"What happened between Trayvon Martin and George
Zimmerman was tragic, (but) these are two individuals
out of a community of 54,000. Let's put that in
perspective," Bonaparte says.
Nicholas Mcray, the city's economic development
director, who is white, says, "It's obviously a
tumultuous time."
He says the attention brought by the shooting "doesn't
help" efforts to build on the growth the city has seen in
the past decade. The population grew 40% since
2000.
Bonaparte and Mcray point to the downtown
redevelopment that rebuilt the river walk along the
southern edge of Lake Monroe, the refurbished park
across the river walk that hosts 90,000 people every
July 4 and the redeveloped downtown with its brick
sidewalks, benches and new facades.
The park, with new basketball courts, jungle gym and
USA Today/ - News, Dom, 01 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
swing set, fountains and football field, is a hub every
day of the week.
Mcray says more redevelopment is under discussion
along the city's main thoroughfare, French Avenue, a
busy boulevard of check-cashing places, fast food and
take-out Chinese restaurants, boarded-up businesses
and vacant lots. The housing authority has met with
federal officials to figure out how to redevelop land
where now-closed housing projects sit in Goldsboro,
one of the city's historically black communities. That
part of town has boarded-up houses and storefronts
and homes in need of repair.
Mcray says the city strives to live up to its slogan, "The
Friendly City." The city even posted on its website a
map of downtown and places to stay and eat for
out-of-towners attending the rallies.
"I think the characterization of our community has not
been as broad as it truly is," he says. "We are a
welcoming, open and safe community."
Kruckemyer and family friend Hank Dieckhaus
discussed the case last week as they sat outside the
Taste of Thyme Café downtown.
Dieckhaus, who is white, moved to Sanford from
Philadelphia nine years ago. He says he's attended all
the meetings and rallies for Trayvon Martin. "I wanted
to go to show support," he says.
Still, he says Sanford bears no resemblance to the Jim
Crow towns of the Deep South.
"This is not 1965; this is not Selma, Alabama, or
Birmingham. This is Sanford, Fla., 2012, and we'll get
through this," says Dieckhaus, 64.
Yet the stigma of the case is strong.
Molly Meyerholtz, manager of The Treehouse Fine
Furniture and Antiques, which has been on First Street
about five years, says the Trayvon Martin case
exploded just at the end of the January-March tourist
season.
"It's very overwhelming," she says. "If the city of
Sanford wanted to put itself on the map, they certainly
didn't do it in the right way."
Contributing: Larry Copeland; the Associated Pres
156

02/04/2012

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
02/04/2012
Bizjournais - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Duke Energy wants N.C. rate-hike appeal dismissed, 161
Bloomberg - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Democrats Resort to Magical Thinking on Obamacare, 162
Bloomberg - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
The Birth of U.S. Fiat Currency, 164
Business Insurance - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
OPINION: Health care reform law requires fast resolution by court, 165
Business Insurance - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Employers face decisions if court overturns entire law, 166
Business Insurance - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Individual mandate rejection seen as worst legal outcome, 167
Business Insurance - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Health reform hangs in balance, 168
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Is Pranab eyeing FII capital gains?, 170
Business Line - Markets
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Applying for TN Govt jobs set to become more easy, 171
Corriere Della Será - Politica
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Corte Costituzionale
Acquedotto: «ripublicizzazione» Tanti annunci e pochi fatti, 172
El Dia - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Ahora se habla de un Plan B para dividir la Procuración, 173
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Verfassungsgericht
Koalitionsstreit Kanzlerin Merkel lehnt höhere Pendlerpauschale ab, 175
Le Monde - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Conseil Constitutionnel
L"obligation de négocier, une injonction paradoxale, 177
Los Tiempos - actualidad
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Corte Internacional de Justicia
Expresidente Lagos propone dar vuelta a la página tras el fallo de La Haya, 178
Reuters General - Article
158

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Prosecutor denies interfering in Florida shooting case, 179
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Global business groups warn India over new tax plan, 180
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Supreme court: immunity for witness grand jury testimony, 182
The Economic Times - Politics/Nation
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Britain warns India tax plan may hurt investment, 183
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
President Confident Health Law Will Stand, 184
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
A Favored Son Returns to Uphill Battle in Nebraska, 186
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Justices’ Cerebral Combativeness on Display, 188
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Pink Slime Economics, 190
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Examining Marijuana Arrests, 192
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Mr. Chairman, the Great State of Nostalgia ..., 193
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Mayoral Hopeful’s Slow Start Has Some Asking if His Heart Is in It, 195
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
To Enroll More Minority Students, Colleges Work Around the Courts, 197
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
At the University of Texas, Admissions as a Mystery, 199
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Column: Why Justice Kennedy should rule 'no', 201
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama warns against 'judicial activism' on health care law, 203
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
159

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
Romney's son hits back after 'Mad Men' swipe, 204
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Small bomb ignites at Wisconsin Planned Parenthood clinic, 205
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama warns justices against 'judicial activism', 206
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Bomb damages Wis. Planned Parenthood clinic, 208
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama predicts high court will uphold health care law, 209
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama says court will uphold health law, 211
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Sanford residents: 'We are good people', 213
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Employers tie insurance to tests, 215
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
'Sanford is not a racist town', 218
160

Bizjournais/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Duke Energy wants N.C. rate-hike appeal
dismissed
Duke Energy has called on North Carolina regulators
to dismiss an appeal of Duke’s 7% rate hike, citing an
error that the N.C. Attorney General contends was a
typing mistake.
The N.C. Utilities Commission approved the rate hike,
effective March 1, on Jan. 27. State Attorney General
Roy Cooper filed an appeal of the rate-hike order last
Wednesday — on the deadline for filing appeals to the
decision.
The original filing gave notice that Cooper was
appealing to the N.C. Court of Appeals. But appeals of
the commission’s rate orders must go to the state
Supreme Court. A spokesman for the attorney
general told the The Business Journal on Wednesday
that the appeal was being made to the Supreme
Court, despite what was stated on the filing.
'Avoid confusion'
But Cooper’s office did not file a correction to the
original notice until Thursday. In that filing, Assistant
Attorney General Peggy Force, who submitted the
initial filing, called the appeals court reference an
“inadvertent typographical error.”
“As the commission and the parties know, appeals
from general rate cases lie directly to the North
Carolina Supreme Court,” Force says, and she notes
the second filing was made “to avoid confusion.”
Duke filed its response Friday. It says the original filing
must be dismissed because the appeals court has no
jurisdiction over the rate increase. The second filing,
which came a day after the appeal deadline, “amounts
to a request for a further extension of time to file (the
attorney general’s) appeal.”
Duke notes the commission already had granted one
extension and cannot grant a second.
The commission had not responded as of Monday
morning.
John Downey covers the energy industry, utilities,
public companies and the courts for the Charlotte
Business Journal.
161

Bloomberg/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Democrats Resort to Magical Thinking on
Obamacare
In the span of one week, Democrats went from
dismissing the possibility that the Supreme Court
would strike down the 2010 law mandating individuals
to buy health insurance to consoling themselves that
any such action would have a silver lining.
James Carville says it would help the Democrats in the
election. Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson
writes that it would make single payer -- a government
health system as in the U.K. and Canada --
“inevitable.” Other liberals, and even the occasional
right-of-center analyst, have echoed that point: The
conservative legal challenge to President Barack
Obama’s health-care overhaul could prove
self-defeating.
It’s an interesting and counterintuitive analysis, but it’s
almost certainly wrong. If the court undoes
Obamacare, either in whole or in part, conservatives
who would like to reduce the government’s role in
health care are likely to get policies much more to their
liking.
Let’s say the court strikes down the entire law. The
Democratic fantasy goes something like this: The
public will still be upset about the number of Americans
without insurance, rising premiums and the difficulty
people with pre-existing conditions have getting
insurance. Republicans will have no plan for achieving
universal coverage. Sooner or later, single payer -which
would probably be more popular than a
mandate, and thus an easier sell to the public -- will
prevail.
Political Reality
Reality-check time: When Obamacare became law,
Democrats had more power in Washington than at any
time since the Carter administration in the 1970s. They
had the presidency and lopsided majorities in both
houses of Congress. Because conservative Democrats
have declined in numbers, it was probably the most
liberal Congress since 1965-66. They were still barely
able to pass the law. And that was with important
medical industries either neutralized or in favor of the
legislation, which they would not be in the case of
single payer.
Democrats attained that degree of power because of
an unusual set of circumstances: an unpopular
Republican president reaching the end of his second
term and a financial crisis hitting at exactly the right
time. The odds are that it will be a long, long time until
Democrats again hit the jackpot. And without an
overwhelming Democratic majority, getting single
payer through Congress would be almost impossible:
Republicans won’t acquiesce to any steps toward such
a system.
It’s true that people like the idea of helping the
uninsured and those with pre-existing conditions, but
the support melts away when this help involves higher
taxes or intrusive regulation. Look at it this way: For
several years, fans of the health-care law have been
saying that any day now the popularity of Obamacare’s
regulation of insurance companies would start
trumping the unpopularity of other parts of the
legislation. It hasn’t happened yet, and there is no
reason to think it would once the court struck down the
law.
Or let’s say the court strikes down the mandate, but
leaves in place the insurance regulations. The
regulations without the mandate would lead healthy
people to drop their coverage -- the insurance rules
mean such people would be able to get it again if they
get sick -- and with only ill people covered, premiums
would soar.
The question then becomes: Would Congress be more
likely to respond by moving to single payer or by
getting rid of the regulations?
We have seen just this scenario play out in a number
of states that imposed similar regulations without any
mandate. Iowa, Kentucky, New Hampshire and South
Dakota have all repealed their regulations, while
Maine, New Jersey and Washington State have
weakened theirs. Only liberal Vermont, according to a
study conducted by America’s Health Insurance Plans,
a trade group, has moved toward single payer.
Clearing the Way
In those cases, of course, the Supreme Court wasn’t
involved. Democrats would be outraged if the court
struck down the mandate, and would presumably
blame any resulting problems in the health-care
market on its decision. Republicans, meanwhile, would
blame the Democrats for enacting a flawed law that
couldn’t survive legal scrutiny.
162

The public is likely to side with the court, for two
reasons. Americans express significantly more
confidence in the court than in the presidency or
Congress. And most Americans dislike the individual
mandate and actually want it struck down.
None of this means conservatives will get their way on
health-care policy across the board. Presumably,
Democrats will continue to resist Representative Paul
Ryan’s plan to transform Medicare, or a revival of
Senator John McCain’s proposal to let people buy
insurance across state lines and give them tax credits.
Many liberals think those policies would be just as
disastrous as most conservatives think Obamacare
would be. But such reforms seem at least as likely as
single payer to make headway. And Obamacare’s
demise would clear the way for them.
Bloomberg/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
(Ramesh Ponnuru is a Bloomberg View columnist and
a senior editor at National Review. The opinions
expressed are his own.)
Read more opinion online from Bloomberg View.
Today’s highlights: The View editors on Myanmar’s
elections and Marco Rubio’s immigration bill; Betsey
Stevenson and Justin Wolfers on the fallibility of
economists; Margaret Carlson on the recall movement
in Wisconsin; Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth S.
Rogoff on why this crisis really is different; Eric Posner
and Glen Weyl on creating an FDA for derivatives
trading.
163

Bloomberg/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
The Birth of U.S. Fiat Currency
On April 2, 1862, the first greenback left the U.S.
Treasury, marking the start of a new era in the
American monetary system.
At the start of the Civil War, the U.S. didn't have a
national paper currency. Instead, the money supply
consisted of U.S. coins and a collection of paper notes
issued by private banks. Technically, the federal
government began issuing its own paper currency in
1861. That year, the Lincoln administration issued $60
million in demand notes, a variant of a Treasury note
that was redeemable "on demand" for gold coins at the
Treasury or any sub-Treasury.
These notes were overshadowed in 1862 by the issue
of $150 million in a new fiat currency officially known
as United States notes and popularly known as
greenbacks or legal tenders. By the end of the war,
close to $450 million worth of greenbacks were in
circulation.
The greenbacks were originally intended to be a
temporary emergency-financing measure. Almost
bankrupt, the Treasury needed money to pay suppliers
and troops. The plan was to print a limited supply of
United States notes to meet the crisis and then have
people convert the currency into Treasury bonds. But
United States notes grew in popularity and continued
to circulate.
The name greenbacks referred to the reverse of the
notes, which were printed in green. The name
legal-tender notes referred to the text that originally
appeared on the back, which began, "This note is legal
tender for all debts, public and private." This provision
made the currency a valid form of payment on par with
gold and silver, which was a very controversial action
at the time. It made the United States note a fiat
currency -- meaning its value was established by law
alone and wasn't based on some other unit of value,
such as gold, silver or land.
Many Americans during and after the Civil War
believed the creation of a fiat currency was
unconstitutional. The Constitution explicitly stated that
only gold and silver could be considered legal tender.
In 1871, in the case of Knox v. Lee, the Supreme
Court settled the matter by declaring that making
United States notes legal tender was indeed
constitutional.
By this time, the greenback was at the center of a
countrywide debate on monetary policy. When the
post-Civil War economic boom ended in the panic and
depression of 1873, many people, especially farmers,
blamed the Treasury’s policy of contracting the
currency -- that is, removing United States notes from
circulation in an attempt to go back to the gold
standard, which would require that a $1 note could be
redeemed for $1 in gold.
As a consequence, there was a call for the expansion
of United States note circulation or an inflation of the
currency. This belief became joined with a political
ideology that opposed big business and banking
interests, resulting in the birth of the Greenback Party
in 1874.
Opposing the Greenbackers were more conservative
interests, sometimes known as "gold bugs,'' who found
support in the Republican Party and in elements of the
Democratic Party. Gold interests proved the stronger
contestant in the debate and in 1878, the total
circulation of United States notes was fixed at a little
over $346 million and the notes eventually became
redeemable in gold (at least until 1933, when this
provision was removed).
During the 20th century, United States notes became
ever less important in the nation’s money supply,
though Congress supported their continued circulation.
They were increasingly replaced by currency issued by
the Federal Reserve System, which came to look
almost identical to the United States note. The Federal
Reserve note thus became the new greenback.
In 1966, Congress allowed the Treasury to start
removing United States notes from circulation. The last
delivery of the notes by the Bureau of Engraving and
Printing to the Treasury was made in 1971. In 1994,
the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory
Improvement Act eliminated the issuance of the notes
altogether.
Today, original greenbacks can be found only in
numismatic collections. But as the first federally issued
fiat currency, the United States note made possible the
bills we still use every day.
164

Business Insurance/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
OPINION: Health care reform law
requires fast resolution by court
THE MOST SIGNIFICANT takeaway from last week"s
oral arguments on the health care reform law before
the Supreme Court was a near-consensus among the
justices that they should resolve the legal issues by the
end of the court"s current term in June.
Justices spanning a wide range of the ideological
spectrum were openly skeptical of arguments
presented by Robert Long, a court-appointed attorney,
that an obscure 1867 law prevents the court from
taking up the case until a tax has been paid—in this
case the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act"s
requirement that most U.S. residents either enroll in a
qualified plan or pay a penalty.
The individual mandate doesn"t take effect until 2014,
with the penalty for those not enrolled in a plan due in
2015. If the justices had accepted Mr. Long"s
argument that it is too soon to hear the case—which
we don"t think they did—the result would have been
years of uncertainty and potential chaos.
Consider the issue of prescription drug coverage that
some employers offer to Medicare-eligible retirees.
The health care reform law, effective next year, pares
a big tax break Congress extended to employers as
part of a 2003 law to encourage them to continue the
drug plans.
In response to the dilution of the tax break, many
employers are preparing to revamp or even eliminate
the retiree drug plans.
What if the Supreme Court were to wait until 2015 to
decide the future of the health care reform law and it
then strikes down the entire law, which presumably
would restore the prescription drug tax break?
Employers, at least in some cases, would have
changed their plans needlessly.
Of course, there are far bigger issues than that. By
2014, states are supposed to set up exchanges where
millions of previously uninsured people will use their
health care reform law premium subsidies to buy
coverage. If the justices were to strike down the law in
2015, think of all the time and money the states would
waste in establishing the exchanges.
Fortunately, if our reading of the justices" comments is
right and a court ruling is handed down in June, those
scenarios will not develop. And everyone should
welcome a quick resolution of the law"s future.
165

Business Insurance/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Employers face decisions if court
overturns entire law
WASHINGTON—There"s good news and bad news
for employers if the U.S. Supreme Court scraps the
entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,
health benefits experts say.
While employers would regain their former flexibility in
designing health benefits, they also would have to
decide what to do with plan changes they"ve already
made to comply with the law, such as extending
coverage to employees" adult children—a move that
benefit experts warn could be very unpopular.
Employers also would lose the opportunity to take
advantage of provisions in the law that may have led to
lower costs and improvements in care quality, such as
research into treatment efficacy and outcomes.
“Once you provide a benefit, even if legally you can
take it away, as a sense of company morale, it is every
difficult to take it away; and this has been a very
popular benefit,” said Chantel Sheaks, a principal at
Buck Consultants L.L.C. in Washington. “It"s the same
issue for companies that lost their grandfather status
and gave preventive care without copayments. Human
resource departments will be getting a lot of phone
calls.”
“If the law is invalid, it returns flexibility to design
benefits without worrying about compliance with the
letter of the law as opposed to what makes sense for
their employees,” said Steve Wojcik, vp of public policy
at the National Business Group on Health in
Washington. But employers may have made physical
workplace changes to—for example, accommodate
nursing mothers—which he said may be difficult to
take away.
“There are a lot of really innovative and cutting-edge
system and payment reforms in the law that make up
the bulk of the law. Losing that momentum would set
us back years. We"d be going backwards instead of
forward,” said Shawn Nowicki, director of health policy
at the Northeast Business Group on Health in New
York.
“We think there are some very good provisions in the
legislation, so if the whole thing were struck down, we
would need to reconstruct the value-based purchasing
provisions,” said Andrew Webber, president and CEO
of the National Business Coalition on Health in
Washington.
“There are many elements of the legislation that
employers support. But at the same time, employers
don"t like mandates and penalties and excise taxes,”
he said.
166

Business Insurance/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Individual mandate rejection seen as
worst legal outcome
WASHINGTON—Deciding that the individual mandate
in the health care reform law is unconstitutional while
keeping the rest of the law intact would be the
“worst-case scenario” of possible Supreme Court
actions on the law, most industry experts agree.
“It does not put us back to where we were prior to
health care reform. It puts us in a place that is much
worse than that,” said Jim Napoli, senior counsel with
Proskauer Rose L.L.P. in Washington.
Hewrote an amicus brief on behalf of the
Washington-based American Benefits Council
suggesting that the court should strike the employer
mandate if it decides the individual mandate is
unconstitutional.
“It would cause employers to seriously consider
whether to remain in the health care game” because
“for many employers, the cost of the penalty would be
less than the cost to actually provide coverage,” he
said.
Moreover, “insurers may pull out of certain markets
and not provide individual coverage. What does that
do to the group market? Or what does it do the cost of
health care in a more general sense? The employers
that self-fund will still be impacted even if they"re not
purchasing an insured product because the cost of
health care will go up. That"s the negative
consequence of it,” Mr. Napoli said.
“The insurance industry will just increase the cost for
everyone,” said Larry Boress, president and CEO of
the Midwest Business Group on Health in Chicago.
Of eight states that enacted guaranteed issue and
community rating without an individual mandate, “three
went into the ditch and only five were left standing, but
they are limping along,” said Paul Keckley, executive
director of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions
based in Washington.
Indeed, during oral arguments, Solicitor General
Donald B. Verrilli Jr. told the court that when
community rating and guaranteed issue were
implemented in New Jersey, rates soared and the
number of individuals covered plummeted from
180,000 to 80,000. “In Kentucky, virtually every insurer
left the market,” he added.
Ed Haislmaier, senior research fellow in the Center for
Health Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation,
predicts that if PPACA is allowed to stand without the
individual mandate “the whole thing goes south very
quickly.”
167

Business Insurance/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Health reform hangs in balance
WASHINGTON—After months of anticipation,
thousands of pages of briefs and more than six hours
of oral arguments last week on the health care reform
law, the U.S. Supreme Court cast more doubt on the
fate of the individual mandate at the heart of the
landmark reform law.
Observers are less certain, however, about whether
the nation"s highest court also will decide that the rest
of the law is so inextricably tied to the mandate—which
requires U.S. residents to either buy health insurance
or pay a penalty—that it, too, must go.
While the justices were expected to cast an initial vote
on the case Friday, the nation must wait as long as
late June for the court to issue its decision.
Observers expect the ultimate decision to be close,
with conservative Justices Samuel Alito Jr., Antonin
Scalia and Clarence Thomas lining up against the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and liberal
Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg,
Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan all voting to uphold
it. They say conservative Chief Justice John G.
Roberts Jr. and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy are likely
to be the “swing votes” that determine the law"s fate.
If the court finds that the individual mandate is
unconstitutional and renders the entire law invalid, it
would require lawmakers to start from scratch, a
difficult endeavor in today"s polarized political climate
in Congress, health care industry experts say.
Employers also would face some tough decisions, the
biggest being whether to roll back benefit plan design
changes already implemented to comply with the law
(see Employers face decisions if court overturns entire
law).
Alternatively, if the court invalidates only the individual
mandate and leaves the rest of the law intact, it could
further drive up the cost of health insurance in the
individual and group markets if insurers remain subject
to community rating and guaranteed issue mandates
without also enlarging the pool toinclude healthier
individuals, industry experts warn (see Individual
mandate rejection seen as worst legal outcome).
“I think that court watchers looking at this for some
time have thought the vote would be very, very close,”
said Ed Fensholt, senior vp and director of compliance
services for Lockton Benefit Group in Kansas City, Mo.
“You"ve got three or four pretty conservative, four
pretty liberal (justices); and then you"ve got Justice
Kennedy, who"s a middle-of-the road guy.”
“What really shocked me was the tenor of the
questions” during oral arguments on the severability
and Medicaid expansion issues, he said. “I always
thought the vote on the mandate would be close, but I
really didn"t think there was a chance the court would
throw the entire law out. From the arguments (last
Wednesday), it seemed like the five conservative
justices thought as a bloc that the entire law has to
go.”
Jay Kirschbaum, St. Louis-based vp and practice
leader for Willis Human Capital Practice, said he had
been “pessimistic” that the Supreme Court might
decide that the individual mandate was
unconstitutional.
“But after listening to the oral arguments, I"m more
optimistic,” he said.
“The entire law is in play,” said Royal Oakes, a partner
with insurance law firm Barger & Wolen L.L.P. in Los
Angeles.
“The questions from the justices suggest they"re likely
to dump the individual mandate; but beyond that, the
crystal ball gets murky. Justice Scalia would probably
toss the whole thing, but the chiefmight try to cobble
together a consensus to reject only those components
that seem to make no sense without the individual
mandate. If that happens, the employer mandate might
be left standing,” Mr. Oakes said.
However, the individual mandate and the employer
mandate are directly related pieces, contained in a
section in PPACA titled “shared responsibility,” said
Paul Dennett, senior vp-health care reform with the
Washington-based American Benefits Council, which
filed a brief in the case asserting that if the individual
mandate is ruled unconstitutional, the employer
mandate should be as well.
“The employer penalty is an assessment on
employees who obtain coverage in the individual
market through exchanges. In the absence of an
individual mandate and the insurance reforms that
support it, some of those employees won"t qualify for
coverage, but the employer would still be subject to a
penalty,” Mr. Dennett said.
“I don"t think anyone felt that when the suit was filed
that it was a constitutional law exercise and, instead,
considered it to be a more political move,” said Andy
Anderson, a partner with Morgan Lewis & Bockius
L.L.P. in Chicago. But after hearing the oral
arguments, he said the possibility of the entire health
care reform law being struck down “is far more
probable than anyone anticipated.”
“The government didn"t make its case as strongly as it
might and the plaintiffs did pretty well,” said Paul
Keckley, executive director of the Deloitte Center for
Health Solutions in Washington. “I"m not ready to
conclude that they are going to throw the whole thing
under the bus,” he said. However, “I could see them
throw the mandate out and keep the law and throw it
back to Congress.”
168

Chief Justice “Roberts does not want the court to be
politicized, and he doesn"t want the court to legislate. I
still have a sense that Kennedy is going to support the
Business Insurance/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
law, but I wouldn"t be surprised if he doesn"t vote with
Roberts,” Mr. Keckley said.
169

Chennai, April 2:
Business Line/ - Markets, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Is Pranab eyeing FII capital gains?
All these years no short term capital gains tax has
been levied on FII money coming in via Mauritius,
because of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement
(DTAA) between India and Mauritius.
As a result, this income has been escaping tax both in
Mauritius (which does not tax capital gains) and in
India (which exempts only long term capital gains,
short term gains being currently taxed at 15 per cent
with a 3 per cent cess).
This was not an oversight. Everyone knew that, in the
name of avoiding “double taxation,” the money was not
being taxed at all.
But at the time the point was first raised, the
Government felt that this was a cost we had to pay if
we wanted FII flows. The Supreme Court, in effect,
accepted this reasoning in its 2003 judgment in the
Azadi Bachao Andolan case.
From trickle to flood
Things have changed a great deal since then, and with
exceptions like 2008 and 2011, FII flows have gone
from a trickle to a flood. As the Government keeps
widening the tax net (to meet burgeoning expenses
while keeping tax rates low), some in the Government
believe that there is no reason to leave FIIs out.
The revised June 2010 discussion paper on the Direct
Taxes Code had a chapter specifically directed at
cases in which, under the name of avoiding double
taxation, certain kinds of income end up not getting
taxed at all.
Even under the ‘ideal' case that Deloitte's International
Taxation people believe India should model its General
Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAARs) on, Mauritius-based
FIIs would be left without a leg to stand. It is hard to
think of any ‘commercial substance', other than tax
avoidance, that FIIs can come up with for the Mauritius
leg of the transaction.
Retrospective changes
Participatory notes, the Finance Minister has promised
not to touch. And a Finance Ministry official has
specifically stated that FIIs will not be targeted by
retrospective changes in Section 9. But that still leaves
one question: If the cash-strapped Finance Minister
had specific anti-avoidance measures in mind, why did
he stir up a hornet's nest with his Budget Speech one
liner about General Anti-Avoidance Rules.
Will FIIs be brought into the tax net? Eventually, yes,
but here and now the Finance Minister might drag his
feet, as in the case of fuel and fertiliser subsidies. A
tax on short-term FII gains would reduce market
volatility, but leaving the whole thing hanging in the air
could aggravate it.
170

Business Line/ - Markets, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Applying for TN Govt jobs set to become
more easy
Chennai, April 2:
The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC)
today announced a slew of measures to make
procedures for applying for Government jobs easy for
applicants.
“With the new one-time registration system in place,
one can give data and TNPSC will store basic details
for five years and receive a unique ID. In the five
years, he/she just needs to refer to the unique ID for
the exam he/she wants to apply along with the fee.
There will be no need to take photocopies of all
certificates,” the TNPSC Chairman, Mr R. Nataraj, told
presspersons.
TNPSC also has tied up with Indian Bank and Sify to
enable more than one option for exam fee payment.
“Now applicants can use one of the three options.
They can pay the fee in one of the over 280 post
offices or in one of the 800 branches of Indian Bank or
through their credit/debit cards,” said TNPSC Member
Secretary, Mr T. Udhayachandran.
As the applicant will be feeding in the mobile number
and e-mail ID, he will get an SMS and a mail alert on
the status of his/her application, he said.
The revamped Web site of the Commission
www.tnpsc.gov.in has features and provisions to clear
any doubts and assistance that might arise among the
applicants.
“Judgments by the Supreme Court and High Courts
regarding TNPSC, previous year question papers,
syllabus and over 90 FAQs have also been made
available for the benefit of the users,” Mr
Udhayachandran said.
171

Corriere Della Será/ - Politica, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Corte Costituzionale)
Acquedotto: «ripublicizzazione» Tanti
annunci e pochi fatti
Un quesito referendario mai rispettato,
chiedeva la riduzione del 7% sulle bollette
Avrebbe voluto ripubblicizzare l’Acquedotto Pugliese.
E già il verbo era inadatto, perché nei suoi 110 anni di
vita l’Acquedotto Pugliese non è mai stato privato, per
cui non c’è nulla da ripubblicizzare (magari c’è da
privatizzare, come impone la legge 448 del 2001 del
governo Berlusconi — mai rispettata — con la quale il
Tesoro cedette senza alcun onere alle Regioni Puglia
e Basilicata l’Aqp con l’unico obbligo di avviarne la
dismissione).
Ma, a parte il verbo, che la ripubblicizzazione
annunciata in campagna elettorale da Nichi Vendola
fosse impraticabile era stato sottolineato più volte e da
più parti (anche dal Corriere del Mezzogiorno) invano:
adesso che lo ha fatto la Corte Costituzionale,
Vendola si è trincerato nel silenzio sull’argomento.
Persa la «guerra dell’acqua», Vendola potrebbe
uscirsene meritandosi almeno l’onore delle armi.
Come? Adempiendo a quanto decisodal referendum
dello scorso giugno, sostenuto dallo stesso Vendola,
con i «sì» che abrogarono la norma (riguardante non
solo i gestori privati, ma anche quelli pubblici) che
consente «al gestore di ottenere profitti garantiti sulla
tariffa, caricando sulla bolletta dei cittadini un 7% a
remunerazione del capitale investito».
Chi ha votato «sì» si aspettava che le bollette si
riducessero del 7%, subito. E invece nulla: incalzato
dal Corriere del Mezzogiorno, all’indomani del
referendum (e non prima) Vendola sottolineò come
fosse «indispensabile fare i conti con la realtà per non
precipitare nei burroni della demagogia:
sull’Acquedotto Pugliese abbiamo deciso di
intraprendere la strada dell’efficientamento. Per questo
non abbasseremo le tariffe». Recentemente ha
parzialmente cambiato tiro: «La Regione Puglia — ha
sottolineato prima del silenzio idrico post Corte
Costituzionale — si è fatta promotrice di un’iniziativa
che possa consentire, più che un modesto taglio
lineare nelle bollette (7%), di riconoscere che la
dotazione giornaliera di 50 litri per persona può e deve
essere gratuita per i cittadini più bisognosi». Non va
bene, come per la ripubblicizzazione: il quesito
referendario chiedeva il taglio di quel 7% (tutt’altro che
modesto) per tutti gli utenti, non solo per i più
bisognosi. E il rispetto di quel quesito non è opzionale.
Michelangelo Borrillo
172

El Dia/ - Noticia, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Ahora se habla de un Plan B para dividir
la Procuración
Se analiza la posibilidad de que el Subprocurador
quede a cargo de la Defensa Oficial
El gobierno bonaerense anunció hace algunas
semanas que avanzará con una profunda reforma en
el sistema judicial que incluye, entre otros cambios, la
instauración de los juicios por jurados, la creación de
la Policía Judicial y la división de la Procuración de la
Suprema Corte. Dos de esas iniciativas registraron
algunos avances, incluso, con debates públicos de los
que participó el propio Daniel Scioli. Sin embargo, el
desdoblamiento del Ministerio Público no termina de
despegar de los laboratorios oficiales.
abre comillasLa alternativa seduce a sectores del
sciolismo, aunque aún está en etapa embrionariacierra
comillas
Si bien fue el Ejecutivo el que blanqueó la idea de
avanzar con la división de la Procuración, se trata de
un viejo anhelo que han venido acuñando organismos
de Derechos Humanos como la Comisión por la
Memoria y que, incluso, llegó a plasmarse en un
proyecto de ley presentado hace algún tiempo por el
diputado kirchnerista Fernando "Chino" Navarro.
La llegada del vicegobernador Gabriel Mariotto al
Senado junto al desembarco que varios legisladores
que reportan a la Casa Rosada, potenciaron este
debate. Pero más allá de la declarada "necesidad" de
avanzar con esta reforma, hay una cuestión política de
fondo: la indisimulada intención del kirchnerismo de
minar el poder de la Procuradora María del Carmen
Falbo a quien emparentan con el duhaldismo.
Es que, concretamente, si se cristaliza el proyecto
Falbo sólo quedaría a cargo de los fiscales, mientras
que las defensorías oficiales pasarían a formar parte
de otro organismo y supervisado por otro funcionario
judicial.
OBJECIONES
Hace ya algún tiempo, aunque ha vuelto a cobrar
notoriedad en función del reverdecer del debate, el
diputado kirchnerista Navarro había dado el puntapié
inicial. Concretamente, propuso que el servicio de la
Defensa Pública quedara bajo la coordinación de una
nueva figura: el Defensor de la Suprema Corte.
De esta manera, la Procuración sólo quedaría con las
Fiscalías y perdería el control sobre la Defensa oficial.
"Uno de los pilares fundamentales del acceso a la
justicia es el de la provisión de ayuda legal a quienes
no pueden proveerla" y, en ese contexto, "es evidente
que el ejercicio de la superintendencia que tiene el
Procurador General sobre los restantes miembros del
Ministerio Público no puede tener los mismos alcances
para dos funciones netamente contradictorias como
son las de acusar y defender, pues de entenderse así
se vería desnaturalizada plenamente la inviolabilidad
de la defensa de la persona y de los derechos en todo
procedimiento administrativo o judicial", sostuvo el
legislador.
Y añadió: "El debido proceso requiere de sujetos
independientes que impulsen sus roles específicos,
esto es, un acusador, un defensor y un tercero que
decida. Y esa división de roles es la base sobre la que
se pretende democratizar el proceso penal".
UNA ALTERNATIVA
En el Ejecutivo no aparecen ahora señales
contundentes en relación a presentar el proyecto que
divide la Procuración. "Vamos a esperar cómo mueven
en la Legislatura", se sinceró un funcionario del
gabinete provincial al hacer referencia al
kirchnerismo.
En rigor, este proyecto es el único vinculado a
Justicia y Seguridad que no estaría activo de los que
anunció Scioli: la creación de la Policía Municipal de
Prevención y la Policía Judicial ya fueron presentados.
Y en las próximas horas ingresará a la Legislatura la
instauración del Juicio por Jurados.
De hecho, además, no comenzaron las reuniones
previstas entre funcionarios, legisladores, el Poder
Judicial y organismos de Derechos Humanos para
avanzar en la definición de la iniciativa.
La reforma que propondría el Ejecutivo apunta a
aplicar en la Provincia un modelo que rige en Santa
Fe, La Pampa y Chubut, donde los cuerpos de
defensores cuentan con autonomía.
Sin embargo, el debate no parece despejado de
obstáculos. Sectores del Poder Judicial han dejado
trascender sus dudas respecto de la posible
173

inconstitucionalidad de una reforma de estas
características. La duda es compartida, incluso, por
algunos sectores del propio oficialismo.
Por eso en las últimas horas comenzó a circular la
versión de una propuesta alternativa: que el
Subprocurador sea quien se haga cargo de la
Defensoría General.
Sería así una división de hecho que, se interpreta en
algunos sectores, permitiría sortear el brete
El Dia/ - Noticia, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
constitucional. De todas formas, la Procuradora
conservaría la responsabilidad administrativa sobre la
totalidad del Ministerio Público.
La alternativa seduce a sectores del sciolismo, aunque
aún está en etapa embrionaria. Resta saber si los
sectores K prestarían conformidad a una reforma que
sólo restaría en parte el margen de maniobra de
Falbo.
174

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Verfassungsgericht)
Koalitionsstreit Kanzlerin Merkel lehnt
höhere Pendlerpauschale ab
Aus der FDP und der CDU wächst der Druck auf die
Kanzlerin: Arbeitnehmer litten unter den
Mobilitätskosten, Spitzenkandidat Röttgen sieht den
Staat in der Pflicht.
Die Pendlerpauschale spaltet die Bundesregierung.
Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel (CDU) lehnt trotz
Rekordpreisen an den Tankstellen eine stärkere
steuerliche Beteiligung des Fiskus an den Kosten der
Fahrt zur Arbeit ab.
Gleichzeitig wächst der Druck aus der eigenen Partei
auf die CDU-Vorsitzende, etwas für die Arbeitnehmer
zu tun, die mit dem Auto zur Arbeit fahren müssen.
Regierungssprecher Steffen Seibert betonte am
Montag in Berlin, das Wettbewerbsrecht sei das
geeignete Mittel, um möglichem Marktmissbrauch im
Mineralölbereich zu begegnen.
So gebe es bereits das Verbot, dass
Mineralölkonzerne ihren Tankstellen Benzin günstiger
verkaufen dürfen als den freien Tankstellen. Zuvor
hatte Wirtschaftsminister Philipp Rösler (FDP) sich
angesichts von Rekordpreisen an den Tankstellen für
eine Anpassung der Pendlerpauschale
ausgesprochen. „Die Arbeitnehmer leiden erheblich
unter den Mobilitätskosten“, sagte ein Sprecher
Röslers. Der Minister halte daher an seiner Forderung
fest. Wenn sich die beiden Parteivorsitzenden nicht
bald einigen, könnte das Thema auf der Tagesordnung
des Koalitionsausschusses landen.
Röttgen sieht Staat in der Pflicht
Auch in der CDU wächst der Druck, die Arbeitnehmer
zu entlasten. „Es ist jetzt die Aufgabe und Pflicht des
Staates, dieses Verhalten des Missbrauches von
Marktmacht von einigen Konzernen unter Kontrolle zu
bekommen. Wenn der Staat es nicht schafft, darf der
Staat es nicht die normalen Arbeitnehmer bezahlen
lassen“, sagte ihr Spitzenkandidat für die
Landtagswahl in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Norbert
Röttgen.
Der Parteivize und Bundesumweltminister unterstützte
für den Fall, dass das Wettbewerbsrecht nicht hilft, die
Forderung des Vorsitzenden der
CDU-Landtagsfraktion, Karl-Josef Laumann, nach
einer höheren Pendlerpauschale. Röttgen sagte, „dann
muss der Staat dem Bürger erstatten, was er braucht,
um zu seiner Arbeitsstätte zu kommen“.
Pauschale unabhängig vom Verkehrsmittel
Zuvor hatte Hessens Ministerpräsident Volker Bouffier
sich dafür ausgesprochen, falls andere Mittel zur
Entlastung versagten. Er ist wie Röttgen einer von vier
Stellvertretern Merkels in der Bundespartei.
Arbeitnehmer können für den Weg zur Arbeit 30 Cent
je Kilometer ansetzen. Dies gilt unabhängig vom
Verkehrsmittel, also auch für Fußgänger und
Fahrradfahrer. Die Pauschale gilt für die Entfernung
von der Wohnung zur Arbeitstätte, deswegen ist
offiziell von einer Entfernungspauschale die Rede.
Für Dienstfahrten werden für jeden gefahrenen
Kilometer vom Finanzamt 30 Cent pauschal als Kosten
anerkannt, also doppelt so viel wie beim Arbeitsweg.
Die große Koalition hatte die Entfernungspauschale für
die ersten 20 Kilometer gestrichen, dies war aber vom
Bundesverfassungsgericht verworfen worden.
Städtetag für Abschaffung der Pauschale
Es hat aber ausdrücklich dem Gesetzgeber
zugestanden, sich mit einem grundlegenden
Systemwechsel von der Pendlerpauschale zu
befreien.
Der Deutsche Städtetag setzt sich seit längerem dafür
ein, dass die Entfernungspauschale gekürzt wird.
Nach seiner Einschätzung fördert sie die
Abwanderung aus den Städten.
Sie wirke sich damit negativ auf die Verkehrssituation
und die Umwelt aus. Im Rahmen einer Reform des
gesamten Steuersystems sei eine vollständige
Abschaffung der Entfernungspauschale zu prüfen.
DIHK fordert Senkung der Energiesteuer bei
steigenden Preisen
Der Deutsche Industrie- und Handelskammertag
warnte vor den wirtschaftlichen Folgen des
Benzinpreisanstiegs. Er sprach sich für eine Senkung
der Energiesteuer (früher Mineralölsteuer) aus, wenn
die Entwicklung an den Tankstellen fortsetzen sollte.
„Ein Benzinpreis von 2 Euro streut Sand ins
Konjunkturgetriebe“, sagte Hauptgeschäftsführer
Martin Wansleben dieser Zeitung. „Wenn sich der
Benzinpreis der 2-Euro-Marke nähert, dann gehört
auch die Diskussion um eine Senkung der
175

Mineralölsteuer auf die Tagesordnung“, verlangte
Wansleben.
Schon jetzt profitiere der Staat bei steigenden Preisen
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Verfassungsgericht)
von zusätzlichen Steuereinnahmen. „Bald ist der Punkt
erreicht, an dem der Staat diese Mehreinnahmen an
Bürger und Unternehmen zurückgeben muss.“
176

Le Monde/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Conseil Constitutionnel)
L"obligation de négocier, une injonction
paradoxale
La négociation collective des conditions de travail est
originale à plus d'un titre. Si elle est apparue
spontanément à l'issue de grèves, le législateur n'a
d'abord, en 1918 puis en 1936, reconnu que l'acte qui
en découle parfois : la convention collective du travail.
En revanche, le préambule de la Constitution de
1946 en a fait un droit fondamental, à son tour
sanctuarisé par une décision du Conseil
constitutionnel du 10 juillet 1998.
Plus encore, là où, dans d'autres pays, cette question
relève exclusivement des usages du dialogue social
de fin de conflit ou de réunions rituelles répondant à
des règles non écrites, le législateur français a
multiplié, au nom d'un "nécessaire soutien au dialogue
social", les incitations à négocier.
L'obligation de négocier au niveau de la branche, sur
des thèmes relatifs aux conditions de travail et aux
garanties sociales, est apparue pour la première fois
dans la loi Auroux de novembre 1982. La négociation
annuelle obligatoire (NAO) dans l'entreprise sur les
salaires, la durée et l'organisation du travail, a été
instaurée au nom de la "démocratie sociale".
De multiples autres obligations d'initier une discussion
collective se sont ajoutées aux obligations initiales de
l'employeur, comme l'a relevé une récente synthèse du
Centre d'analyse stratégique (n° 240, septembre
2011).
Ce dialogue social imposé porte à présent aussi sur
l'égalité professionnelle, l'épargne salariale, la
formation, la gestion prévisionnelle des emplois et des
compétences des salariés âgés, la pénibilité du travail,
la suppression des écarts de rémunération entre
hommes et femmes, etc.
IMPLICATION ACCRUE DE L'ETAT
L'implication récurrente de l'Etat s'est, de plus,
accentuée : les partenaires sociaux doivent négocier,
voire conclure, des accords collectifs afin de bénéficier
d'aides ou d'exonérations sociales, ou pour échapper à
des sanctions financières. A titre subsidiaire, de tels
accords peuvent être conclus par des représentants
élus du personnel ! Le dialogue social change de
nature.
Non seulement la négociation devient "permanente",
mais aussi stressante, car sanctionnée financièrement,
et de plus en plus complexe, du fait de la nature des
thèmes à aborder, qui ne relèvent souvent pas de la
seule entreprise.
Le résultat paradoxal de ces injonctions étatiques est
que la négociation collective se cantonne souvent aux
thèmes imposés par la loi, et parfois même à une
reproduction du catalogue de mesures suggérées
dans les circulaires d'application de la loi. Il n'y a plus
de temps, de moyens ou de volonté à consacrer à
d'autres négociations sociales.
C'est là l'exact contraire de l'idée même de la
convention collective de travail qui, selon la belle
formule des juristes des années 1930, a "une âme
réglementaire dans un corps contractuel".
177

Los Tiempos/ - actualidad, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Corte Internacional de Justicia)
Expresidente Lagos propone dar vuelta a
la página tras el fallo de La Haya
LIMA |
El expresidente chileno Ricardo Lagos propuso a Perú
dar vuelta a la página y trabajar en una agenda
común, después de que se conozca el fallo de la
Corte Internacional de Justicia de La Haya sobre la
delimitación marítima, en entrevista publicada hoy en
Lima.
"El fallo de La Haya se va a respetar: lo doy por
escrito", dijo Lagos al diario El Comercio, sobre el
proceso iniciado por Perú en 2008 ante esa corte.
El exmandatario chileno (2000-2006) agregó que "de
ahí en adelante demos vuelta a la página y miremos
una agenda conjunta hacia adelante".
La resolución de la corte se conocerá probablemente
en 2013, pues en diciembre de este año empezará la
última etapa con la presentación oral de ambas
partes.
Lagos dijo que el canciller peruano, Rafael
Roncagliolo, le comentó recientemente que ambos
países "van a ganar porque vamos a dejar atrás
pleitos de antes para poder abocarnos a la agenda de
futuro", lo cual le pareció una aproximación "muy
inteligente" al tema.
Según el exgobernante, América Latina necesita
hablar con una sola voz y mientras no haga eso, "no
existimos" en el mundo global.
Si bien saludó la existencia de Gobiernos con
tendencia izquierdista en la región, Lagos marcó
distancias de las posturas intervencionistas de Evo
Morales de Bolivia, Rafael Correa de Ecuador y Hugo
Chávez de Venezuela.
Con respecto al reclamo boliviano para recuperar el
acceso soberano al mar, Lagos dijo que "por ahora, no
veo solución" porque la única posibilidad sería una
salida "pegada a la frontera con Perú".
Lagos recordó que tuvo la sensación de estar muy
cerca a una solución con Bolivia durante el segundo
Gobierno de Hugo Banzer (1997-2001), pero luego
éste enfermó y falleció, y sus sucesores tuvieron otras
posiciones más cerradas respecto al tema de la
soberanía.
178

Reuters General/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Prosecutor denies interfering in Florida
shooting case
By Daniel Trotta and Barbara Liston
SANFORD, Florida | Mon Apr 2, 2012 8:07pm EDT
(Reuters) - A Florida prosecutor who removed himself
from the investigation into the shooting death of black
teenager Trayvon Martin denied on Monday that he
quashed police intentions to charge the shooter with
manslaughter.
State Attorney Norm Wolfinger asked the U.S. Justice
Department civil rights division to disregard a letter it
received from lawyers for Martin's family which
referred to reports that Wolfinger interfered in the
police investigation.
The letter contained "outright lies," Wolfinger said.
George Zimmerman, 28, a neighborhood watch
volunteer, shot and killed 17-year-old Martin on
February 26 in Sanford, Florida, claiming self defense.
Police did not arrest Zimmerman, saying evidence had
failed to contradict his story that he was attacked by
Martin.
The racially charged case has prompted
demonstrations around the United States demanding
Zimmerman's arrest. The Justice Department has
agreed to review the investigation by Florida state and
local authorities.
ABC News reported last week that Sanford police
detective Chris Serino, unconvinced by Zimmerman's
story of self-defense, wanted to charge him with
manslaughter, but was overruled by Wolfinger's office.
A separate report by news website TheGrio.com,
unconfirmed by Reuters, said Wolfinger left his home
the Sunday night of the shooting to meet with Sanford
police in person.
Benjamin Crump, a lawyer for the Martin family, asked
the Justice Department in a letter on Monday to
investigate those reports. Though the letter reported
the events without attribution, Crump told Reuters his
information came from the media reports and he did
not have independent verification.
Wolfinger had declined all comment since removing
himself from the case on March 22, but fired back in a
statement on Monday.
"I am outraged by the outright lies contained in the
letter by Benjamin Crump," Wolfinger said. "I
encourage the Justice Department to investigate and
document that no such meeting or communication
occurred."
Wolfinger said last month he removed himself from the
case in the hope of "toning down the rhetoric."
That same day, Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee also
stepped aside, saying "my involvement in the matter is
overshadowing the process." The city commission
governing Sanford had passed a motion of "no
confidence" against Lee the night before.
Florida Governor Rick Scott named a special
prosecutor, Angela Corey, to replace Wolfinger on the
shooting investigation. Corey has yet to say if she
intends to charge Zimmerman, who remains free but in
hiding.
Lynne Bumpus-Hooper, a spokesman for Wolfinger,
said the state attorney never spoke with Lee on the
night of the shooting. Instead Sanford police consulted
that night with Kelly Jo Hines, the prosecutor on call,
Bumpus-Hooper said. She declined to say what was
discussed.
"Police officers can make an arrest at virtually any
dadgum point they feel they have enough probable
cause to make an arrest," Bumpus-Hooper said. "They
do not need our permission and they do not seek our
permission."
(Reporting by Daniel Trotta and Barbara Liston. Editing
by David Adams and David Brunnstrom)
179

Reuters General/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Global business groups warn India over
new tax plan
By Henry Foy and Matthias Williams
MUMBAI/NEW DELHI | Mon Apr 2, 2012 12:41pm
EDT
(Reuters) - International trade groups representing
more than 250,000 companies have told Indian prime
minister Manmohan Singh in a letter that his
government's new retrospective tax proposals have led
foreign businesses to reconsider their investments in
the country.
India's federal budget last month outlined a proposal to
enable the tax authorities to make retroactive claims
on overseas corporate deals and bring in new
anti-avoidance measures, moves that have been
criticized for further denting investor sentiment.
On Monday the UK's finance minister George Osborne
also raised his concerns over the issue with his Indian
counterpart.
The letter from seven foreign business groups delivers
the broadest criticism yet made by the overseas
business community of an Indian government that has
failed to enact economic reforms to spur investment
and revive growth.
"The sudden and unprecedented move (on tax) ... has
undermined confidence in the policies of the
Government of India towards foreign investment and
taxation and has called into question the very rule of
law, due process, and fair treatment in India," the
groups said in the March 29 missive to Singh.
"This is now prompting a widespread reconsideration
of the costs and benefits of investing in India,"
continued the letter, signed by bodies including the
U.S.-based Business Roundtable, the Confederation of
British Industry, the Japan Foreign Trade Council and
Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters.
The Business Roundtable is chaired by Boeing's chief
executive, James McNerney, and represents
companies with more than $6 trillion in revenues.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^
Full trade association letter: r.reuters.com/cuq47s
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^
India's reputation among global investors has taken a
beating over the past year as the government has
lurched from crisis to crisis, including a botched
attempt to allow foreign supermarkets into the country
and a long-running stand-off with South Korea's
POSCO over a $12 billion steel plant.
Sluggish investment is partly to blame for slowing
growth in Asia's third-largest economy, which grew an
annual 6.1 percent in the December quarter, the
weakest in nearly three years.
INCREASING UNCERTAINTY
More recently a long-running tax struggle between
London-listed Vodafone Group Plc, India's largest
overseas investor, and the Indian government has
come to symbolize the perils facing foreign investors in
the country.
Vodafone won a five-year legal battle in January when
India's Supreme Court dismissed a demand made by
the Indian authorities for a $2.2 billion capital gains
withholding tax on the British company's acquisition of
Hutchison Whampoa Ltd's Indian mobile assets in
2007.
That ruling was hailed by business groups as a victory
for clarity in the country's investment climate, which
has suffered due to policy paralysis, regulatory
uncertainty and widespread corruption allegations
against the government.
But the proposal in the recent budget to retroactively
impose a capital gains tax on merger and acquisition
deals conducted overseas where the underlying asset
is located in India would amend 50-year-old-tax laws
and allow New Delhi to pursue taxes on
long-concluded transactions.
"We are concerned about the proposed budget
measure," Osborne told reporters after his closed
meeting with Mukherjee.
"Not just because of its impact on one company,
Vodafone, but because we think it might damage the
180

overall climate for investment in India."
"What India needs, like all countries, is a stable and
predictable tax system to encourage investments, and
we have concerns that this budget proposal would not
add to that," Osborne said, adding he had raised his
concern with Mukherjee.
Parliament is expected to consider the new tax
proposals during the last week of April.
The proposals, if written into law, could also affect
Kraft Foods Inc' s 2010 acquisition of Cadbury's Indian
business and deals involving Indian assets sold by
AT&T Inc and SABMiller Plc's purchase of Fosters.
"Some of our member companies had already begun
re-evaluating their investments in India due to
increasing levels of controversy and uncertainty
regarding taxation in recent years," the collective letter
to Singh said.
Foreign direct investment (FDI) in India stood at $35.3
billion in the first nine months of the 2011-12 fiscal
year, powered by two multi-billion-dollar energy deals,
more than the $32.9 billion registered in the 12 months
to March 2011, according to data from the Reserve
Bank of India.
India needs increasing FDI and foreign institutional
inflows to offset a rising trade deficit, which is likely to
have hit $175 to $180 billion in the year that ended in
March.
"India will lose significant ground as a destination for
international investment if it fails to align itself with
Reuters General/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
policy and practice around the world," the letter said.
TURMOIL IN TELECOMS
Vodafone said on March 30 it was considering a
number of actions after the budget proposal, which it
described as "grossly unjust".
In a March 26 letter to Singh, Vodafone's chief
executive Vittorio Colao said the budget proposal
contained "extraordinary retrospective provisions,
going back 50 years and removing the protection of
the courts from investors".
"Arbitrary and punitive retrospective treatment of one
of India's most prominent long-term foreign investors
by the tax authorities could only tarnish the image of
India as a destination for inward investment," he wrote
in the letter, a copy of which was seen by Reuters.
Confusion already reigns in India's telecoms market
since the Supreme Court last month ordered all 122
mobile network licenses awarded in a scandal-tainted
2008 sale be revoked.
As a result Abu Dhabi's Etisalat has already
announced the winding down of its Indian operations.
Meanwhile Norway's Telenor has been embroiled in a
dispute with its Indian partner, Unitech Ltd, and has
said it would seek to move the business to a fresh
venture with a new partner.
(Additional reporting by Devidutta Tripathy and Rajesh
Kumar Singh in New Delhi; Editing by Tony Munroe
and Greg Mahlich)
181

Reuters General/ - Article, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Supreme court: immunity for witness
grand jury testimony
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON | Mon Apr 2, 2012 11:37am EDT
(Reuters) - The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that
a government investigator who initiates a criminal case
against a private individual and later lies to a grand
jury still has immunity from a civil lawsuit over his
testimony.
The high court justices unanimously handed a defeat
to a Georgia accountant who wanted to proceed with
his lawsuit seeking damages from a government
official who was the chief investigator for a local
prosecutor.
The accountant, Charles Rehberg, had engaged in an
anonymous "whistleblowing" campaign about unethical
billing practices at a hospital in Albany, Georgia.
Investigator James Paulk of the Dougherty County
District Attorney's office falsely testified to a grand jury
that the accountant had harassed doctors.
Paulk, who started the investigation as a favor to
hospital officials, later admitted he had no evidence
and had not talked to any witnesses. The charges
against Rehberg were dismissed.
Rehberg then sued, but Paulk argued he was
protected by immunity, and a U.S. appeals court based
in Atlanta agreed with Paulk.
The Supreme Court's opinion by Justice Samuel Alito
held that witnesses in a grand jury proceeding were
entitled to the same absolute immunity from a civil
lawsuit as a witness who testifies at trial.
Without immunity, the truth-seeking process would be
impaired as witnesses might be reluctant to testify,
Alito wrote in the 18-page opinion, adding that a
witness' fear of litigation might deprive a grand jury of
critical evidence.
Alito said potential liability was not needed as a
deterrent to prevent false testimony. Other sanctions,
mainly criminal prosecution for perjury, provided a
sufficient deterrent, he said. The justices agreed to
decide the case after conflicting appeals court rulings
on the issue.
The Supreme Court case is Charles Rehberg v.
James Paulk, No. 10-788.
(Reporting By James Vicini; Editing by Bill Trott and
Todd Eastham)
182

The Economic Times/ - Politics/Nation, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Britain warns India tax plan may hurt
investment
NEW DELHI: British finance minister George Osborne
on Monday criticised an Indian plan to retroactively tax
business deals, saying it could damage foreign
investment in the fast-developing country.
A proposal to allow Indian authorities to make
retroactive tax claims is widely seen as targeting
British mobile phone giant Vodafone, which has been
battling the New Delhi government over alleged unpaid
taxes.
The company in January won a Supreme Court case
against the government's bid to tax the firm over its
$10.7-billion takeover in 2007 of Hong Kong-based
Hutchison Whampoa's Indian unit.
But Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee then
announced a move to bypass the court ruling, adding
to growing wariness among foreign investors about
putting their money in Asia's third-largest economy.
"We are concerned about the proposed budget
measure," Osborne said after talks in New Delhi.
"Not just because of its impact on one company,
Vodafone, but because we think it might damage the
overall climate for investment in India."
"I was quite candid about that with my Indian
counterpart," he told reporters. "What India needs, like
all countries, is a stable and predictable tax system to
encourage investment."
New Delhi's planned change to the Income Tax Act
would be retroactive to 1962 and would oblige
domestic and foreign firms to pay tax on any overseas
transaction involving an Indian asset.
Osborne's visit coincided with seven global industry
bodies, ranging from the United States to Japan,
saying the tax threat was "prompting a widespread
reconsideration of the costs and benefits of investing in
India."
In a joint letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh,
they said the "unprecedented" proposal "had
undermined confidence in the government's policies on
foreign investment."
Some multinationals had already begun re-assessing
their investments in the country due to mounting
uncertainty over taxation, the letter said.
The proposal, announced in last month's budget,
"called into question the very rule of law, due process,
and fair treatment in India," it added.
Signatories to the letter include the Confederation of
British Industry, the United States Council for
International Business and the Japan Foreign Trade
Council.
"India will lose significant ground as a destination for
international investment if it fails to align itself with
policy and practice around the world and restore
confidence in the relevance of the judiciary," the
groups said.
Vodafone said last week it was urgently looking at
ways to head off a potential fresh tax demand for $2.2
billion and slammed the government's latest plans as
"grossly unjust".
Indian tax officials contend Vodafone should have
withheld the amount the seller, Hutchison, would have
owed in capital gains tax when it sold the Indian mobile
unit, which now has nearly 150 million subscribers.
Vodafone successfully argued in court that the deal
was exempt from any tax because it took place abroad
and both buyer and seller were foreign.
It also noted it was the purchaser and had made no
gain on the acquisition.
As well as Vodafone, transactions by companies such
as SAB Miller and Kraft could be affected by the
proposal.
183

The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
President Confident Health Law Will
Stand
WASHINGTON — President Obama declared Monday
that he was confident the Supreme Court would
uphold his health care law, saying it would be an
“unprecedented, extraordinary” step to overturn
legislation passed by the “strong majority of a
democratically elected Congress.”
In his first public comments since court questioning last
week suggested that it might find the Affordable Care
Act unconstitutional, Mr. Obama offered both a robust
defense of the law and a barbed warning to justices
thinking of striking it down.
“For years what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on
the bench was judicial activism or the lack of judicial
restraint, that an unelected group of people would
somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law,”
Mr. Obama said after meeting at the White House with
the leaders of Mexico and Canada.
“Well, there’s a good example,” he continued, “and I’m
pretty confident that this court will recognize that, and
not take that step.”
During three days of Supreme Court hearings on the
case last week, the aggressive tenor of questions from
several justices suggested that the law’s central
provision — the individual mandate — was in jeopardy.
Some justices appeared to be looking for practical
solutions if they invalidated all or parts of the law.
A ruling is expected in June, which would thrust the
health care case into the thick of the presidential
campaign. Mr. Obama, appearing to recognize that the
law could be struck down, extolled its practical benefits
and framed a case that could be used against the
Supreme Court in an election-year debate.
The law’s constitutionality, the president said, had
been affirmed by legal scholars across the political
spectrum, as well as by two conservative appeals court
judges. It was passed by the House, 219 to 212,
largely along party lines.
Mr. Obama said the legislation had brought affordable
health care to 2.5 million young people, easing the
burden on their parents, and had reduced the cost of
prescription drugs for millions of older people.
“This is not an abstract argument,” he said. “People’s
lives are affected by the lack of availability of health
care, the unaffordability of health care, or their inability
to get health care because of preexisting conditions.”
“There is not only an economic element to this and a
legal element to this, but there is a human element to
this,” said the president, who appeared in the Rose
Garden, flanked by President Felipe Calderón of
Mexico and Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada.
“I hope that’s not forgotten in the political debate.”
Mr. Obama has not hesitated to challenge the
Supreme Court before. In his State of the Union
address in 2010, with several stone-faced justices
sitting in the audience, he harshly criticized the court’s
decision in the Citizens United campaign finance case,
saying it would “open the floodgates for special
interests — including foreign corporations — to spend
without limit in our elections.”
Mr. Obama’s response on health care overshadowed a
news conference that touched on trade ties between
the United States, Mexico and Canada, and American
efforts to help Mexico combat drug-related violence.
The United States, the president said, needed to help
Mexico both as a good neighbor and out of
self-interest. Rampant drug-related violence south of
the border, he said, could have a “spillover effect” on
Americans living in or visiting Mexico, and could have
“a deteriorating effect overall on the nature of our
relationship.”
Mr. Calderón blamed much of the violence on the
steady flow of guns from the United States to Mexico.
He also disputed that Mexico was alone in its
problems, claiming that the rate of homicides per
hundred thousand inhabitants in Washington is
substantially greater than that of any big Mexican city.
President Obama was in South Korea for a nuclear
security summit when the Supreme Court began
hearing the health care case. But he followed it
closely, administration officials said, reading a
summary of the oral arguments on the flight home and
discussing the case with his White House counsel.
On Monday, Mr. Obama rejected the idea that the
individual mandate could be struck down without
crippling the whole law. “I think the justices should
184

understand that, in the absence of an individual
mandate, you cannot have a mechanism to insure that
people with pre-existing conditions can actually get
health care,” he said.
The White House has insisted it is not developing
contingency plans if the law is struck down. While a
negative ruling would be a major symbolic defeat for
the president, it is not clear how it would affect his
The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
re-election bid.
Public opinion toward the law is split, but a senior
administration official said on Monday that only
Republicans supported repealing it altogether. Another
senior official noted that Mr. Obama himself initially
opposed the individual mandate, before concluding
that it would help curb cost increases in health care.
185

The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
A Favored Son Returns to Uphill Battle in
Nebraska
LINCOLN, Neb. — Bob Kerrey, the former governor
and two-term senator from Nebraska, has returned to
his native state after a decade in New York City to try
to reclaim his Senate seat.
The state’s once-favored son — a bridge in Omaha
bears his name — now finds himself recast as a
carpetbagger, navigating a landscape both familiar and
foreign after 12 years of political vicissitude.
He was welcomed back with an immediate challenge
to his residency, a barrel of snark and an inability to
find so much as a frying pan in his modest, hastily
acquired home.
“I am managing the personal transition,” Mr. Kerrey,
68, said as he sipped a coffee in a shop here.
“My first homecoming was in 1969,” he said, referring
to his return from Vietnam, where he served as a
member of the Navy SEALs. “I don’t have to be
reminded of the importance of home and community.”
Whether voters will again cotton to Mr. Kerrey, who
decided to seek the seat after a fellow Democrat, Ben
Nelson, opted to retire, will hinge largely on who
succeeds in defining him over a short but almost
certainly animated race, upon which the control of the
Senate could turn.
Is he, as his advertising campaign suggests, the
charismatic war hero and longtime public servant just
itching to return to his beloved Nebraska, a state still
smarting from its politically charged place in the
negotiations over President Obama’s health care law?
Or is he, as his detractors contend, a shameless
opportunist culturally sullied by a decade in Manhattan
(insert image of overly chic reading glasses and
cappuccino here), where he served as president of the
New School, now capriciously trying to give his party a
whisper of hope?
“Nebraska has become more conservative, and Bob
Kerrey has become more liberal,” said Mark A.
Fahleson, chairman of the state’s Republican Party,
which tried, unsuccessfully, to keep Mr. Kerrey off the
ballot. “This is a state that forced a man to return to
private life over a single vote on Obamacare. Plus this
is a presidential election year, and Nebraska is a red
state.”
Polls show Mr. Kerrey badly trailing the three
Republicans vying for the nomination, and he
concedes that he is six months behind on organizing
his campaign and raising cash. His is a decidedly
uphill battle.
“I kind of liked Bob Kerrey,” Terry Reeh, 55, said in an
interview in a bar in West Omaha. Mr. Reeh said he
voted for Mr. Kerrey for governor and for senator but
would not again.
“I’m going to vote Republican down the line,” he said,
“because I am a pretty good Republican. I think most
people in Nebraska are.”
The stakes of this race may be higher for Washington
and Nebraska than for Mr. Kerrey. Democrats, buoyed
by the coming retirement of Senator Olympia J.
Snowe, Republican of Maine, are beginning to believe
that they may be able to retain a thin majority in the
Senate if one or two races go their way. So Mr.
Kerrey’s campaign here has become an urgent
matter.
For Nebraska, the race could also be defining: Should
Mr. Kerrey be defeated, the Democrats will be left with
a single statewide elected official for the first time in
recent memory. “I could basically hang up my hat after
that, huh?” Mr. Fahleson joked.
The way that Mr. Kerrey entered the race can perhaps
best be described as daft. After Mr. Nelson announced
in December that he would not seek re-election,
speculation about Mr. Kerrey was sparked. Yet he
waited for several weeks, finally saying he would not
run.
Then he decided just days before the filing deadline
that, in fact, he wanted to go for it, setting off rumors
around Washington that Democrats had begged him or
prodded him with a promise to restore his seniority and
give him choice committee assignments.
But only his wife, Sarah Paley, with whom he has a
10-year-old son, has that sort of influence on him, he
said. “We were watching the Oscars,” he said, “and
she knew the filing deadline was coming up and she
said you’ve got to run.”
186

And so Mr. Kerrey took off for Nebraska and registered
to vote and to run, listing his sister’s house as his
home and then finding a spot in the guesthouse of a
friend, which became his new address.
This quixotic journey motivated Republicans to file a
lawsuit saying that Mr. Kerrey did not establish legal
residency or qualify as a registered voter in Nebraska
before his filing. This was rejected by the Nebraska
Supreme Court.
Ms. Paley is remaining in New York while their son
finishes school. She intends to visit Nebraska often.
Mr. Kerrey said that the theme of his campaign would
center on the notion that “it’s good to be back,” and
that the country has to “step up its game” in terms of
global competition, education and beating back
partisanship. On health care, Mr. Kerrey said he would
have voted for the Obama legislation, but he also said
he would like to see it changed.
“My position will be fix it, don’t repeal it,” he said. “I
prefer not single-payer, but I think you’ve got to get
everyone in the same group. I think the commercial
payers can get it done.” He also says that a form of
premium support, favored by many Republicans, “can
work with everyone in a single group.”
“I don’t presume I am going to win the election talking
like this,” he said, “but I’ve never won an election as a
consequence of public opinion.”
The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Mr. Nelson was a holdout on the current legislation,
now under Supreme Court review, and provided one
of the final votes for its passage. He won a concession
at one point from Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the
majority leader, which became known as the
Cornhusker Kickback, which caused Mr. Nelson no
shortage of grief back home, though it was not in the
final legislation.
“ ‘Cornhusker Kickback’ is burned in people’s brains,”
said Trent Fellers, a spokesman for Jon Bruning, the
state’s attorney general and a Republican candidate
for the Senate. “People have a lot of pride around the
cornhusker, and that was sort of tarnished. People are
very engaged on the health care issue here.”
For now, Mr. Kerrey is meeting old friends, raising
money and getting his feet on the ground. “I got up this
morning and tried to make an omelet, and I couldn’t
find a frying pan,” he said. “I’m dealing with the things
like that that anyone who is in transition does.”
If the detractors are getting to Mr. Kerrey, his cheerful
smile and eyes, which still dance when he digs in on
policy, do not show it.
“There are a lot worse things than losing an election,”
he said. “The top of that list would be winning and not
having permission to do what needs to be done. So I’m
just going to have fun.”
187

The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Justices’ Cerebral Combativeness on
Display
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is usually the
most remote and mysterious branch of American
government. Not last week.
Over three days of intense arguments on the future of
President Obama’s health care law, the public got a
vivid glimpse of an institution at once immensely
powerful and intensely human, one packed with brainy,
funny and assertive justices prepared to confront and
decide the most urgent issues of the day.
“It seemed that they were at an intellectual feast,” said
David J. Garrow, who teaches history and law at the
University of Pittsburgh. Indeed, the justices exhibited
an appetite for debate that seemed to wear out the tag
team of lawyers who appeared before them.
A decision in the case is expected by late June. In the
meantime, the court will hear arguments in a challenge
to Arizona’s tough immigration law, and it will soon
confront cases concerning affirmative action in higher
education and a request to reconsider the Citizens
United campaign finance decision. Cases on voting
rights and same-sex marriage are not far behind.
It can seem that the court is prepared to decide every
major controversy in American life. “They are quite
willing to flex the muscles of judicial review,” Thomas
C. Goldstein, a Washington lawyer and the publisher
of the Web site Scotusblog, said of the justices.
Last week’s arguments illuminated two different
aspects of the court led by Chief Justice John G.
Roberts Jr.: an intellectual side at ease with legal
issues of colossal complexity, and a pithy,
conversational side that can frame issues in accessible
nuggets.
The two facets emerged on different days. The
arguments on peripheral issues, on Monday and
Wednesday, were often highly technical.
“I am a law professor and have been quite interested
in this case,” said Benjamin H. Barton, who teaches at
the University of Tennessee. “I had a pretty hard time
following those arguments.”
The crucial session on Tuesday, on the
constitutionality of the law’s requirement that most
Americans obtain health insurance or pay a penalty,
was different.
“The justices went right to the heart of the matter in a
way that most Americans can understand,” Professor
Barton said.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for instance, crisply
made the administration’s case for why the health care
market warrants special treatment. The point, she said,
was not “my choice whether I want to buy a product to
keep me healthy.” Rather, it is “the cost that I am
forcing on other people if I don’t buy the product.”
Justice Antonin Scalia made a contrary point with
equal vigor. The powers not granted to the federal
government by the Constitution belong to the states
and the people, he said. “And the argument here,” he
went on, “is that the people were left to decide whether
they want to buy insurance or not.”
The court released audio recordings each day,
allowing the public prompt access to the substance
and tenor of the arguments, unmediated by scholars
and commentators.
There was an important lesson in the arguments, said
Lee Epstein, who teaches law and political science at
the University of Southern California.
“The teachable moment here isn’t for the public,” she
said. “It’s for the law professors and elite lawyers who
were all predicting a slam-dunk for the Obama
administration.”
The verbal and analytic skills the justices brought to
the argument were a reflection of what sort of person
gets nominated to the Supreme Court these days. As
a new study from Professor Barton demonstrates, the
current court is distinctively different from earlier ones.
Before they joined the Supreme Court, for instance,
its current members spent less time in private practice
and more time in Washington than any previous set of
nine justices.
The current justices also spent more years at college
and law school in the Ivy League or at Stanford than
had any previous court. Indeed, every current justice
attended law school at Harvard or Yale (with Justice
Ginsburg transferring from Harvard to Columbia).
188

With the exception of Justice Elena Kagan, every
member of the current court first served as a federal
appeals court judge.
It used to be common for justices to join the court from
much more varied backgrounds, including significant
positions in public life.
In his study, Professor Barton said the current justices
might lack the “practical wisdom” of “individuals who
have faced the hurly-burly of legal practice or politics
or trial court judging to understand the ramifications of
broad social policy.”
New justices must adjust to another sort of hurly-burly,
as Justice Kagan, who joined the court in 2010,
learned at one point during Tuesday’s argument. She
The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
tried to interrupt a lawyer and failed.
Then Justice Stephen G. Breyer jumped in and
engaged the lawyer for several minutes.
“You can go back to Justice Kagan,” Justice Breyer
finally said. “Don’t forget her question.”
Too late, Justice Kagan said, smiling. “I’ve forgotten
my question,” she said, though she seemed ready to
pose one.
But she missed her chance again when Justice
Ginsburg asked a question.
Justice Kagan assessed the situation. “See what it
means to be the junior justice?” she asked.
189

Pink Slime Economics
The big bad event of last week was, of course, the
Supreme Court hearing on health reform. In the
course of that hearing it became clear that several of
the justices, and possibly a majority, are political
creatures pure and simple, willing to embrace any
argument, no matter how absurd, that serves the
interests of Team Republican.
But we should not allow events in the court to
completely overshadow another, almost equally
disturbing spectacle. For on Thursday Republicans in
the House of Representatives passed what was surely
the most fraudulent budget in American history.
And when I say fraudulent, I mean just that. The
trouble with the budget devised by Paul Ryan, the
chairman of the House Budget Committee, isn’t just its
almost inconceivably cruel priorities, the way it slashes
taxes for corporations and the rich while drastically
cutting food and medical aid to the needy. Even aside
from all that, the Ryan budget purports to reduce the
deficit — but the alleged deficit reduction depends on
the completely unsupported assertion that trillions of
dollars in revenue can be found by closing tax
loopholes.
And we’re talking about a lot of loophole-closing. As
Howard Gleckman of the nonpartisan Tax Policy
Center points out, to make his numbers work Mr. Ryan
would, by 2022, have to close enough loopholes to
yield an extra $700 billion in revenue every year.
That’s a lot of money, even in an economy as big as
ours. So which specific loopholes has Mr. Ryan, who
issued a 98-page manifesto on behalf of his budget,
said he would close?
None. Not one. He has, however, categorically ruled
out any move to close the major loophole that benefits
the rich, namely the ultra-low tax rates on income from
capital. (That’s the loophole that lets Mitt Romney pay
only 14 percent of his income in taxes, a lower tax rate
than that faced by many middle-class families.)
So what are we to make of this proposal? Mr.
Gleckman calls it a “mystery meat budget,” but he’s
being unfair to mystery meat. The truth is that the filler
modern food manufacturers add to their products may
be disgusting — think pink slime — but it nonetheless
has nutritional value. Mr. Ryan’s empty promises don’t.
You should think of those promises, instead, as a kind
of throwback to the 19th century, when unregulated
corporations bulked out their bread with plaster of paris
and flavored their beer with sulfuric acid.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Come to think of it, that’s precisely the policy era Mr.
Ryan and his colleagues are trying to bring back.
So the Ryan budget is a fraud; Mr. Ryan talks loudly
about the evils of debt and deficits, but his plan would
actually make the deficit bigger even as it inflicted
huge pain in the name of deficit reduction. But is his
budget really the most fraudulent in American history?
Yes, it is.
To be sure, we’ve had irresponsible and/or deceptive
budgets in the past. Ronald Reagan’s budgets relied
on voodoo, on the claim that cutting taxes on the rich
would somehow lead to an explosion of economic
growth. George W. Bush’s budget officials liked to play
bait and switch, low-balling the cost of tax cuts by
pretending that they were only temporary, then
demanding that they be made permanent. But has any
major political figure ever premised his entire fiscal
platform not just on totally implausible spending
projections but on claims that he has a secret plan to
raise trillions of dollars in revenue, a plan that he
refuses to share with the public?
What’s going on here? The answer, presumably, is
that this is what happens when extremists gain
complete control of a party’s discourse: all the rules
get thrown out the window. Indeed, the hard right’s grip
on the G.O.P. is now so strong that the party is sticking
with Mr. Ryan even though it’s paying a significant
political price for his assault on Medicare.
Now, the House Republican budget isn’t about to
become law as long as President Obama is sitting in
the White House. But it has been endorsed by Mr.
Romney. And even if Mr. Obama is reelected, the
fraudulence of this budget has important implications
for future political negotiations.
Bear in mind that the Obama administration spent
much of 2011 trying to negotiate a so-called Grand
Bargain with Republicans, a bipartisan plan for deficit
reduction over the long term. Those negotiations
ended up breaking down, and a minor journalistic
industry has emerged as reporters try to figure out how
the breakdown occurred and who was responsible.
But what we learn from the latest Republican budget is
that the whole pursuit of a Grand Bargain was a waste
of time and political capital. For a lasting budget deal
can only work if both parties can be counted on to be
both responsible and honest — and House
190

Republicans have just demonstrated, as clearly as
anyone could wish, that they are neither.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
191

The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Examining Marijuana Arrests
The New York State Legislature showed good sense
when it exempted people convicted of low-level
marijuana possession from having to submit DNA to
the state database, unless they have been convicted
of a previous crime. Still, the state must do more to
curb the arrests of tens of thousands of people each
year in New York City for minor possession of
marijuana, despite a 1977 state law that decriminalized
it.
State data show that the New York Police Department
arrested more than 50,000 people last year for
low-level possession, with about 30 percent having no
prior arrest record. More than 11,700 of those arrested
were 16- to 19-year-olds; nearly half had never been
arrested before and 94 percent had no prior
convictions.
Under the 1977 law, possession of 25 grams or less of
marijuana is a violation, subject to a $100 fine for the
first offense. But possession of any amount that is in
public view is a misdemeanor punishable by up to
three months in jail and a $500 fine. Civil rights
lawyers say that many of those stopped by city police
were arrested after officers told them to empty their
pockets, which brought the small amount of drugs into
view.
The Bronx Defenders, a public defender agency in that
borough, reported last week that it had examined the
cases of 518 people arrested for low-level possession
in 2011 and concluded that 40 percent of them were
unlawfully arrested or charged.
Marijuana arrests declined after passage of the 1977
law, but that changed in the 1990s. Between 1997 and
2010, the city arrested 525,000 people for low-level,
public-view possession, according to a legislative
finding. Lawmakers and civil rights lawyers are rightly
outraged that more than 80 percent of those arrested
in the city are black and Latino, despite substantial
data showing that whites are more likely to use the
drug. Bills pending in both the Senate and the
Assembly could help reduce the inequity in the law by
making public possession of a small amount a violation
instead of a misdemeanor.
192

The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Mr. Chairman, the Great State of
Nostalgia ...
Yards and yards of patriotic bunting stun the senses as
you enter the Gerald Schoenfeld Theater, where a
revival of “Gore Vidal’s The Best Man” opened on
Sunday night. Television monitors displaying
black-and-white footage hang from boxes that frame
the stage, and the usher handing you your program
wears a festive boater with red, white and blue trim.
The aim is to give the audience a sense of being
present at a presidential nominating convention in
Philadelphia in 1960, where the play is set.
I suspect the producers could have spared themselves
the expense of all this you-are-there paraphernalia. By
the time the curtain came down on this starry but
sluggish production, and a nominee had been formally
announced, I did feel as if I’d endured a particularly
fractious and constipated evening at a political
convention. Need I add that acquiring this experience
has never been one of my great ambitions?
Mr. Vidal’s drama about backroom deal making and
the withering of America’s political discourse first
opened on Broadway in 1960, back when party
conventions in election years were still suspenseful
battles for delegates and not ceremonial coronations of
preselected candidates. There has been talk that this
year’s campaign for the Republican nomination might
go down to the wire, old-school style, which adds a
small fillip of fresh topicality to this production, directed
by Michael Wilson and featuring a glittering dais of
stars, including James Earl Jones, Angela Lansbury,
John Larroquette and Eric McCormack. (The previous
Broadway revival also opened during an election year,
in 2000.)
Unfortunately a thin veneer of currency isn’t sufficient
to revitalize a drama that feels positively quaint,
despite Mr. Vidal’s winking cynicism about the political
arena and his undeniable prescience about future
trends in American politicking. He was certainly on
target in noting the corrupting influence of television
cameras on the tone of political campaigns and the
rise of pandering populism as a crucial element in the
playbook of any politician hoping to make headway in
a presidential contest.
But anyone following politics with even the slightest
peripheral vision is acutely aware of how radically the
landscape has changed. The toxins Mr. Vidal was
identifying in 1960 as hovering threats on the
democratic horizon are now confirmed facts of political
life, so that this once-trenchant drama — concerning a
battle for the nomination between a high-minded,
deeply moral candidate and his canny, cutthroat rival
— feels like a civics lesson drawn from a long
out-of-date textbook.
Mr. Larroquette (a Tony winner last year for “How to
Succeed in Business Without Really Trying”) and Mr.
McCormack (television’s “Will & Grace”) play the
contrasting characters dueling for the top prize of the
carefully unnamed political party. William Russell (Mr.
Larroquette) is the patrician candidate who exemplifies
the ideals Mr. Vidal clearly favors in a man and a
president: intelligence, probity, a Harvard degree and a
healthy distaste for the grim business of currying the
favor of voters by coddling their baser instincts. (His
campaign manager, expertly played by Michael
McKean, has to restrain him from dropping too many
erudite references to the likes of Bertrand Russell and
Oliver Cromwell at his news conferences.) He’s no
saint, however: long estranged from his wife, Alice
(Candice Bergen), Russell has a reputation for
philandering, a detail that must have seemed daring in
1960 but inspires a yawn in the post-Clinton,
post-Edwards era.
Joseph Cantwell (Mr. McCormack) is the ambitious
senator who pulled himself up by his bootstraps,
attended a state school and has no qualms about
using any and all means available to gain an upper
hand over his more well-connected rival. This means
smearing Russell by revealing his past history of
psychological frailty.
Cantwell is clearly meant to represent the
degenerative tendencies in American politics of Mr.
Vidal’s era (which have only metastasized our own),
but I have to admit that from a theatrical standpoint the
cool savagery embodied by Mr. McCormack’s
Cantwell, all camera-ready smiles and animal energy,
proves to be far more appealing than the tormented
nobility of Mr. Larroquette’s Russell.
Mr. Larroquette gives a restrained performance, doling
out Russell’s wise musings — on the anathema of
personality politics, on the importance of leading men
as opposed to following polls, on the relentless artifice
involved in campaigning — with a studied air of
pained, weary wisdom. But the character comes
193

across as alternately a dispenser of high-toned, dryly
ironic jokes or a lecturer on ethics. Mr. McCormack’s
slippery Cantwell may be repellent in his ruthlessness,
but at least he’s not a snore.
Ms. Bergen, making a rare stage appearance, looks a
trifle stiff as the long-suffering wife, but she hits her
comic marks with crisp efficiency, delivering Alice’s
sardonic asides with the same brittle edge she brought
to her performance on TV’s “Murphy Brown.” The slight
air of discomfort Ms. Bergen radiates certainly suits the
character, who shares her husband’s innate distaste
for the indecorous business of glad-handing.
As Cantwell’s upstart Southern belle wife Mabel, Kerry
Butler looks luscious in Ann Roth’s well-turned
costumes, but she pushes her character’s kittenish
sexuality and crass cattiness a little too close to
caricature. Jefferson Mays makes an effectively
sweaty impression as a squirrelly former Army mate of
Cantwell’s who is corralled by Russell’s campaign
manager into revealing a secret in the senator’s past
he hopes to use to neutralize Cantwell’s plan to go
public with Russell’s medical history.
But the audience warms most to the veterans onstage.
Ms. Lansbury, a welcome presence in many a recent
Broadway season, makes every moment of her stage
time count as Sue-Ellen Gamadge, a chatty and genial
but steely party operative given to dictating to
candidates and their wives what the female voter does
and does not appreciate. The role is small, but Ms.
Lansbury embodies her character with such style that
she is as vivid a presence as any when she’s onstage,
and manages to nail a sure laugh merely by lowering a
newspaper.
The great Mr. Jones is provocatively (if not
preposterously) cast as Arthur Hockstader, a former
president from the South whose endorsement both
candidates hope to win. It is obviously a trifle absurd to
suggest that an African-American would have
achieved the presidency before the civil rights
movement had even gained steam. And since no one
else onstage is black, I’m not sure Mr. Jones’s
presence can be classified as color-blind casting.
But no matter: this consummate actor digs into his role
with a relish you can surely sense from the back row of
the balcony. He all but swamps the stage with
Hockstader’s hearty bonhomie and zest for the
machinations of backroom deal making, but also
succeeds in inflecting his character — in the last
rounds of a losing battle with cancer — with a moving
sense of his mortality.
He also earns robust laughs with some of Mr. Vidal’s
The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
piercingly funny lines collapsing the distance between
the politics of mid-20th-century America and today.
“The world’s changed since I was politickin’,” he
observes in a conversation about religion with Russell,
after Russell confesses he isn’t a believer. “In those
days you had to pour God over everything, like
ketchup.” (Apparently the world’s changed back,
Arthur.)
But the play more often strikes postures that feel
antiquated even in their idealism, as when Russell
responds to a question about the importance of polling
with a tidy little lecture about the role of government in
a properly functioning democracy.
“I don’t believe in polls,” he says. “Accurate or not. And
if I may bore you with one of my little sermons: Life is
not a popularity contest; neither is politics. The
important thing for any government is educating the
people about the issues, not following the ups and
downs of popular opinion.”
Noted.
Gore Vidal’s The Best Man
By Gore Vidal; directed by Michael Wilson; sets by
Derek McLane; costumes by Ann Roth; lighting by
Kenneth Posner; music and sound by John Gromada;
projections by Peter Nigrini; hair design by Josh
Marquette; technical supervision by Hudson Theatrical
Productions; production stage manager, Matthew
Farrell; company manager, Brig Berney; general
manager, Richards/Climan, Inc.; associate producer,
Stephanie Rosenberg. Presented by Jeffrey Richards,
Jerry Frankel, Infinity Stages, Universal Pictures Stage
Productions, Barbara Manocherian/Michael Palitz,
Kathleen K. Johnson, Andy Sandberg, Ken
Mahoney/The Broadway Consortium, Fifty Church
Street Productions, Larry Hirschhorn/Bennu
Productions, Patty Baker, Paul Boskind and Martian
Entertainment, Wendy Federman, Mark S. Golub and
David S. Golub, Cricket Hooper Jiranek, Stewart F.
Lane and Bonnie Comley, Carl Moellenberg, Harold
Thau and Will Trice. At the Gerald Schoenfeld Theater,
236 West 45th Street, Manhattan, (212) 239-6200,
telecharge.com. Running time: 2 hours 30 minutes.
WITH: James Earl Jones (Former President Arthur
Hockstader), John Larroquette (Secretary William
Russell), Candice Bergen (Alice Russell), Eric
McCormack (Senator Joseph Cantwell), Kerry Butler
(Mabel Cantwell), Jefferson Mays (Sheldon Marcus),
Michael McKean (Dick Jensen) and Angela Lansbury
(Sue-Ellen Gamadge).
194

The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Mayoral Hopeful’s Slow Start Has Some
Asking if His Heart Is in It
William C. Thompson Jr. has heard all the questions.
Is he really running for mayor next year? Can he raise
enough money to compete in a crowded primary?
Does he have the burning desire that it takes to mount
an aggressive campaign?
The answer to all of these, Mr. Thompson says, is yes.
But as he ramps up his campaign, his first task is
persuading skeptics that he is really in it.
Mr. Thompson, a former comptroller who was the
Democratic nominee for mayor in 2009, enters the
2013 race with considerable advantages. He ran
strongly in the 2009 election, surprising many political
experts by coming within five percentage points of
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. As the only
African-American candidate, and possibly the only
minority candidate, in the probable 2013 field, Mr.
Thompson is also in a unique position to benefit from
the growing majority of black, Hispanic and
Asian-American voters in the city.
Despite these advantages, though, Mr. Thompson is
off to a slow start. By mid-January, he had raised just
$889,241, less than half what each of his expected
major rivals for the Democratic nomination had raised.
And his low-key approach to campaigning has left
many wondering if he can compete against a handful
of extremely ambitious politicians.
“Does he today have the same passion to run and to
lead the city that he had when he was running against
Bloomberg?” asked the Rev. A. R. Bernard, who leads
Christian Cultural Center, a church in Brooklyn with
36,000 members. “I don’t know if the fire’s there or
not.”
Others were more blunt.
“If he wants to show that he’s a serious candidate, he
has to step up his visibility first,” Susan Del Percio, a
Republican political consultant, said. She added,
“Right now he does not look like a serious candidate
— he looks like someone who wants to keep the door
open for a possible run.”
In an interview, Mr. Thompson attributed the questions
about his candidacy partly to the fact that he was not
currently an officeholder, and therefore was not “front
and center” in the public eye. He also suggested that it
benefited his opponents to stir such doubts.
“There were a number of people who — their path to
victory couldn’t have me in the discussion, so it was
always easier to say, ‘Bill’s not running,’ ” he said.
But he expressed confidence in his ability to bring
together a multiethnic coalition of voters, even saying
that he thought he could get to 40 percent in the
primary and avoid a runoff.
And while he acknowledged that he had some
catching up to do in fund-raising, he said he was not
worried about raising enough to hit the spending limit
in the primary, which is roughly $6.7 million for
candidates participating in the public financing
system.
“I’m confident that I’m going to be able to raise the
money that’s necessary to run a strong campaign and
to max out,” he said.
For the last two years, Mr. Thompson has been
working at the municipal finance firm Siebert Brandford
Shank & Company and serving as chairman of the
Battery Park City Authority.
Mr. Thompson said he had been “reorganizing” his life.
A member of his finance committee, Betsy Gotbaum,
who is a former public advocate, said of his recent
absence from politics, “I think taking the year off was
important for him,” even though she said it had
contributed to the uncertainty about his intentions.
Mr. Thompson has been getting out more recently: to
events held by business groups and labor unions. He
was in Albany for the annual conference of the New
York State Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic and Asian
Legislative Caucus, as well as for Gov. Andrew M.
Cuomo’s Black History Month celebration. He was also
the only mayoral candidate at Mr. Cuomo’s New York
City Super Bowl party the week before.
He plans to announce on Monday that he is rehiring
two former members of his 2009 campaign staff: Geoff
Garin, a pollster; and Doc Sweitzer, a media
consultant.
But at times he still does not seem to be in active
campaign mode. On a recent Sunday, for example, he
195

attended a fund-raiser for the Downtown Independent
Democrats, a club that endorsed him in 2009. By the
time Mr. Thompson arrived at the SoHo loft where the
event was being held, Scott M. Stringer, the Manhattan
The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
borough president, who is another possible mayoral
candidate, had been there for 45 minutes, assiduously
working the crowd.
196

The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
To Enroll More Minority Students,
Colleges Work Around the Courts
With its decision to take up racial preferences in
admissions at public colleges, the Supreme Court has
touched off a national guessing game about how far it
might move against affirmative action and how
profoundly colleges might change as a result.
But no matter how the court acts, recent history shows
that when courts or new laws restrict affirmative action,
colleges try to find other ways to increase minority
admissions.
The aggressiveness of those efforts, and the results,
vary widely by state, but generally they increase
minority enrollment — though not as much as overt
affirmative action once did. And they have tended to
help Hispanic applicants far more than blacks, at least
partly because of the demographics of the states
where they have been tried.
Texas and a few others, for instance, compare
students with their high school classmates, rather than
with all applicants, resulting in more enrollment from
poor communities. Washington is among the states
that give added credit in the admissions process to
students who come from poor families or excel at
troubled schools.
Other colleges have spent more time recruiting in
underrepresented communities. And the University of
California system tries to weigh a student’s life beyond
grades and test scores — which, critics say,
sometimes amounts to giving racial preferences
without acknowledging them.
Even if the Supreme Court limits the options, college
and universities will “be seeking diversity by any legal
means possible,” said Ada Meloy, general counsel of
the American Council on Education.
But a decision overturning affirmative action could
produce a national pattern of more liberal states going
further to mimic the current system than more
conservative states. Defenders of affirmative action
are most likely to see any new system as unfair to
black and Hispanic students, while critics will still see it
as unfair to whites and Asian-Americans.
The current nationwide standard is based on two
decisions involving the University of Michigan in 2003,
when the Supreme Court ruled that public universities
could not give an applicant an automatic advantage
based on race or ethnicity. But in a decision written by
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the court also ruled, 5
to 4, that colleges could consider race and ethnicity as
part of a case-by-case assessment of individuals.
Since 2003, the court has shifted rightward, with
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., a critic of preferences,
replacing Justice O’Connor.
In February, the court agreed to hear Fisher v.
University of Texas, a challenge to the university’s
admissions policy, fueling speculation that it could
revisit the standards it set nine years ago. The Texas
system admits the top students at every high school in
the state, but also admits additional students with a
system that takes race into account.
The court has many options, including leaving things
as they stand, finding that universities are interpreting
the Michigan case too loosely, altering it, or
overturning it completely. And it remains unclear how
any ruling would affect private colleges, which rely
heavily on federal financing.
Perhaps the best glimpse of a future without the
current version of affirmative action comes from the
handful of states that have already outlawed the use of
race in public college admissions.
After California voters approved such a law, black and
Hispanic freshman enrollment at the University of
California system dropped by about one-quarter in
1998, the first year the ban was in effect. At the
system’s most competitive campuses, in Berkeley and
Los Angeles, enrollment for those groups fell by almost
half.
In the years since, the system has tried several
approaches to increase diversity without directly taking
race into account, and the numbers eventually rose.
Black students accounted for just over 4 percent of
University of California freshmen in the mid-1990s.
That fell to 3 percent after the law took effect, and
remained there for several years, before climbing close
to 4 percent in recent years.
Hispanic enrollment stood at 14 to 15 percent of the
total before the ban, and fell to 12 percent in 1998, but
197

quickly began to climb, driven by California’s fast-rising
Latino population. By 2010, that group accounted for
more than 22 percent of the system’s freshmen.
“If we had affirmative action as one of our tools, we’d
do somewhat better for Hispanics, and we’d probably
do significantly better for African-Americans,” said
Mark G. Yudof, president of the University of California
system.
A central part of California’s effort has been to
compare applicants with other students in their
communities, rather than with students statewide,
much as Texas does. At each high school, the top 9
percent of students are guaranteed admission to the
University of California — though not necessarily to the
campuses of their choice — as long as they meet
some other criteria.
Officials acknowledge that the aim is race-conscious
but that the mechanism is race-neutral.
Florida uses a percentage-based system as well.
There, as in California and Texas, the benefits go
mostly to Hispanic students because of the large
number of high schools that are predominantly
Hispanic. Black students are spread among high
schools with large numbers of other students.
In California, arguably the most liberal state to have
banned affirmative action in admissions, the university
system has gone further to increase minority
enrollment. The system has expanded, adding a new
campus and increasing enrollment at existing schools.
The Berkeley campus, and later U.C.L.A., also
adopted an admissions approach called holistic
review, reducing the emphasis on grades and test
scores while taking a broader look at students’
experiences and the challenges they have overcome.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
“I do think you’re going to see a move toward a more
holistic admissions system” in other states, Mr. Yudof
said, especially if the Supreme Court rolls back
consideration of race. His system is pushing all of its
campuses in that direction.
Some of the public universities in Washington State,
where voters banned affirmative action in 1998, use a
holistic approach, as does the University of Michigan.
Richard H. Sander, a U.C.L.A. law school professor
who studies the issue, says that the holistic approach
is also loose enough to allow race to be an
unacknowledged part of the equation, potentially
violating state law. University officials insist that their
systems are race-blind.
In Washington, Hispanic and black enrollment at state
universities did not change much after the law went
into effect, but at the state’s flagship, the University of
Washington, it fell for a few years, before returning to
its former level. At the University of Michigan, minority
enrollment fell sharply after the law took effect in 2007,
and has not rebounded. Black students made up more
than 10 percent of the freshman class a decade ago,
and 7 to 8 percent in the years just before the law, but
that has dropped to a little over 5 percent in recent
years.
As for the Fisher case, Professor Sander pointed to
the crucial role of Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, widely
seen as the swing vote. He predicted that rather than
overturn the standards it set in 2003, the court would
amend them or alter the way they are carried out,
restricting the use of race without eliminating it. “This
hinges on Kennedy,” Professor Sander said, “and
Kennedy usually likes to do half a loaf.”
198

The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
At the University of Texas, Admissions
as a Mystery
AUSTIN, Tex. — Even after 20 years of legal
wrangling, admission to the University of Texas — and
what role race plays — still has its mysteries.
Part of the process is clear. Under the state’s Top 10
Percent program, Texas students at the top of their
high school class are guaranteed admission, filling
three-quarters of the slots for in-state students. The
process for admitting the other quarter — the part that
the United States Supreme Court will consider next
fall, in a lawsuit filed by Abigail Fisher, a white
applicant denied admission in 2008 who said she was
discriminated against because of her race — is not so
clear cut. For those spots, applicants are rated on
factors including test scores, essays, activities,
socioeconomic status, cultural background — and race
and ethnicity.
The process, known as holistic review, allows the
university to shape a diverse class with the interests
and talents to make good use of university resources,
said William Powers Jr., the president of the University
of Texas’ flagship campus in Austin.
“If a company had 100 applications for five positions
and just took the five with the highest grade point
average without looking at anything else, I think people
would be stunned,” he said. “Grades are important, but
there are other important indicia, like leadership and
diligence. Grades don’t tell us who is going to have a
proclivity, or aptitude, for geosciences, fine arts or
teaching.”
But whom does holistic admissions help more —
minority students, or affluent white applicants from
private and suburban schools? “It is not the case that
the 25 percent is designed or motivated by adding to
ethnic diversity or adding to the numbers of students
from private or suburban schools,” he said.
With the case in litigation, Mr. Powers declined to
discuss the numbers. But university records show that
about two-thirds of the white freshmen were admitted
automatically, compared with 80 percent of the black
students and 85 percent of the Hispanic students.
Because students are admitted to specific colleges,
like the College of Education or the business school, it
is impossible to determine which group benefits most
from holistic review without knowing how many
students of which race applied to, and were admitted
to, each school — numbers the university does not
release.
College counselors say that holistic admissions
decisions are hard to predict.
“We try to teach all our parents and students that U.T.
uses holistic review to fill specific programs, but it’s
sometimes hard to accept that someone with lower
grades and scores might get in if they’re an all-state
cheerleader,” said Jeff Pilchiek, director of guidance at
the highly regarded Westlake High School. “The buzz
a few years ago was, ‘Apply to education, and then
you can transfer to business.’ Then it was natural
science, but that got very competitive.”
In interviews on the stately campus overlooking the
State Capitol, students’ views on holistic admission
seemed to depend on their own race and ethnicity.
This year’s freshman class of 7,000 students is 46
percent white, 23 percent Hispanic, 20 percent Asian
and 6 percent black — and, as on most campuses,
many students socialize mostly with others like
themselves.
“I imagined, coming to college, that it would be unified,
but when I got here, I fell back into my comfort zone,”
said Aimee Vasquez, a Hispanic freshman. The
university’s motto is “What Starts Here Changes the
World,” she added, but “it’s comfortable to be with your
own kind, so we’re not changing the world.”
Like other black and Hispanic students interviewed,
Ms. Vasquez said she believed that holistic admissions
mostly helped affluent white students from top schools.
“I think the holistic approach, where they look at
everything, does more for kids who went to the most
awesome schools, mostly the white kids,” she said. “A
lot of them have great test scores, great grades and
lots of activities.”
Catherine Rodarte, a Hispanic junior, agreed. Only one
friend was not admitted under the state’s top students
program, she said, “and when I asked how she got in,
she said she was really involved in a lot of activities in
high school.” She added: “In my anthro class, we were
discussing it, and some people said they thought
Latino students got in easier, and get more aid. I didn’t
say anything, because sometimes it’s still hard for me
199

to speak up in class when it’s almost all white students
around me.”
Black students experience that isolation, too.
“I’m pretty outgoing, but I’m the only black person in
my Spanish class, and when it’s time to choose a
partner, there’s that moment of, ‘Who’s going to want
to be my partner?’ ” said Charley Collins, a senior.
Ms. Collins and Nicole Akpunku, a sophomore friend,
said the black students they knew had been admitted
automatically. “All of my friends who got in were in the
Top 10,” Ms. Akpunku said.
But, Ms. Collins said, “a lot of white students didn’t
come through Top 10.”
The New York Times/ - Politics, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Yet many white and Asian students think that holistic
admissions bring in more black and Hispanic
students.
“If I had to guess, I think the 25 percent helps
minorities more,” said Christina Jackson, a white
senior from Oklahoma. “There’s been a shift. I think
they’re thinking more about minorities now.”
Few students spoke with much passion on the issue. “I
haven’t heard big debates or anything, maybe because
the current students were already admitted,” said
Natalie Butler, the student body president.
Some faculty members did not seem to be getting
worked up either. “There’s a little bit of fatigue,” said
Arthur Markman, a psychology professor.
200

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Column: Why Justice Kennedy should
rule 'no'
Justice Anthony Kennedy is, in a sense, the king of the
United States of America. As the deciding vote on the
U.S. Supreme Court in dozens of important cases
where the liberals and conservatives are evenly
divided, he has become, in effect, a jurisprudential
monarch (hence columnist Mark Steyn's nickname for
him, "the Sultan of Swing"). He has been the final word
on everything from the 2000 Bush-Gore presidential
election to partial-birth abortion and terrorist detention.
And now he will, in all likelihood, decide the
constitutionality of the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act— aka ObamaCare.
Whether it is good news for America that one man has
so much power is a conversation for another day. The
pressing question is whether Kennedy's role as judicial
Solomon is good news for supporters of ObamaCare
or its critics. And the short answer is: Nobody knows.
Justice Kennedy is famous — infamous? — for
dramatically changing his mind at the last moment.
He's also renowned for basing his decisions in
grandiose moral theories in the hope of imposing a
national consensus where it doesn't exist. As legal
scholar Jeffrey Rosen put it in a lengthy 2007 profile
for TheNew Republic, "In Kennedy's mind, the messy
realities behind real laws must yield to his idealizing
moral abstractions."
Evidence of his method
The most notorious example of the Kennedy method
came in the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey
decision in which he ruled to uphold Roe v. Wade. In a
section famously derided by his fellow Justice Antonin
Scalia as the "sweet-mystery-of-life passage,"
Kennedy wrote:
"These matters, involving the most intimate and
personal choices a person may make in a lifetime,
choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are
central to the liberty protected by the 14th Amendment.
At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own
concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and
of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about these
matters could not define the attributes of personhood
were they formed under compulsion of the state."
Kennedy's detractors on the right think this is so much
gobbledygook. But let's assume it does mean
something to at least one very important person:
Kennedy. And if that's the case, then opponents of the
health reform law — like me — have good reason to
hope he will overturn it. During last week's marathon
hearings, Justice Kennedy asked Solicitor General
Donald Verrilli, "When you are changing the relation of
the individual to the government in this … unique way,
do you not have a heavy burden of justification to show
authorization under the Constitution?" By using the
commerce clause to, in effect, force citizens into a
contract, ObamaCare is setting a precedent whereby
the federal government can compel citizens to do
almost anything. For all the talk about making citizens
eat broccoli, the fact is that the government couldn't
offer any valid "limiting principle" to what the state can
do through the commerce clause.
Federal vs. state
Moreover, as Kennedy himself has written, our federal
system whereby people live under two distinct
governments — state and federal — is a bulwark of
liberty. "The Framers concluded," Kennedy observed
last year in Bond v. United States, "that allocation of
powers between the national government and the
states enhances freedom, first by protecting the
integrity of the governments themselves, and second
by protecting the people, from whom all governmental
powers are derived." The world ObamaCare ushers in
bulldozes distinctions between federal and state
government.
But that's a prosaic concern compared with the larger
metaphysical issues at stake.
The recent brouhaha over religious liberty and birth
control is just a foretaste of the bitter pills to come
once the government is granted unprecedented
influence over the most personal transactions in life,
and when the chief concerns of bureaucrats will be to
preserve the health and solvency of "the system"
rather than the health or sovereignty of the individual.
Simply put, a country fully under the heel of
ObamaCare is a country where the state has too much
say in how people define personhood and the meaning
of life. By forcing people to buy health insurance, by
giving unelected boards and bureaucrats
unaccountable power over our lives, and not
inconceivably our deaths, ObamaCare violates the
201

ideal of self-government at the core of the
Constitution. And it seems hard to imagine that you
can fundamentally alter the concept of self-government
without infringing upon the liberties recounted in
USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Justice Kennedy's soliloquy on the sweet mystery of
life.
202

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama warns against 'judicial activism'
on health care law
WASHINGTON – President Obama cautioned the
Supreme Court against overturning his landmark
health care law Monday, a move he said would be
"unprecedented" and "extraordinary."
In his first comments on the court's historic oral
arguments last week, Obama said a decision to
reverse the actions of Congress would be "judicial
activism," which conservatives usually oppose.
"I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take
what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step
of overturning a law that was passed by a strong
majority of a democratically elected Congress," the
president said.
"And I'd just remind conservative commentators that
for years what we've heard is the biggest problem on
the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial
restraint, that an unelected group of people would
somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.
Well, this is a good example. And I'm pretty confident
that this court will recognize that and not take that
step."
Obama's comments came during a news conference
at the White House with Mexican President Felipe
Calderón and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen
Harper after a summit of the three North American
leaders.
Obama had been in South Korea during the court's
three-day consideration of the law, which was narrowly
passed in 2010 by a majority of Democrats in the
House of Representatives and Senate over
Republicans' objections.
Obama predicted the justices would uphold the law,
despite strong reservations voiced by four
conservative justices about its requirement that most
Americans buy insurance or pay a penalty. A fifth
justice, Clarence Thomas, is widely expected to vote
against the "individual mandate."
Conservatives quickly shot back at Obama's
comments. "It must be nice living in a fantasy world
where every law you like is constitutional and every
Supreme Court decision you don't is 'activist,' " said
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, former chairman of the
Senate Judiciary Committee.
203

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Romney's son hits back after 'Mad Men'
swipe
Tagg Romney didn't think it was funny that his late
grandfather was sideswiped on last night's episode of
Mad Men.
A character on AMC's popular show set in the
advertising world of the 1960s referred to George
Romney, the former Michigan governor, as a "clown."
"Dad is fair game. Grandpa isn't," tweeted Tagg
Romney, the eldest son of Mitt Romney, the GOP
presidential front-runner.
"George Romney was as good a man I've ever known.
Inspirational leader, worked for civil rights, promoted
freedom. We need more like him," his grandson said in
his defense on Twitter.
On Mad Men, the character Henry Francis (who works
for New York City Mayor John Lindsay) tells someone
on the phone, "Well, tell Jim his honor's not going to
Michigan. Romney's a clown, and I don't want him
standing next to him."
The show is set this season in 1966, so the reference
is definitely about George Romney, who was governor
from 1963-1969 and died in 1995. But it's unclear what
was meant by the "clown" line.
Mitt Romney frequently refers to his dad -- also a
former Cabinet secretary, presidential candidate and
head of American Motors -- on the campaign trail.
His father was something of a moderate and supported
civil rights when many in the Republican Party did not.
In 1964, George Romney declined to endorse
conservative Barry Goldwater for president.
Mitt Romney has spoken of how it was "disappointing"
to watch his father get knocked out of the 1968
presidential race because of comments about the
Vietnam War.
204

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Small bomb ignites at Wisconsin Planned
Parenthood clinic
Police in Grand Chute, Wis., say a homemade
explosive device placed outside a Planned Parenthood
clinic caused minor damage to an examination room
when it went off Sunday.
There were no staff members or patients inside the
building when the device exploded, the Appleton Post
Crescent reports.
Teri Huyck, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood
of Wisconsin, says the clinic will re-open Tuesday.
The device, which Police Chief Greg Peterson says
consisted of a plastic bottle filled with "agents of an
incendiary quality," had been placed on an outside
windowsill, the Post Crescent reports.
The explosion ignited a small fire that burned out
before firefighters arrived to check on a tripped alarm.
Peterson says authorities had not heard of any prior
threats against the clinic.
The Criminal Section of the Justice Department's Civil
Rights Division has opened an investigation into the
incident, a DOJ spokeswoman tells Talking Points
Memo.
TPM also reports that Republican presidential
candidate Rick Santorum, who is campaigning in
Wisconsin this week, condemned the incident.
"While we can and should work to defund Planned
Parenthood and push back against government
mandates that force Americans and religious institution
to violate their faith, violence against our fellow citizens
has no place in a freedom-loving America," Santorum
says in a statement to TPM.
205

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama warns justices against 'judicial
activism'
President Obama said today he is confident the
Supreme Court will uphold his health care law -- and
basically warned the justices against striking down the
law by practicing what he called "judicial activism."
"I'd just remind conservative commentators that for
years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the
bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial
restraint," Obama said during a joint news conference
with the leaders of Canada and Mexico.
Obama defined activism by saying "an unelected
group of people would somehow overturn a duly
constituted passed law -- well, here's a good example.
And I'm pretty confident that this -- this court will
recognize that and not take that step."
The Supreme Court -- which heard three days of
arguments on the law last week -- is expected to hand
down a ruling in June.
Obama said he's "confident" that the high court "will
not take what would be an unprecedented
extraordinary step of overturning a law that was
passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected
Congress."
A Democratic-run Congress passed the health care
law on a largely partisan vote in 2010.
During last week's Supreme Court hearings, some
conservative justices had harsh questions about the
law's key feature, the requirement that nearly all
Americans buy some form of health insurance or pay
fine.
Some critics say that requirement, as well as most of
the health care law itself, is an unconstitutional
overreach by the federal government.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, took exception to Obama's
comments, saying "it must be nice living in a fantasy
world where every law you like is constitutional and
every Supreme Court decision you don't is 'activist.'
Many of us have been arguing for nearly three years
that the federal government does not have the power
to dictate individuals' purchasing decisions."
Obama said the law has support from "legal experts
across the ideological spectrum, including two very
conservative appellate court justices that said this
wasn't even a close case."
The comments came during a joint news conference at
the White House with Canadian Prime Minister
Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe
Calderon.
Some highlights:
2:29 p.m. -- Harper tells a Canadian reporter -- in both
English and French -- he is confident that the nation's
partnership with the United States and Mexico helps in
the areas of both trade and security. And that includes
the new Trans-Pacific Partnership with other nations
as well.
Obama says all three countries must make
"modifications" in working together on trade. Also says
that violence in Mexico should be a concern for all of
North America.
Calderon said one North American nation cannot be
fully secure unless all of them are. Also notes that the
homicide rate in Washington, D.C., is higher than in
cities in Mexico.
2:21 p.m. -- Responding to a question from a Mexican
reporter, Calderon says the U.S. will help Mexico battle
illegal gun trafficking.
Obama tells the reporter that his administration has no
plans to get involved in Mexico's presidential election.
He said relations between the two nations "transcends
partisan politics."
2:13 p.m. -- Bloomberg News asks Obama about the
prospect of a health care reversal at the Supreme
Court; then asks the leaders of Mexico and Canada if
U.S. influence has declined, as claimed by Mitt
Romney.
On the second question, Obama notes that the
Republicans are still in primary mode. Notes that one
of his most famous speeches -- at the 2004
Democratic convention -- dealt almost solely with
American "exceptional-ism."
As for the Supreme Court, Obama predicts that the
justices will uphold the health care law. Says there is
206

precedent for the law and doesn't think the court "will
take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary
step" of striking down law -- and all but warns the court
against "judicial activism."
Calderon says the question is "a little local" for him, but
hopes the U.S. will follow Mexico's lead in developing
a national health care plan.
Harper tells the Bloomberg reporter: "I don't think you
really expect me to intervene in the U.S. presidential
election."
2:10 p.m. -- Harper thanks "Barack" for his hospitality.
Praises the trading partnership among Canada, the
U.S., and Mexico under the North American Free
USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Trade Agreement. Also speaks in both English and
French.
1:59 p.m. -- Calderon, speaking in Spanish, says the
leaders' work day has been "fruitful" and "fluid." Cites
efforts at deregulation of trade rules among the three
nations, as well as plans to combat weapons and drug
trafficking.
1:53 p.m. -- Obama opens by welcoming "Stephen"
and "Felipe" to the White House. Note that together
they represent "half a billion people" in North America,
and are doing what they can to "speed up" economic
recovery. Says the leaders also discussed security
issues.
207

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Bomb damages Wis. Planned Parenthood
clinic
Police in Grand Chute, Wis., say a homemade
explosive device placed outside a Planned Parenthood
clinic caused minor damage to an examination room
when it went off Sunday.
There were no staff members or patients inside the
building when the device exploded, the Appleton Post
Crescent reports.
Teri Huyck, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood
of Wisconsin, says the clinic will re-open Tuesday.
The device, which Police Chief Greg Peterson says
consisted of a plastic bottle filled with "agents of an
incendiary quality," had been placed on an outside
windowsill, the Post Crescent reports.
The explosion ignited a small fire that burned out
before firefighters arrived to check on a tripped alarm.
Peterson says authorities had not heard of any prior
threats against the clinic.
The Criminal Section of the Justice Department's Civil
Rights Division has opened an investigation into the
incident, a DOJ spokeswoman tells Talking Points
Memo.
TPM also reports that Republican presidential
candidate Rick Santorum, who is campaigning in
Wisconsin this week, condemned the incident.
"While we can and should work to defund Planned
Parenthood and push back against government
mandates that force Americans and religious institution
to violate their faith, violence against our fellow citizens
has no place in a freedom-loving America," Santorum
says in a statement to TPM.
208

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama predicts high court will uphold
health care law
President Obama said today he is confident the
Supreme Court will uphold his health care law -- and
basically warned the justices against striking down the
law by practicing what he called "judicial activism."
"I'd just remind conservative commentators that for
years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the
bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial
restraint," Obama said during a joint news conference
with the leaders of Canada and Mexico.
Obama defined activism by saying "an unelected
group of people would somehow overturn a duly
constituted passed law -- well, here's a good example.
And I'm pretty confident that this -- this court will
recognize that and not take that step."
The Supreme Court -- which heard three days of
arguments on the law last week -- is expected to hand
down a ruling in June.
Obama said he's "confident" that the high court "will
not take what would be an unprecedented
extraordinary step of overturning a law that was
passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected
Congress."
A Democratic-run Congress passed the health care
law on a largely partisan vote in 2010.
During last week's Supreme Court hearings, some
conservative justices had harsh questions about the
law's key feature, the requirement that nearly all
Americans buy some form of health insurance or pay
fine.
Some critics say that requirement, as well as most of
the health care law itself, is an unconstitutional
overreach by the federal government.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, took exception to Obama's
comments, saying "it must be nice living in a fantasy
world where every law you like is constitutional and
every Supreme Court decision you don't is 'activist.'
Many of us have been arguing for nearly three years
that the federal government does not have the power
to dictate individuals' purchasing decisions."
Obama said the law has support from "legal experts
across the ideological spectrum, including two very
conservative appellate court justices that said this
wasn't even a close case."
The comments came during a joint news conference at
the White House with Canadian Prime Minister
Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe
Calderon.
Some highlights:
2:29 p.m. -- Harper tells a Canadian reporter -- in both
English and French -- he is confident that the nation's
partnership with the United States and Mexico helps in
the areas of both trade and security. And that includes
the new Trans-Pacific Partnership with other nations
as well.
Obama says all three countries must make
"modifications" in working together on trade. Also says
that violence in Mexico should be a concern for all of
North America.
Calderon said one North American nation cannot be
fully secure unless all of them are. Also notes that the
homicide rate in Washington, D.C., is higher than in
cities in Mexico.
2:21 p.m. -- Responding to a question from a Mexican
reporter, Calderon says the U.S. will help Mexico battle
illegal gun trafficking.
Obama tells the reporter that his administration has no
plans to get involved in Mexico's presidential election.
He said relations between the two nations "transcends
partisan politics."
2:13 p.m. -- Bloomberg News asks Obama about the
prospect of a health care reversal at the Supreme
Court; then asks the leaders of Mexico and Canada if
U.S. influence has declined, as claimed by Mitt
Romney.
On the second question, Obama notes that the
Republicans are still in primary mode. Notes that one
of his most famous speeches -- at the 2004
Democratic convention -- dealt almost solely with
American "exceptional-ism."
As for the Supreme Court, Obama predicts that the
justices will uphold the health care law. Says there is
209

precedent for the law and doesn't think the court "will
take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary
step" of striking down law -- and all but warns the court
against "judicial activism."
Calderon says the question is "a little local" for him, but
hopes the U.S. will follow Mexico's lead in developing
a national health care plan.
Harper tells the Bloomberg reporter: "I don't think you
really expect me to intervene in the U.S. presidential
election."
2:10 p.m. -- Harper thanks "Barack" for his hospitality.
Praises the trading partnership among Canada, the
U.S., and Mexico under the North American Free
USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Trade Agreement. Also speaks in both English and
French.
1:59 p.m. -- Calderon, speaking in Spanish, says the
leaders' work day has been "fruitful" and "fluid." Cites
efforts at deregulation of trade rules among the three
nations, as well as plans to combat weapons and drug
trafficking.
1:53 p.m. -- Obama opens by welcoming "Stephen"
and "Felipe" to the White House. Note that together
they represent "half a billion people" in North America,
and are doing what they can to "speed up" economic
recovery. Says the leaders also discussed security
issues.
210

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama says court will uphold health law
President Obama said today he is confident the
Supreme Court will uphold his health care law -- and
basically warned the justices against striking down the
law by practicing what he called "judicial activism."
"I'd just remind conservative commentators that for
years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the
bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial
restraint," Obama said during a joint news conference
with the leaders of Canada and Mexico.
Obama defined activism by saying "an unelected
group of people would somehow overturn a duly
constituted passed law -- well, here's a good example.
And I'm pretty confident that this -- this court will
recognize that and not take that step."
The Supreme Court -- which heard three days of
arguments on the law last week -- is expected to hand
down a ruling in June.
Obama said he's "confident" that the high court "will
not take what would be an unprecedented
extraordinary step of overturning a law that was
passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected
Congress."
A Democratic-run Congress passed the health care
law on a largely partisan vote in 2010.
During last week's Supreme Court hearings, some
conservative justices had harsh questions about the
law's key feature, the requirement that nearly all
Americans buy some form of health insurance or pay
fine.
Some critics say that requirement, as well as most of
the health care law itself, is an unconstitutional
overreach by the federal government.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, took exception to Obama's
comments, saying "it must be nice living in a fantasy
world where every law you like is constitutional and
every Supreme Court decision you don't is 'activist.'
Many of us have been arguing for nearly three years
that the federal government does not have the power
to dictate individuals' purchasing decisions."
Obama said the law has support from "legal experts
across the ideological spectrum, including two very
conservative appellate court justices that said this
wasn't even a close case."
The comments came during a joint news conference at
the White House with Canadian Prime Minister
Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe
Calderon.
Some highlights:
2:29 p.m. -- Harper tells a Canadian reporter -- in both
English and French -- he is confident that the nation's
partnership with the United States and Mexico helps in
the areas of both trade and security. And that includes
the new Trans-Pacific Partnership with other nations
as well.
Obama says all three countries must make
"modifications" in working together on trade. Also says
that violence in Mexico should be a concern for all of
North America.
Calderon said one North American nation cannot be
fully secure unless all of them are. Also notes that the
homicide rate in Washington, D.C., is higher than in
cities in Mexico.
2:21 p.m. -- Responding to a question from a Mexican
reporter, Calderon says the U.S. will help Mexico battle
illegal gun trafficking.
Obama tells the reporter that his administration has no
plans to get involved in Mexico's presidential election.
He said relations between the two nations "transcends
partisan politics."
2:13 p.m. -- Bloomberg News asks Obama about the
prospect of a health care reversal at the Supreme
Court; then asks the leaders of Mexico and Canada if
U.S. influence has declined, as claimed by Mitt
Romney.
On the second question, Obama notes that the
Republicans are still in primary mode. Notes that one
of his most famous speeches -- at the 2004
Democratic convention -- dealt almost solely with
American "exceptional-ism."
As for the Supreme Court, Obama predicts that the
justices will uphold the health care law. Says there is
211

precedent for the law and doesn't think the court "will
take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary
step" of striking down law -- and all but warns the court
against "judicial activism."
Calderon says the question is "a little local" for him, but
hopes the U.S. will follow Mexico's lead in developing
a national health care plan.
Harper tells the Bloomberg reporter: "I don't think you
really expect me to intervene in the U.S. presidential
election."
2:10 p.m. -- Harper thanks "Barack" for his hospitality.
Praises the trading partnership among Canada, the
U.S., and Mexico under the North American Free
USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Trade Agreement. Also speaks in both English and
French.
1:59 p.m. -- Calderon, speaking in Spanish, says the
leaders' work day has been "fruitful" and "fluid." Cites
efforts at deregulation of trade rules among the three
nations, as well as plans to combat weapons and drug
trafficking.
1:53 p.m. -- Obama opens by welcoming "Stephen"
and "Felipe" to the White House. Note that together
they represent "half a billion people" in North America,
and are doing what they can to "speed up" economic
recovery. Says the leaders also discussed security
issues.
212

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Sanford residents: 'We are good people'
SANFORD, Fla. – Thao Boyd, a Vietnamese immigrant
in this small city at the center of a national uproar over
racial profiling, wants people to know one thing about
her adopted community:
"Everybody knows Sanford now, but don't be scared
about Sanford," says Boyd, 37, who owns a nail salon
downtown. "Come visit us whenever you are ready."
In the 15 years that Boyd has lived here, she says, she
has never felt discriminated against. What's more, she
says, she can drive the 15 minutes from her house to
the salon and know a family on almost every block
where she could stop and ask for help if she ever
needed it.
"We are good people here," she says.
Over the past two weeks, this city of 54,000, once
known for its vast celery fields, is now known as the
place where an unarmed 17-year-old black teen
walking home from the store with a bag of candy in his
pocket was shot and killed by a neighborhood watch
volunteer.
Trayvon Martin died on Feb. 26. Police did not arrest
the shooter, George Zimmerman, 28. Zimmerman is
white and Hispanic.
The Orlando Sentinel reported Sunday that two voice
identification experts it contacted said the person
overheard on a 911 call that night was not
Zimmerman, who told police he was the one
screaming for help. Martin's mother says it was her
son's voice.
As Trayvon's family, activists, celebrities and ordinary
folks across the country call for Zimmerman's arrest,
the community has been overwhelmed with news
trucks, reporters, high-profile civil rights leaders
including Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and
thousands of protesters. Another rally was held
Sunday in Miami.
At a meeting with city commissioners March 26,
Sharpton warned that Sanford risks becoming the 21st
century's Selma or Birmingham, two Southern cities
that became synonymous with racial hate during the
1960s civil rights movement.
But residents here say the comparison is unfair.
"Sanford is not a racist town, it's just not," says Nancy
Kruckemyer, 57, who is white. "Everybody wants
justice."
As the investigation continues into the shooting, "I feel
there is a heaviness in town," Kruckemyer says.
Some black residents, too, say Sanford is no longer a
community with flagrant racial tension between black
and white residents. About a third of the city's
residents are black.
Pastor Valarie Houston agrees that the races generally
get along fine in Sanford. She says the tension that
exists sits squarely with the police department and
how it treats members of the black community.
"The police department is not fair to the
African-American community," she says. She says
police investigations are weak or non-existent when
black people are killed.
The Trayvon Martin case, she says, "is just one of
many."
At a community meeting with the NAACP last week,
more than a dozen families complained of unfair
treatment by the police. Their allegations ranged from
an officer hitting a 10-year-old boy to what they see as
a poor investigation and failure to arrest Zimmerman.
Those are the frustrations the Trayvon Martin case has
tapped, Houston says.
Thousands of protesters chanting "Justice for Trayvon"
marched to the police department Saturday in the
latest of several rallies here. The department did not
return phone calls requesting comment.
"It's a beautiful city and we have a lot of good qualities,
but if this is the publicity the city needs to straighten
things up as far as the law, then so be it," says
Lazarus Mitchell, 30, who coaches youngsters in a
football athletic league at Fort Mellon Park, the site of
one of the largest rallies for Trayvon. Mitchell, who is
black, has white and black children on his teams.
City manager Norton Bonaparte, Sanford's first black
213

manager, says he understands the anger of the black
community and wants the city to repair its trust.
He has called on the Justice Department, which is
investigating Trayvon's death, to look into other cases
where residents have raised concerns about police
treatment. He also wants people to contact the federal
officials with their complaints.
"We need to address this head-on," Bonaparte says.
"The shooting has had a polarizing effect … but it's
based on something that's been going on longer than
the Trayvon Martin case."
Bonaparte, a transplant from Topeka, is still getting to
know Sanford. He was on the job for five months when
Trayvon was killed. He was smitten when he came for
a job interview in July.
"I drove down this beautiful waterfront, people were out
walking, there were people of all races," he says. "It
was a weekday and they were all out enjoying
themselves. It seemed idyllic."
He doesn't want the negative publicity to shatter that
image and the city's small-town charm. The city has
hired a crisis management firm to help deal with the
fallout from the shooting.
"What happened between Trayvon Martin and George
Zimmerman was tragic, (but) these are two individuals
out of a community of 54,000. Let's put that in
perspective," Bonaparte says.
Nicholas Mcray, the city's economic development
director, who is white, says, "It's obviously a
tumultuous time."
He says the attention brought by the shooting "doesn't
help" efforts to build on the growth the city has seen in
the past decade. The population grew 40% since
2000.
Bonaparte and Mcray point to the downtown
redevelopment that rebuilt the river walk along the
southern edge of Lake Monroe, the refurbished park
across the river walk that hosts 90,000 people every
July 4 and the redeveloped downtown with its brick
sidewalks, benches and new facades.
The park, with new basketball courts, jungle gym and
USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
swing set, fountains and football field, is a hub every
day of the week.
Mcray says more redevelopment is under discussion
along the city's main thoroughfare, French Avenue, a
busy boulevard of check-cashing places, fast food and
take-out Chinese restaurants, boarded-up businesses
and vacant lots. The housing authority has met with
federal officials to figure out how to redevelop land
where now-closed housing projects sit in Goldsboro,
one of the city's historically black communities. That
part of town has boarded-up houses and storefronts
and homes in need of repair.
Mcray says the city strives to live up to its slogan, "The
Friendly City." The city even posted on its website a
map of downtown and places to stay and eat for
out-of-towners attending the rallies.
"I think the characterization of our community has not
been as broad as it truly is," he says. "We are a
welcoming, open and safe community."
Kruckemyer and family friend Hank Dieckhaus
discussed the case last week as they sat outside the
Taste of Thyme Café downtown.
Dieckhaus, who is white, moved to Sanford from
Philadelphia nine years ago. He says he's attended all
the meetings and rallies for Trayvon Martin. "I wanted
to go to show support," he says.
Still, he says Sanford bears no resemblance to the Jim
Crow towns of the Deep South.
"This is not 1965; this is not Selma, Alabama, or
Birmingham. This is Sanford, Fla., 2012, and we'll get
through this," says Dieckhaus, 64.
Yet the stigma of the case is strong.
Molly Meyerholtz, manager of The Treehouse Fine
Furniture and Antiques, which has been on First Street
about five years, says the Trayvon Martin case
exploded just at the end of the January-March tourist
season.
"It's very overwhelming," she says. "If the city of
Sanford wanted to put itself on the map, they certainly
didn't do it in the right way."
214

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Employers tie insurance to tests
Once a year, employees of the Swiss Village
Retirement Community in Berne, Ind., have a checkup
that will help determine how much they pay for health
coverage. Those who don't smoke, aren't obese and
whose blood pressure and cholesterol fall below
specific levels get to shave as much as $2,000 off their
annual health insurance deductibles.
At Chicago-based Jones Lang LaSalle, a real estate
firm, workers can earn up to $300 in cash for having a
physical and hitting certain medical goals, or
completing health coaching programs.
Gone are the days of just signing up for health
insurance and hoping you don't have to use it. Now,
more employees are being asked to roll up their
sleeves for medical tests — and to exercise,
participate in disease-management programs and quit
smoking to qualify for hundreds, even thousands of
dollars' worth of premium or deductible discounts.
Proponents say such plans offer people a financial
incentive to make healthier choices and manage
chronic conditions such as obesity, high blood
pressure and diabetes, which are driving up health
care costs in the USA. Even so, studies of the effect of
such policies on lifestyle changes are inconclusive.
And advocates for people with chronic health
conditions, such as heart disease and diabetes, fear
that tying premium costs directly to test results could
lead to discrimination.
MORE: Kaiser Health News
Employee reaction has also been mixed. "It's an
invasion of privacy," says Bradley Seff, 54, a court
reporter who in August 2010 filed a lawsuit against his
employer, Broward County, Fla., for introducing such a
plan.
Nonetheless, such plans appear to be the wave of the
future. Faced with crippling health care costs, the
number of employers embracing such programs
inched up from 49% in 2010 to 54% last year — and
more say they expect to do so soon, according to a
survey by consultants Aon Hewitt. Big-name
participants include insurer UnitedHealthcare, car
rental firm Hertz, postage meter maker Pitney Bowes
and media owner Gannett, owner of USA TODAY.
More employers are expected to adopt them starting in
2014, when the health law — if the Supreme Court
upholds it — would allow them to offer larger
incentives or penalties.
"We're seeing a big move in this direction driven by
employers' concern about rising health costs and their
sense that employee behavior has a lot to do with high
costs," says Kevin Volpp, a professor at the University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, who has studied
the use of such incentives.
Cost savings seen
Leaders at Swiss Village credit their 8-year-old
wellness program, along with a high-deductible
insurance plan and an on-site fitness center, with
slowing health care cost increases. Indeed, workers
saw no increase in premiums from 2005 to 2011.
"We continue to embrace what we're doing," says
Daryl Martin, executive director of the non-profit
organization. Even so, a few high-cost medical issues
among its 230 covered employees and their
dependents last year caused Swiss Village to raise
employee costs 14% this year. What's important,
Martin says, is that the company's approach keeps
health "at the forefront of what people are thinking
about."
Of the employers who offer such programs, about
one-third offer financial incentives to those who
undergo specific medical tests, according to the Aon
Hewitt survey. And 5% of those tie the financial
rewards or penalties to meeting specific medical-based
standards. The survey also found an expansion of
such tests is on the horizon: 57% of employers said
they planned to add incentives for spouses and
dependents in the next three to five years.
"A lot of costs come from spouses, but only 29% had
incentives for spouses," says Cathy Tripp, a senior
vice president at Aon.
Employers will still have to craft plans to comply with
federal and, in some cases, state requirements, Volpp
says. The programs must be voluntary — meaning an
employer can't require a worker to participate as a
condition of coverage — and the employer must offer a
"reasonable alternative" to qualify for the reward, or to
avoid the penalty for those who can't achieve the
goals.
But Dick Woodruff, vice president of federal relations
for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action
Network, worries that there's no definition of what a
reasonable alternative must include.
215

Some workers also complain that the programs are an
intrusion into their private lives.
"They portrayed it as voluntary, which it isn't, because
if you don't participate, they fine you every paycheck,"
says Seff, the former Broward employee who is suing
over the program. He has since retired on disability
with back and neck problems. "I don't think any
employer should do it."
In an effort to slow rising costs, Broward County in
2009 began asking workers to fill out a health
information form and have a finger-stick blood test
each year to check blood sugar and cholesterol levels,
according to court filings. Workers who declined were
docked $40 a month. Those who participated were
offered disease-management programs if they had
asthma, high blood pressure, diabetes, congestive
heart failure or kidney disease. The county stopped
docking those who declined to participate Jan. 1, 2011,
after Seff's lawsuit was filed, court documents show.
The lawsuit, which argues that the county's program
violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, is likely the
first of its kind in the nation, says Seff's attorney,
Daniel Levine in Boca Raton, Fla. Without ruling on
whether the wellness effort was voluntary, a federal
district court judge backed the county in April of last
year, saying the plan fell under provisions of the law
meant to protect bona fide benefit programs. The case
is now on appeal. Broward County attorneys did not
return requests for comment.
Some state lawmakers are also concerned about the
potential for discrimination. Colorado passed
legislation in 2010 that requires wellness programs to
be accredited, bars penalizing workers for not
participating or failing to meet a health standard — and
allows appeals if an employee is denied an alternative.
A similar bill was brought unsuccessfully in California
last year, according to a February report by
Georgetown University's Health Policy Institute.
Concern for consumers
While supporting wellness programs in general,
several patient advocacy groups warned the Obama
administration last March that additional consumer
protections are needed. Tying medical test results to
financial incentives or penalties in premiums or
deductibles could discriminate against some workers,
especially those who already have health problems,
the groups said.
"When you start increasing premiums or pumping up
the deductibles, you're making it more expensive and
USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
harder for people to access insurance," says the
Cancer Society's Woodruff, who adds that offering gift
cards or bonuses are a better way to reward people for
participation.
Employers argue, however, that since they're on the
hook for the bills, they can ask workers to take more
responsibility.
"House money, house rules," says Ken Sperling,
global health care practice leader at Aon Hewitt.
The first worker wellness programs, which began
about a decade ago, rewarded simple participation:
attending a health fair or filling out "health risk
assessments," with the worker perhaps receiving a
$25 gift card in return.
Today, many offer discounted premiums to workers
who meet standards related to blood pressure,
cholesterol and weight, with the value of those
discounts running between $30 and $60 a month, says
Jim Pshock, founder and CEO of Bravo Wellness in
Avon, Ohio. Bravo administers such programs for
about 220 employers nationwide, including Colorado
construction firm Oakwood Homes and Nashville's
Ardent Health Services.
Although employers may set specific goals — such as
a body mass index (BMI) below 30, the level
considered obese — many also reward achievement
of less daunting targets. One employer rewarded
workers if their test results didn't worsen, Pshock
says.
At Swiss Village, workers get $500 off their deductible
for each of these measures: not smoking, having a
BMI of 27.5 or less, a low-density lipoprotein
cholesterol level (LDL) of 130 milligrams per deciliter or
less, and blood pressure of 130/85 or less. LDL levels
above 129 are associated with higher risk of heart
disease, while blood pressure greater than 120/80 is
considered a risk factor for heart attack and stroke.
A second tier of awards allows employees who
approach those ranges to earn $250 per category. The
testing takes place at an on-site health fair or at a
doctor's office, with the results gathered by an
independent insurance firm that runs the company's
program.
The information is generally gathered by firms that run
wellness programs or insurance plans.
UnitedHealthcare, which offers its "Personal Rewards"
program to large, self-insured clients, says it does not
use the information to set premiums.
216

But do they work?
Given the available data, it's hard to parse how much
of the reported savings from such programs come from
improved health, and how much from the frequent
pairing of such programs with high-deductible policies.
"We just don't know how effective (incentives) are,"
Volpp says. There is pretty good evidence they help
smokers quit, he says, but less that they prompt
workers to lose weight and keep it off.
Volpp says the medical literature shows they work best
when participants have choices: get below a certain
BMI, or lose 5% of current body weight, for example.
And, he says, rewards should be immediate. "If you
want the employee to do a health assessment or
(medical) screening, you should give them the reward
right after they do it," Volpp says.
At Jones Lang LaSalle, workers who make a pledge —
on the honor system — that they don't smoke, or will
take a stop-smoking class, and achieve a healthy
weight, get 10% off their contribution toward insurance
premiums.
USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
In 2010, the firm added a cash bonus program,
offering $50 to workers who get a physical and another
$50 for every one of four medical tests they take:
weight, blood pressure, glucose and cholesterol, plus
an extra $50 if they do all the tests. If they meet
specified goals — or complete a coaching program —
they receive the money as a cash bonus. Spouses and
domestic partners are also eligible, says Howard
Futterman, senior vice president of benefits.
Last year, 65% of employees participated. While it's
early, he says, indications are the program is having
an impact on costs: Health spending rose 6% in 2010,
but only 3% in 2011.
"Our long-term goal is to make health and well-being
part of our culture and everyday values," Futterman
says. "When people start doing it naturally and you
don't have to pay them for it, that's when you know
you've succeeded."
217

USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
'Sanford is not a racist town'
SANFORD, Fla. – Thao Boyd, a Vietnamese immigrant
in this small city at the center of a national uproar over
racial profiling, wants people to know one thing about
her adopted community:
"Everybody knows Sanford now, but don't be scared
about Sanford," says Boyd, 37, who owns a nail salon
downtown. "Come visit us whenever you are ready."
In the 15 years that Boyd has lived here, she says, she
has never felt discriminated against. What's more, she
says, she can drive the 15 minutes from her house to
the salon and know a family on almost every block
where she could stop and ask for help if she ever
needed it.
PHOTOS: Thousands rally for Trayvon Martin
"We are good people here," she says.
Over the past two weeks, this city of 54,000, once
known for its vast celery fields, is now known as the
place where an unarmed 17-year-old black teen
walking home from the store with a bag of candy in his
pocket was shot and killed by a neighborhood watch
volunteer.
Trayvon Martin died on Feb. 26. Police did not arrest
the shooter, George Zimmerman, 28. Zimmerman is
white and Hispanic.
The Orlando Sentinel reported Sunday that two voice
identification experts it contacted said the person
overheard on a 911 call that night was not
Zimmerman, who told police he was the one
screaming for help. Martin's mother says it was her
son's voice.
As Trayvon's family, activists, celebrities and ordinary
folks across the country call for Zimmerman's arrest,
the community has been overwhelmed with news
trucks, reporters, high-profile civil rights leaders
including Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and
thousands of protesters. Another rally was held
Sunday in Miami.
At a meeting with city commissioners March 26,
Sharpton warned that Sanford risks becoming the 21st
century's Selma or Birmingham, two Southern cities
that became synonymous with racial hate during the
1960s civil rights movement.
But residents here say the comparison is unfair.
"Sanford is not a racist town, it's just not," says Nancy
Kruckemyer, 57, who is white. "Everybody wants
justice."
As the investigation continues into the shooting, "I feel
there is a heaviness in town," Kruckemyer says.
Some black residents, too, say Sanford is no longer a
community with flagrant racial tension between black
and white residents. About a third of the city's
residents are black.
Pastor Valarie Houston agrees that the races generally
get along fine in Sanford. She says the tension that
exists sits squarely with the police department and
how it treats members of the black community.
"The police department is not fair to the
African-American community," she says. She says
police investigations are weak or non-existent when
black people are killed.
The Trayvon Martin case, she says, "is just one of
many."
At a community meeting with the NAACP last week,
more than a dozen families complained of unfair
treatment by the police. Their allegations ranged from
an officer hitting a 10-year-old boy to what they see as
a poor investigation and failure to arrest Zimmerman.
Those are the frustrations the Trayvon Martin case has
tapped, Houston says.
Thousands of protesters chanting "Justice for Trayvon"
marched to the police department Saturday in the
latest of several rallies here. The department did not
return phone calls requesting comment.
"It's a beautiful city and we have a lot of good qualities,
but if this is the publicity the city needs to straighten
things up as far as the law, then so be it," says
Lazarus Mitchell, 30, who coaches youngsters in a
football athletic league at Fort Mellon Park, the site of
one of the largest rallies for Trayvon. Mitchell, who is
black, has white and black children on his teams.
City manager Norton Bonaparte, Sanford's first black
manager, says he understands the anger of the black
community and wants the city to repair its trust.
218

He has called on the Justice Department, which is
investigating Trayvon's death, to look into other cases
where residents have raised concerns about police
treatment. He also wants people to contact the federal
officials with their complaints.
"We need to address this head-on," Bonaparte says.
"The shooting has had a polarizing effect … but it's
based on something that's been going on longer than
the Trayvon Martin case."
Bonaparte, a transplant from Topeka, is still getting to
know Sanford. He was on the job for five months when
Trayvon was killed. He was smitten when he came for
a job interview in July.
"I drove down this beautiful waterfront, people were out
walking, there were people of all races," he says. "It
was a weekday and they were all out enjoying
themselves. It seemed idyllic."
He doesn't want the negative publicity to shatter that
image and the city's small-town charm. The city has
hired a crisis management firm to help deal with the
fallout from the shooting.
"What happened between Trayvon Martin and George
Zimmerman was tragic, (but) these are two individuals
out of a community of 54,000. Let's put that in
perspective," Bonaparte says.
Nicholas Mcray, the city's economic development
director, who is white, says, "It's obviously a
tumultuous time."
He says the attention brought by the shooting "doesn't
help" efforts to build on the growth the city has seen in
the past decade. The population grew 40% since
2000.
Bonaparte and Mcray point to the downtown
redevelopment that rebuilt the river walk along the
southern edge of Lake Monroe, the refurbished park
across the river walk that hosts 90,000 people every
July 4 and the redeveloped downtown with its brick
sidewalks, benches and new facades.
The park, with new basketball courts, jungle gym and
swing set, fountains and football field, is a hub every
day of the week.
USA Today/ - News, Seg, 02 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Mcray says more redevelopment is under discussion
along the city's main thoroughfare, French Avenue, a
busy boulevard of check-cashing places, fast food and
take-out Chinese restaurants, boarded-up businesses
and vacant lots. The housing authority has met with
federal officials to figure out how to redevelop land
where now-closed housing projects sit in Goldsboro,
one of the city's historically black communities. That
part of town has boarded-up houses and storefronts
and homes in need of repair.
Mcray says the city strives to live up to its slogan, "The
Friendly City." The city even posted on its website a
map of downtown and places to stay and eat for
out-of-towners attending the rallies.
"I think the characterization of our community has not
been as broad as it truly is," he says. "We are a
welcoming, open and safe community."
Kruckemyer and family friend Hank Dieckhaus
discussed the case last week as they sat outside the
Taste of Thyme Café downtown.
Dieckhaus, who is white, moved to Sanford from
Philadelphia nine years ago. He says he's attended all
the meetings and rallies for Trayvon Martin. "I wanted
to go to show support," he says.
Still, he says Sanford bears no resemblance to the Jim
Crow towns of the Deep South.
"This is not 1965; this is not Selma, Alabama, or
Birmingham. This is Sanford, Fla., 2012, and we'll get
through this," says Dieckhaus, 64.
Yet the stigma of the case is strong.
Molly Meyerholtz, manager of The Treehouse Fine
Furniture and Antiques, which has been on First Street
about five years, says the Trayvon Martin case
exploded just at the end of the January-March tourist
season.
"It's very overwhelming," she says. "If the city of
Sanford wanted to put itself on the map, they certainly
didn't do it in the right way."
219

03/04/2012

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
03/04/2012
Bizjournais - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Denver camping ban introduced, debated, 223
Bizjournais - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama predicts Supreme Court will uphold health care law, 224
Business Line - Opinion
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
No cap on rickshaws in Delhi: Supreme Court, 225
Diario La Prensa - Politica
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
El Colegio de Magistrados bonaerense reclamó a Scioli "políticas salariales de largo plazo", 226
El País - Internacional
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Mucho político y recuerdo a Tomas y Valiente, 227
El País - Internacional
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Pascual Sala afirma que los recortes "afectan" a los derechos fundamentales, 228
El País - Internacional
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Corte Penal Internacional
La Corte Penal Internacional no reconoce a Palestina como Estado, 230
El Universal - Política
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Derecho Constitucional
IFE invertirá 160 mdp en boletas, 231
Expresso OnLine Lisboa - Atualidade
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Tribunal Superior de Justiça
Ajuda Externa: 'Troika' diz que Governo está em falta por adiar venda da particpação da CGD na Galp ,
232
Financial Times Deutschland - Nachrichten
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Verfassungsgericht
Röttgen handelt in akuter Wahlpanik, 233
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung - Politik
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Europäischen Gerichtshof
Frauenquote durch die Hintertür , 234
La Nacion Chile - Portada Noticias
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Corte Suprema obliga a Banco Santander a indemnizar con $20 millones a cliente por mal manejo de
su cuenta, 235
La Nacion Chile - Portada Noticias
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Corte Internacional de Justicia
Perú: Demanda contra Chile es una "opción de paz", 236
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Catholic university in Ohio ends birth-control coverage, 237
221

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Government plans to sue Arizona sheriff for targeting Latinos, 239
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Appeals court upholds California affirmative action ban, 240
The Economic Times - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Supreme Court seeks details of 18 mercy pleas before President, 241
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Looking Ahead, Republicans Examine Options in Health Care Fight, 242
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Mayor Defends Withholding Report on 911 System, 244
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Column: Shareholders should know about political donations, 246
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama: GOP budget 'a prescription for decline', 247
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Column: Martin death protests mix the old and the new, 249
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama defends Supreme Court remarks, 250
222

Bizjournais/ - News, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Denver camping ban introduced, debated
Denver City Councilman Albus Brooks introduced a
controversial city measure Tuesday that would prohibit
unauthorized camping in public and private places,
drawing an overflow crowd of homeless advocates,
media and downtown business representatives.
Brooks, District 8, urged everyone in the room for a
council committee meeting “to take a deep breath”
before stating his case for the proposed law, saying
the number of homeless people sleeping on Denver’s
streets – especially the 16th Street Mall – has
increased to an “alarming” level.
“This is needed from a public safety standpoint and
from the standpoint of protecting the public right of
way,” Brooks said to the council’s Land Use,
Transportation & Infrastructure Committee (LUTI).
In response to the many people who were wearing
orange “Homes Not Handcuffs” buttons, Brooks said:
“This is not about arresting individuals. Understand the
facts.”
He pointed to provisions in the law that would require
police to first contact the person suspected of
unauthorized camping, assess their needs then point
them to services or shelters that would address those
needs.
There’s also language in the law requiring officers to
first issue a verbal warning, then a written one, before
any citations are issued.
“We need to protect our commercial district,” Brooks
said. “I don’t apologize for that at all.”
Assistant City Attorney David Broadwell said there are
similar laws in Boulder, Colorado Springs and Aspen.
The Boulder law was upheld in District Court last year
and the state Supreme Court declined to take the
case.
He said the warnings “go the extra mile” and are
unusual for existing city laws, where an officer can cite
a violator without such warnings.
The proposed law “does not prohibit merely sleeping,
so dozing on a park bench, per se, is not prohibited,”
he said. It also would allow for such events as Sports
Authority’s “SNIAGRAB” sale that typically draws
shoppers to camp on the sidewalk. Private property
owners would also be able to grant permission for
outdoor camping.
“Laws should regulate behavior, not status,” Broadwell
said. “This ordinance is about behavior, not [the]
status” of being homeless.
Though public comment is not usually allowed at
committee meetings, Chairwoman Jeanne Robb
allowed two representatives from each side two
minutes each to address the committee, which was
attended by almost every councilmember, not just
committee members.
John Parvensky, president of Colorado Coalition for
the Homeless, opposed the measure, saying it would
criminalize homelessness. But if a law is passed, he
urged the introduction of language that would prevent
an arrest or citation if the person had no other place to
sleep.
“No one should be forced into a choice of being
arrested if they have no where else to go because of
the lack of available shelters,” he said.
Downtown Denver Partnership Inc.’s Executive
Director Tamara Door said the downtown business
community needs help addressing the problem of
people sleeping on the streets.
“This has a severe impact on businesses and the
perception of our community,” Door said.
She said, after verifying with the Denver police, that
not one citation has been issued for those in violation
of the “sit and lie” law, enacted in 2005, which prevents
people from doing so on public right-of-ways between
the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m.
The proposed law is still in draft form and will be heard
before the LUTI committee, and the Health and Human
Services Committee, before going to the full City
Council, April 30 — if it is passed by LUTI.
223

Bizjournais/ - News, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama predicts Supreme Court will
uphold health care law
In his first public comments about the case since it
went to the Supreme Court last week, President
Barack Obama predicted Monday that the Supreme
Court will uphold his health care law, The Wall Street
Journal reported.
Obama also said that overturning the law would be a
prime example of judicial overreach.
224

Business Line/ - Opinion, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
No cap on rickshaws in Delhi: Supreme
Court
When there is no cap on number of motorised
vehicles, equally there can be no cap on number of
rickshaws plying in Delhi, held the Supreme Court.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) had frozen the
number of rickshaws at 89,000 and refused to give
fresh licences thus making the remaining 4.91 lakh
rickshaw pullers potential violators of law attracting
penalty ranging from Rs 5 to Rs 50 a day.
Sidelining the poor
The apex court while upholding the Delhi High Court
verdict quashing such a ceiling, graphically called the
MCD move an attempt to elbow out the poor and make
room for the rich man's car.
The court pointedly asked if the Government would
impound the licence of a drunken driver who mows
down people and put him behind bars instead of
depriving a poor man of his legitimate livelihood.
225

Diario La Prensa/ - Politica, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
El Colegio de Magistrados bonaerense
reclamó a Scioli "políticas salariales de
largo plazo"
Los magistrados señalaron que la situación actual
"afecta el principio de intangibilidad, protegido por la
Constitución Nacional como elemento ineludible de
preservación de la independencia judicial".
LA PLATA- El Colegio de Magistrados y Funcionarios
del Poder Judicial bonaerense expresó hoy su
"inquietud" por la falta de respuesta del gobierno de
Daniel Scioli "a la construcción de una política salarial
de largo plazo" para el sistema judicial "que otorgue
previsibilidad".
A través de un comunicado, expresó que "se verifica
desde hace años en nuestro país un deterioro
considerable de las remuneraciones de los
magistrados y funcionarios", que a juicio de los
colegiados "genera incertidumbre a todos los agentes
del Poder Judicial", lo que afecta "inevitablemente el
funcionamiento del servicio de justicia".
Por eso, exigieron al Poder Ejecutivo provincial que
formule "propuestas tendientes a la construcción de
una política salarial de largo plazo para el Poder
Judicial que otorgue previsibilidad al sistema y
ofrezca una solución superadora de la actual situación
de discusiones coyunturales de recomposición
salarial".
Finalmente, los magistrados señalaron que la
situación actual "afecta el principio de intangibilidad,
protegido por la Constitución Nacional como
elemento ineludible de preservación de la
independencia judicial".
Ante esto, pidieron "a las autoridades del gobierno de
nuestra provincia resolver de manera rápida y
satisfactoria esta situación".
Los trabajadores judiciales de la provincia vienen
realizando medidas de fuerza desde hace semanas
que afectan en trabajo en los tribunales, en el marco
de una dura negociación salarial y que mañana
derivará en un nuevo paro por 24 horas.
226

El País/ - Internacional, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Mucho político y recuerdo a Tomas y
Valiente
Sala reconoció la condición “de mediterráneo” antes
de remontarse a la revolución francesa para incidir en
que en la declaración de los derechos del hombre
El presidente del Tribunal Constitucional, Pascual
Sala, empezó su intervención recordando cuando era
estudiante de Derecho “en este mismo edificio”, la
sede histórica de la Universitat de València, entre
1952 y 1957. Aquí, cerca del claustro de la Nau,
presidido por el “famoso exiliado español Luis Vives”,
conoció a Francisco Tomás y Valiente, “valenciano
ilustre asesinado en 1996”, que fue también
presidente del TC. Entre el público, le escuchaba el
también valenciano Tomás Vives, que fue
vicepresidente del alto tribunal.
La portavoz del Consejo General del Poder Judicial,
Gabriela Bravo, se había extendido previamente en la
valencianidad de Sala, en su carácter apasionado y su
afición por los viajes, la música, el arte y los toros,
además de resaltar su compromiso ya en la lucha
contra la dictadura del “primer magistrado no de
carrera” (el resto han sido catedráticos de
Constitucional) que preside el TC.
Sala le tomó la palabra y reconoció esa condición de
valenciano y “de mediterráneo” antes de remontarse a
la revolución francesa para incidir en que en la
declaración de los derechos del hombre ya se
reflejaba que si no había efectividad de tales derechos
a través de un poder judicial independiente, de poco
serviría la división de poderes que consagraba.
La intervención de Sala convocó a numerosos
políticos y representantes de la judicatura y de la
abogacía. Asistieron Máximo Buch Torralva, consejero
de Economía, Industria y Comercio; Jorge Cabré Rico,
consejero de Justicia y Bienestar Social; Mariano
Vivancos, director general del AVAP; el diputado y
nuevo líder del PSPV-PSOE, Ximo Puig; el diputado
nacional socialista, Ciprià Ciscar; el senador y
expresidente de la Generalitat, Joan Lerma; la
senadora socialista Carmen Alborch; el exsecretario
general del PSPV-PSOE, Joan Romero; el
exconsejero de Medio Ambiente por el PSOE Emèrit
Bono: o el miembro del Consell Valencià de Cultura,
Vicente González Móstoles.
La presidenta del Tribunal Superior de Justícia de la
Comunidad Valenciana, Pilar de la Oliva Marrades, la
fiscal jefe de la Audiencia de Valencia, Teresa Gisbert,
también asistieron al acto convocado por Claustre
Obert, al igual que la empresaria Agnés Noguera o
varios miembros de Salvem el Cabanyal. También
representantes del equipo rectoral como Jorge
Hermosilla, vicerrector de Participación y Projección
Territorial, el delegado de Estudiantes, Daniel
González, y la decana de la Facultad de Derecho,
María Elena Olmos.
Antes del acto, en declaraciones a los medios al ser
preguntado sobre cómo pueden afectar los
Presupuestos del Estado al Ministerio de Justicia,
Bravo declaró que se rebajará en torno a un 6% y
agregó que “teniendo en cuenta el contexto
económico y, sobre todo, que la media de reducción
en otros ministerios es de un 15% era una noticia
esperada”.
En su opinión, “lo importante es seguir trabajando y
buscar las fórmulas y los procedimientos que nos
permitan optimizar los recursos que tenemos: una
adecuada organización judicial y mejores instrumentos
para que los jueces”.
227

El País/ - Internacional, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Pascual Sala afirma que los recortes
"afectan" a los derechos fundamentales
El presidente del Constitucional espera que la
repercusión en los servicios básicos "se haya
estudiado"
Consulta todos los detalles de los Presupuestos
Los recortes presupuestarios en los servicios básicos
“indudablemente afectan a los derechos
fundamentales” porque existe “una relación” entre
estos y las prestaciones que el Estado realiza a los
ciudadanos. “Su repercusión, supongo que se habrá
estudiado y que podrá calibrarse en lo sucesivo”,
continuó el presidente del Tribunal Constitucional
(TC), Pascual Sala. “Yo no he estudiado los
presupuestos, no me ha dado tiempo, y tardaré
bastante en estudiarlos porque no es mi cometido,
pero sin duda alguna tiene relación, por supuesto”,
añadió.
Pascual Sala no eludió ninguna pregunta de los
periodistas antes de entrar en el paraninfo de la
Universitat de València para impartir una conferencia
que versaba, precisamente, sobre la protección
jurisdiccional de los derechos fundamentales, en el
seno de Claustre Obert, espacio de debate creado por
el EL PAÍS y la institución académica que, en esta
ocasión, contó con la colaboración de la Asociación
para la Transparencia la Integridad la Gobernanza
(ATIG).
Después, en el coloquio, también se mostró muy
solícito ante el numeroso público. El rector de la
Universitat, Esteban Morcillo, ejerció de anfitrión y la
portavoz del Consejo General del Poder Judicial
(CGPJ), Gabriela Bravo, presentó a su “maestro y
amigo”.
En su intervención, el jurista valenciano, de 76 años y
que lleva 48 ejerciendo, desgranó las garantías frente
a la ley y los poderes públicos que contempla la
Constitución, antes de entrar en un análisis más
pormenorizado de algunas sentencias del alto tribunal
particularmente sensibles y polémicas con la
vulneración de los derechos fundamentales.
No fue casual la elección de los casos ni la defensa
que hizo Sala de la protección de los derechos
fundamentales ante cualquier otra circunstancia.
Citó sentencias del Tribunal Constitucional sobre el
derecho a la huelga de los trabajadores de una
publicación; sobre el deber de entrar a valorar si ha
habido una desprotección en un caso de torturas;
sobre el derecho a la libertad de expresión frente al
derecho al honor, cuyo conflicto debe resolver el
Constitucional; sobre la conculcación de un derecho
fundamental como la libertad religiosa e ideológica en
los casos de profesores de religión, que son pagados
por la administración pero son nombrados por la
Iglesia, y no fueron renovados en su trabajo; sobre el
derecho a la participación, “contenido esencial que no
puede ser negado por el legislador democrático”, de
una agrupación política en asuntos públicos; o sobre
el derecho de amparo que fue restringido por una ley
de 2007 para no convertir al Constitucional en un
tribunal de casación. “Los derechos fundamentales no
pueden tener restricciones legislativas”, concluyó el
jurista.
“¿Entiende que España está a un nivel homologable al
espacio europeo?”, preguntó Andrés Boix, profesor de
Derecho Administrativo, tras citar “jurisprudencia
insatisfactoria” como la doctrina Parot. “Sí”, respondió
Sala, “puede haber alguna discrepancia con el
Tribunal de Derechos Humanos, pero no de
constitucionalidad”. El presidente del ATIG, Manuel
Lázaro, le inquirió sobre la ley de Transparencia. Sala
manifestó no haberla estudiado y sugirió que el
derecho a ser informado por los poderes públicos se
debe regular por la propia administración y que ya hay
mecanismos para combatir su conculcación.
Ana, “una ciudadana en paro”, hizo referencia al
“cáncer” de la “mentira” de los políticos y de los
poderes públicos y preguntó si el Constitucional puede
exigir responsabilidades. Sala contestó que hay
número de casos en los que colisionan el derecho a la
libertad de expresión y el derecho al honor y que el
“procedimiento democrático” para cambiar a los
políticos son “las elecciones”. “La mentira es
reprobable pero es un concepto relativo, no absoluto”,
agregó. Maribel Doménech se interesó por cuál es
“tiempo prudencial” en que el alto tribunal dictará
sentencia definitiva sobre El Cabanyal. “A la mayor
228

evedad posible”, afirmó Sala. E incidió en que se
salvaguardan los derechos de los ciudadanos al
suspenderse el plan municipal.
Un ciudadano preguntó por su recurso de amparo ante
el TC de dos sentencias contradictorias sobre un pleito
de 1986. “Comprendo su tribulación. Hay una
vulneración de derechos, pero desconozco las
resoluciones”, le respondió. Tomás, estudiante de
Filosofía, cuestionó si es justo que “un chabolista sufra
El País/ - Internacional, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
una condena amplia por robar para comer mientras
que políticos y empresarios salen mejor parados”.
“Hace supuesto de la cuestión, parte de que se está
tratando con injusticia al chabolista y al de cuello alto.
Dígame los casos concretos”, apuntó Sala. “¿La
justicia es igual para todos?”, preguntó una estudiante
de periodismo. “La justicia es igual para todos; si no,
no sería justicia”, afirmó.
229

El País/ - Internacional, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Corte Penal Internacional)
La Corte Penal Internacional no reconoce
a Palestina como Estado
El fiscal jefe rechaza el caso porque la ONU solo
reconoce a los palestinos como observadores
La Corte Penal Internacional (CPI) no investigará los
presuntos crímenes de guerra cometidos en la guerra
de Gaza (2008-2009) porque la Autoridad Palestina no
es un Estado reconocido por Naciones Unidas. Luis
Moreno Ocampo, fiscal jefe de la Corte, ha resuelto
que “compete a la ONU, o bien al resto de países
miembros de la propia CPI, decidir si Palestina es un
Estado en toda regla”. De hacerlo, la Autoridad
Palestina podría firmar el Estatuto de Roma, acta
fundacional de la Corte. En tal caso, ahora hipotético,
la fiscalía sí podría aceptar la petición remitida en
2011 por la propia Autoridad para estudiar “los actos
violentos cometidos en territorio palestino desde
2002”. Ese año se puso en marcha la Corte.
Nada más conocer la decisión, el ministerio de
Asuntos Exteriores de Israel ha emitido un
comunicado donde aplaude la resolución. “La CPI no
tiene jurisdicción para ver este caso”, han dicho sus
portavoces, que han mostrado dudas sobre algunos
de los argumentos del fiscal sobre el futuro palestino.
“El artículo 12 de Estatuto de Roma señala que solo
un Estado puede señalar la competencia de la Corte
para que esta acepte un caso. Naciones Unidas
también puede remitirlo. Pero si hay dudas sobre el
estatuto legal del que pide una investigación, se toma
como punto de referencia las resoluciones de la
Asamblea General de la ONU”, ha señalado la CPI.
La situación palestina es compleja porque la Autoridad
Palestina ha sido reconocida como Estado, de forma
bilateral, por más de un centenar de Gobiernos y
organizaciones internacionales. Para Naciones
Unidas, la Organización para la Liberación de
Palestina (OLP) es un observador. La Asamblea
General así lo acredita, pero el Consejo de Seguridad
sigue sin pronunciarse sobre la posibilidad de admitir a
Palestina como Estado. Si así fuera, Israel ha dejado
claro que nunca firmaría un acuerdo de paz para la
región.
Para Estados Unidos, dispuesto a apoyar el proceso
de paz en Oriente Medio, es políticamente imposible
abandonar a Israel. Por eso ha dicho que vetará,
desde el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU, la
admisión de Palestina como Estado.
230

El Universal/ - Política, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Derecho Constitucional)
IFE invertirá 160 mdp en boletas
nayeli.cortes@eluniversal.com.mx
El IFE invertirá más de 160 millones de pesos en la
impresión de más de 248 millones de boletas a utilizar
en el proceso electoral federal 2012.
Para su producción, Talleres Gráficos de México
adquirió una nueva rotativa capaz de imprimir 55 mil
boletas por hora.
Ayer, el presidente del instituto, Leonardo Valdés,
encabezó la ceremonia de producción de boletas y
exhortó a los ciudadanos a votar.
"La gobernabilidad democrática descansa en el
ejercicio de un derecho constitucional para que la
renovación de los poderes públicos sea pacífica,
periódica y auténtica", afirmó Valdés Zurita.
El consejero Alfredo Figueroa rechazó que el no
ejercicio del voto sea la vía para el cambio y aclaró
que frente al escenario de violencia, el sufragio libre
siempre será la opción para cambiar por la vía
pacífica.
"Son muchas y entendibles las razones de diversas
comunidades respecto al rechazo al voto como
mecanismo de transformación, pero no es a su
margen como la historia nos ha enseñado que
podemos cambiar nuestras condiciones por la vía
pacífica? No basta con votar para avanzar
democráticamente, pero no hacerlo es un mecanismo
desfavorecedor de las condiciones de desarrollo
político", aseguró.
Seguridad en las boletas
El IFE pagó 82 millones de pesos a la empresa
Papelera Chihuahua por la producción de mil 800
toneladas de papel seguridad, materia prima para
producir las boletas. Esta cifra se eleva a más de 160
millones de pesos al sumar lo pagado a Talleres
Gráficos de México por la impresión.
Como medidas de seguridad, este papel contiene
fibrillas ópticas y una marca de agua con el emblema
del Instituto Federal Electoral.
La boleta como tal incluye cuatro medidas adicionales:
textos microimpresos, imagen latente (texto
observable sólo con un decodificador), tinta invisible y
caracteres especiales.
Por cada tipo de elección (presidente, diputados y
senadores) se producirán 82 millones 678 mil 860
millones de boletas, cuya impresión concluirá el 31 de
mayo.
El Ejército estará a cargo de su resguardo durante su
producción y traslado a todas las entidades.
231

Expresso OnLine Lisboa / - Atualidade, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Tribunal Superior de Justiça)
Ajuda Externa: 'Troika' diz que Governo
está em falta por adiar venda da
particpação da CGD na Galp
Lisboa, 03 abr (Lusa) -- A Comissão Europeia
considera que o Governo está em falha no acordo
feito com a 'troika' e com as decisões do Tribunal de
Justiça Europeu ao decidir adiar a venda da
participação da Caixa Geral de Depósitos na Galp.
No relatório sobre a terceira avaliação do programa da
'troika' para Portugal, a Comissão Europeia diz que o
"Governo decidiu adiar a venda da participação de um
por cento" da Caixa Geral de Depósitos na Galp,
"mantendo assim uma situação de direitos especiais
do Estado".
Neste sentido, a Comissão Europeia sublinha que "o
requisito do MoU (Memorando de Entendimento) não
foi cumprido e a decisão de 10 de novembro do
Tribunal de Justiça Europeu não foi respeitada".
232

Financial Times Deutschland/ - Nachrichten, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Verfassungsgericht)
Röttgen handelt in akuter Wahlpanik
Leitartikel Weil er auf Stimmenfang ist, fordert Norbert
Röttgen die Erhöhung der Pendlerpauschale. Dabei
müsste er als Bundesumweltminister radikaler handeln
- und ihre Abschaffung fordern.
Was müsste ein Bundesumweltminister, der diesen
Titel auch verdient, zur Pendlerpauschale sagen? Er
würde fordern, diese autoverkehrsfördernde
Subvention endlich abzuschaffen, um das Geld
sinnvoller zu verwenden. Doch Norbert Röttgen tut das
nicht. Der Christdemokrat führt sich lieber auf, wie sich
Piraten-Wähler etablierte Politiker vorstellen: Er
verspricht den Bürgern Nordrhein-Westfalens ein
Wahlgeschenk nach dem anderen, auf dass sie ihm
die Stimmenmehrheit bescheren mögen. Das mag
opportun sein. Glaubwürdig ist es nicht.
Nun wäre Röttgens Wahlpanik noch zu verschmerzen.
Aber er ist leider nicht der Einzige. Kurz vor zwei
Landtagswahlen soll die Pendlerpauschale dafür
herhalten, die Ausschläge beim Benzinpreis zu
kompensieren. Dabei ist sie dazu schlicht nicht
geeignet. Im Gegenteil, sie sollte abgeschafft werden.
Ein hoher Benzinpreis über Ostern ist in der Tat
ärgerlich, aber erklärlich. Die inländische Nachfrage
steigt nun mal vor Feiertagen, und damit auch der
Preis. Vor allem aber ist der Ölpreis auf einem
Rekordhoch, wegen der verbesserten Konjunktur in
den USA und China sowie den politischen
Spannungen mit dem Iran. An solchen
Marktmechanismen kann eine Erhöhung der
Pendlerpauschale nichts ändern.
Kurzfristig ist sie nicht einzuführen, dafür müssen die
Gesetze geändert und Verwaltungsvorschriften
erarbeitet werden. Vor allem aber müssen die Ausfälle
im Bundesetat berechnet und kompensiert werden.
Das geht nicht über Nacht. Ob die hohen Benzinpreise
aber so lange so hoch wie jetzt bleiben, ist nicht klar.
Und langfristig wäre eine Erhöhung nicht sinnvoll und
sogar schädlich. Denn wenn sich der Ölpreis auf
hohem Niveau stabilisiert, sollte dies der Staat nicht
einfach kompensieren. Er muss vielmehr Anreize
setzen, die Benzinabhängigkeit zu reduzieren, durch
steuerliche Förderung verbrauchsarmer Antriebe.
Die Pendlerpauschale erreicht das Gegenteil: Sie
belohnt Angestellte dafür, dass sie sich fern ihrer
Arbeit ein Haus im Grünen suchen oder aus
Bequemlichkeit auf das Umziehen wegen einer neuen
Stelle verzichten. Damit wird ein Zersiedlungsprozess
gefördert, der infrastrukturpolitisch wie umweltpolitisch
unsinnig ist - und auch noch jährlich 4,4 Mrd. Euro
kostet.
Die Pauschale sollte deshalb abgeschafft werden,
gerade jetzt, inmitten des Aufschwungs. Sie mag eine
Institution sein, aber sie besitzt keinen
Verfassungsrang. Das Bundesverfassungsgericht
hatte eine Neuregelung 2008 nur verworfen, weil diese
handwerklich schlecht und nicht schlüssig und nur für
die Einnahmesteigerung erfolgt war.
Die Pendlerpauschale ersatzlos zu streichen dagegen
wäre konsequent. Das einzugestehen erfordert aber
mehr Ehrlichkeit und Glaubwürdigkeit, als so manche
Politiker im Wahlkampf aufbringen.
233

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung/ - Politik, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Europäischen Gerichtshof )
Frauenquote durch die Hintertür
Für Frauen steigen die Chancen in die
Führungsgremien aufzurücken, denn das
Vergaberecht setzt die Unternehmen unter Druck.
Aber ist das rechtens?
Von Caroline Freisfeld
Plötzlich könnte es mit der Frauenquote in
Führungsgremien von Unternehmen ganz schnell
gehen. Denn das Auswärtige Amt hat herausgefunden,
dass Deutschland Handelsbeschränkungen drohen,
wenn sich auf den Leitungsebenen der Unternehmen
nichts ändert. Die Aufregung über das Gutachten ist
groß.
Die Rede ist hier nicht von Handelsembargos, wie sie
Staaten wie Iran oder Nordkorea treffen. Vielmehr
könnte Deutschland Opfer der normativen Kraft des
Faktischen werden. Immer mehr Mitgliedstaaten der
EU haben Vergaberichtlinien, wonach öffentliche
Aufträge nur an Unternehmen vergeben werden
dürfen, die einen angemessenen Anteil weiblicher
Führungskräfte aufweisen.
Sind bei Bietertreffen künftig „Setcards“ gefragt?
Geschlechterquoten für Führungsgremien gibt es
bereits in Belgien, Frankreich, Italien, den
Niederlanden und in Spanien, schreiben die Beamten.
Bevor also demnächst die öffentliche Hand etwa in
Frankreich europaweit ausgeschriebene Aufträge an
Siemens, Bosch oder Bilfinger vergibt, müssten diese
erstmal offenbaren, wie sie es mit den Frauen halten.
Schon werden Gedanken an hübsch gestaltete
Unternehmensprospekte mit Bildern voller lachender
Businessfrauen wach oder an Unternehmen, die zu
den Bietertreffen künftig „Setcards“ mitbringen, die
Fotomappen, die Models bei Castings dabeihaben.
Auch in Nordrhein-Westfalen ist ein Gesetz auf dem
Weg
Aber nicht nur in Auslandssachverhalten wird der
Hebel des Vergaberechts angesetzt. Kürzlich wurde
bekannt, dass das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen nur noch
mit Dienstleistungsunternehmen zusammenarbeiten
will, die sich ausreichend der Förderung des
unterrepräsentierten Geschlechts verschrieben
haben.
Aufträge der öffentlichen Hand wird es dann zwischen
Rhein und Weser nur noch geben, wenn sich die
Unternehmen zur Frauenförderung und zur
Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Beruf verpflichten.
Diese Vorgaben im neuen nordrhein-westfälischen
Tariftreue- und Vergabegesetz gelten ab 20
Beschäftigten und einer Auftragssumme von 50 000
Euro, bei Bauleistungen ab 150 000 Euro. Das Gesetz
tritt im Mai in Kraft.
Sind solche Regelungen erlaubt?
Clemens Antweiler, Fachanwalt für Verwaltungsrecht
in Düsseldorf, hält die Festsetzung solcher
„vergabefremden Kriterien“ jedoch für unzulässig. Bei
Rechtsanwaltskanzleien fehle zum Beispiel ein
sachlicher Zusammenhang zwischen einer
Frauenquote und der Vergabe von
Rechtsberatungsleistungen, rügt Antweiler in einer
juristischen Fachzeitschrift. Anwaltskanzleien sind
ebenfalls von dem nordrhein-westfälischen
Vergabegesetz betroffen, wenn sie ihre Dienste der
dortigen öffentlichen Hand anbieten wollen.
“Der Streit um solche vergabefremden Kriterien
schwelt schon lange“, sagt der Experte Martin
Büdenbender von der Kanzlei Leinemann in Köln.
Dabei gehe es immer um die Frage, wofür das
Vergaberecht eigentlich da ist und ob man es mit
solchen sozialen Zielsetzungen überfrachten darf.
Aus Büdenbenders Sicht ist die Sache aber relativ
klar: „Nach derzeitiger Gesetzeslage und auch der
Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs
müssen Bieter diese Vorgaben akzeptieren. Immerhin
ist die Förderung der Gleichstellung von Mann und
Frau als Staatsziel im Grundgesetz verankert und
findet sich auch in den europäischen Verträgen.“
Allerdings müssten öffentliche Auftraggeber die
Kriterien mit Maß anwenden, sagt der Jurist. Wenn in
einer Branche aus objektiven Gründen nur wenige
Frauen arbeiteten, dann dürfe das nicht den
Unternehmen angelastet werden. „Unmögliches kann
nicht gefordert werden.“ Wer sich ungerecht behandelt
fühlt, muss gegen die Vergabeentscheidung vor
Gericht ziehen.
234

La Nacion Chile/ - Portada Noticias, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Corte Suprema obliga a Banco Santander
a indemnizar con $20 millones a cliente
por mal manejo de su cuenta
Fallo estableció la responsabilidad de esta entidad por
una serie de incumplimientos, como cobros excesivos
en cuotas de un crédito hipotecario, recargos en los
fondos, protestos injustificados y envío de
antecedentes a los boletines comerciales, entre otros.
La Corte Suprema condenó al Banco Santander a
pagar una indemnización de $20.000.000 a Germán
Olivi Meléndez, un cliente que sufrió graves
incumplimientos en el manejo de una cuenta corriente
y un crédito hipotecario.
En fallo unánime (causa rol 2560-2011), los ministros
de la Primera Sala Adalis Oyarzún, Sergio Muñoz,
Juan Araya, Guillermo Silva y Carlos Cerda (suplente),
condenaron a la entidad financiera a indemnizar "por
el daño moral provocado por el incumplimiento de una
relación contractual", informó el Poder Judicial.
FALLO
El fallo ratificó la sentencia del Segundo Juzgado Civil
de Santiago, confirmada por la Corte de Apelaciones
de Santiago, que estableció la responsabilidad de este
banco por una serie de incumplimientos, como cobros
excesivos en cuotas de un crédito hipotecario,
recargos en los fondos, protestos injustificados, envío
de antecedentes a los boletines comerciales, entre
otros.
Según el fallo, el Banco Santander tuvo un
"comportamiento irregular" en el tratamiento de los
fondos del cliente, especialmente en el "cobro de
dividendos hipotecarios inexistentes imputados a
dineros destinados al pago de cheques, los que
resultaron protestados; el cargo de comisiones por
protestos y sobregiros; el cobro de una cuota de
contribuciones no debida, y el descuento de una suma
determinada de dinero de propiedad del actor para
hacerse pago de un crédito que no se encontraba
impago y del cual tampoco era el deudor principal".
Esto fue calificado por el tribunal como un "actuar
negligente y descuidado del banco que deviene en un
incumplimiento del contrato de cuenta corriente, por
cuanto contravino la obligación principal que éste le
imponía, cual era debitar correctamente las cargas y
fondos del actor, incumplimiento al cual le atribuyen
culpa o negligencia".
235

La Nacion Chile/ - Portada Noticias, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Corte Internacional de Justicia)
Perú: Demanda contra Chile es una
"opción de paz"
Canciller Roncagliolo declaró que el litigio en La Haya
muestra como dos países resuelven sus diferencias
en el marco del derecho internacional y señaló que
esperan el incio de la fase oral "con serenidad,
prudencia y confianza".
El canciller de Perú, Rafael Roncagliolo, afirmó que la
demanda presentada por su país ante la Corte
Internacional de Justicia de La Haya para que ese
tribunal establezca los límites marítimos con Chile es
una "opción de paz".
Roncagliolo declaró a los periodistas que este litigio
muestra como dos países resuelven sus diferencias
de forma pacífica y en el marco del derecho
internacional.
Aseguró, en ese sentido, que los argumentos que
tiene Perú le permitirán afrontar la fase oral del
proceso, que comenzará en diciembre próximo, "con
serenidad, prudencia y confianza, al margen de toda
campaña mediática".
Roncagliolo se reunió este lunes en privado con los
miembros de la bancada del partido gobernante Gana
Perú y con los integrantes de la bancada opositora de
Alianza por el Gran Cambio para informarles de los
pormenores del proceso.
El canciller enfatizó, sin embargo, que los
pronunciamientos vinculados al tema "son
responsabilidad del canciller y del Agente ante la
Corte Internacional de Justicia", Allan Wagner.
Perú presentó en 2008 una demanda ante La Haya
con el argumento de que los límites marítimos no han
sido establecidos, aunque Chile asegura que existen
dos tratados bilaterales firmados en los años
cincuenta del siglo pasado que para los peruanos se
refieren solo a la pesca.
La demanda de Perú pide establecer la frontera
marítima en una línea equidistante a las costas de
ambos países, con lo que obtendría 35.000 kilómetros
cuadrados de mar que hasta ahora están bajo
jurisdicción chilena.
236

Reuters General/ - Article, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Catholic university in Ohio ends
birth-control coverage
(Reuters) - Xavier University, one of the oldest Roman
Catholic colleges in the United States, will cut off
birth-control coverage for its employees in July, a
move that has divided faculty members and students
on the Cincinnati campus.
The abrupt cancellation of insurance benefits at the
Jesuit university in Ohio comes amid a furious dispute
between the Obama administration and the nation's
Catholic bishops over contraception.
The administration has mandated that nearly all health
insurance plans provide free birth control by this
summer, with limited accommodations for religious
institutions that oppose contraception on moral
grounds. Top Catholic bishops have blasted that
mandate as an attack on religious freedom.
President Barack Obama's allies, in turn, have
accused the church of obstructing an important benefit
for women.
The controversy prompted Xavier President Michael
Graham, a Jesuit priest, to review the health insurance
plan offered to the university's 935 employees.
Graham announced this week in a letter to the faculty
that the plan will cease to cover contraception on July
1.
Some faculty members who relied on the coverage
said they were surprised and upset at the sudden end
to benefits, which could raise their out-of-pocket costs
for contraception by hundreds of dollars a year.
"It hadn't occurred to me that this would ever be an
issue," said Tina Davlin-Pater, an associate professor
in the department of sports studies.
Davlin-Pater, an athletic trainer who is not Catholic,
said she viewed the denial of birth control coverage as
an indication that "it's still OK to discriminate against
women in today's world."
Student Facebook pages crackled with similar
comments on Tuesday as word of the decision
circulated. Amid the anger, a few on campus stood up
to back the university administration.
'NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEN THERE'
"That coverage never should have been there in the
first place," said Meghan Savercool, a junior majoring
in theology. She called the move a crucial means of
"upholding the Jesuit Catholic identity of the
university."
The contraception mandate that sparked the Xavier
move is part of a broad push by the Obama
administration to provide free access for Americans to
a variety of preventive services, from mammograms to
childhood vaccinations to birth control.
The Catholic church considers artificial contraception a
sin - and does not view pregnancy as an ill to be
prevented - and the bishops have protested the
inclusion of contraception as a mandatory benefit.
Surveys have shown that an overwhelming majority of
Catholic women of reproductive age have used
contraception at some point, despite the church's
teaching.
The birth-control mandate is tied to Obama's broader
2010 healthcare law now under review by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
If the court strikes down the law, the mandate would
likely evaporate. If the law is upheld, nearly all plans
would have to cover contraception by August 1.
Religious institutions will have an extra year to comply,
though several have filed suit to try to block the
provision from ever taking effect.
The controversy has jolted some Catholic college
presidents into scrutinizing the health insurance plans
offered to their employees, hunting for potential
conflicts with church doctrine.
"Many times, contraception was covered and the
organization didn't even know it," said Michael O'Dea,
executive director of the Christus Medicus Foundation,
which promotes Christian healthcare.
It is not clear whether Xavier officials knew
contraception was covered in their plan. A
spokeswoman said the university's administration
would not comment.
Some on campus said they suspected Graham had
come under intense pressure from the diocese, and
237

perhaps from conservative donors as well, to publicly
demonstrate Xavier's fidelity to Catholic doctrine by
cancelling the birth-control coverage.
"How it was handled ... (made it) seem more political,
like they were trying to make a statement, rather than it
being in the interest of their employees," said Jimmy
Geiser, a junior majoring in philosophy.
Though she would not speculate as to why the
university president made his decision, Dorothy Engle,
chairwoman of the biology department, said she and
many colleagues found the timing suspect.
"It seems unusual to change the healthcare plan in the
middle of the year," rather than wait until the open
enrollment period when employees could sign on to a
spouse's plan or look for other coverage, Engle said.
Xavier, which was founded in 1831 and serves 7,000
students, has a strong academic reputation. Engle,
who has been a faculty member for more than 20
years, said the university has also been known for its
"ecumenical" feel, welcoming students and faculty of
all religions and encouraging lively discussions about
faith.
Reuters General/ - Article, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
"It's always been very open," she said. "That's why it's
a surprise that health insurance benefits would
become an issue."
Some Catholic education experts said they hoped
other colleges would follow Xavier's lead. "This is a
very positive move," said Patrick Reilly, president of
the Cardinal Newman Society, which pushes Catholic
colleges to stay true to the church's teachings.
The contraception debate, Reilly said, "has certainly
made Catholic colleges more aware, both of what their
own (insurance) policies are, and of what the church
expects of them."
Several other prominent Catholic universities in the
U.S., including Georgetown, DePaul and Fordham,
offer contraceptive coverage as part of employee
insurance plans. A spokesman for Fordham said the
university was not re-evaluating its coverage.
Spokeswomen for Georgetown and DePaul did not
return calls.
(Reporting by Stephanie Simon in Denver; Editing by
Will Dunham)
238

Reuters General/ - Article, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Government plans to sue Arizona sheriff
for targeting Latinos
By Jeremy Pelofsky
WASHINGTON | Tue Apr 3, 2012 6:20pm EDT
(Reuters) - The Obama administration on Tuesday
said it was preparing to sue Arizona county sheriff Joe
Arpaio and his department for violating civil rights laws
by improperly targeting Latinos in a bid to crack down
on illegal immigrants.
The sheriff's high-profile crackdown on illegal
immigrants has helped thrust the issue onto the
national political stage with some states passing tough
new laws aimed at pushing out those in the country
illegally.
The administration's Justice Department and the
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office have been in
settlement talks for months over allegations that
officers regularly made unlawful stops and arrests of
Latinos, used excessive force against them and failed
to adequately protect the Hispanic community.
Those negotiations have broken down because of a
fight over the Justice Department's demand that an
independent monitor be appointed by a federal court to
oversee compliance with the settlement, which has
now reached 128 pages in draft form, according to the
Obama administration.
"We believe that you are wasting time and not
negotiating in good faith," Roy Austin, deputy assistant
attorney general in the Justice Department's civil rights
division, said in a letter to the lawyer for Maricopa
County Sheriff's Office (MCSO).
Austin said in the letter that Arpaio's team demanded
that a meeting slated for Wednesday include for the
first time negotiations over the monitor and previously
had demanded that the Justice Department provide
more details about its findings.
"MCSO's refusal to engage in good faith negotiations
requires us to prepare for civil (court) action," Austin
said. He added that the Justice Department has
recently discovered more information about the "failure
to reasonably investigate sex crimes" by Arpaio's
office.
The Justice Department in a December report outlined
numerous alleged civil rights violations, including that
Latino drivers were four to nine times more likely to be
stopped than non-Latinos by Arpaio's force.
The sheriff has steadfastly denied any wrongdoing and
lashed out at the Obama administration for targeting
his department and failing to deal with the problem of
illegal immigration with some 11.5 million believed to
be in the United States.
In a strongly worded statement on Tuesday, Arpaio
said the appointment of a monitor would force him to
abdicate responsibility for his police force, including
decisions about policies, operations, jail programs and
enforcement.
"To the Obama administration, who is attempting to
strong arm me into submission only for its political
gain, I say: This will not happen, not on my watch!"
Arpaio said in the statement.
Arpaio's force has been under investigation by federal
authorities since 2008 during the Bush administration.
Obama's Justice Department spent months fighting for
access to documents and to some of his deputies.
Arpaio was interviewed twice during the probe.
(Additional reporting by David Schwartz in Phoenix;
Editing by Anthony Boadle)
239

By Dan Levine
Reuters General/ - Article, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Appeals court upholds California
affirmative action ban
SAN FRANCISCO | Mon Apr 2, 2012 11:51pm EDT
(Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court upheld California's
ban on the use of affirmative action in university
admissions on Monday, reaffirming that public schools
cannot base admission on race, gender or ethnicity.
The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
upholding so-called Proposition 209 comes as
affirmative action resurfaces as a live issue at the top
of the U.S. legal system.
"Today's ruling is good news for everyone who values
fairness and equal opportunity, because Proposition
209 guarantees fair treatment for everyone, regardless
of skin color, sex, or ethnic ancestry," Ralph W.
Kasarda, who argued the case for the conservative
Pacific Legal Foundation, said in a statement.
Proposition 209, passed by voters over 15 years ago,
has prompted fierce debate for years in California.
Opponents said it narrowed opportunities for women
and minorities to succeed in the state. Supporters
countered it simply created a system where individual
ability was rewarded.
The plaintiffs in the California challenge argued that
the number of African American, Latino and Native
American freshmen at UCLA and U.C. Berkeley
dropped by over 50 percent in the wake of Proposition
209.
However, a lower court judge dismissed the challenge,
and on Monday a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit
affirmed that ruling.
The panel wrote it had already established a precedent
on the issue when it upheld the affirmative action bar
in a previous opinion in the 1990s, and said prior 9th
Circuit caselaw had already taken falling minority
enrollment into account.
An attorney for the plaintiffs, a group of high school
and college students, could not immediately be
reached late on Monday.
The issue of affirmative action will ultimately go to the
U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed in February to
decide if a state university may consider an applicant's
race to achieve a more diverse student body, revisiting
in an election year a divisive social issue it last
addressed nine years ago.
In the case now under consideration, the high court
agreed to hear an appeal by a white female applicant
who was denied undergraduate admission in 2008 to
the University of Texas at Austin. The Supreme Court
is expected to hear arguments in the case in its
upcoming term that begins in October.
(Reporting by Dan Levine; Editing by Cynthia Johnston
and Lisa Shumaker)
240

The Economic Times/ - News, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court seeks details of 18 mercy
pleas before President
NEW DELHI: In a significant move, the Supreme
Court today directed the Centre to furnish details of 18
mercy pleas, including that of Parliament attack death
convict Afzal Guru, pending disposal before the
President.
A bench of justices G S Singhvi and S J
Mukhopadhaya also asked eminent jurist Ram
Jethmalani to file written submissions on "whether the
President should objectively apply mind while deciding
mercy petitions".
The apex court felt that the role of the state was
perhaps advisory and the final verdict is of the
President.
The court passed directions while dealing with the
appeal filed by death convict Devender Pal Singh
Bhullar, challenging the undue delay in disposal of his
mercy petition by the President.
The bench asked Additional Solicitor General Haren
Raval to produce the files relating to 18 death row
convicts whose mercy petitions are pending for
disposal for the past one to seven years.
Appearing for Bhullar, senior counsel K T S Tulsi told
the court that between 1997 and 2011, the President
has disposed off 32 mercy petitions, 13 of which were
done after a 10-year wait.
He submitted 14 other cases were disposed off after a
delay ranging between four and 10 years, while the
remaining cases were disposed off between one-four
years.
Earlier Jethmalani told the court that there should not
be even a day's delay in disposal of the mercy petition
of the convict as it was violative of the persons right to
liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
He submitted that section 302 IPC prescribes a
maximum sentence of death but delay in execution of
the death sentence or disposal of the mercy petition
amounted to imposing additional punishment on the
convict "if not sanctioned by law".
241

The New York Times/ - Politics, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Looking Ahead, Republicans Examine
Options in Health Care Fight
WASHINGTON — Republican lawmakers who have
spent two years railing against President Obama’s
health care law are beginning to devise alternatives so
they can be ready if the Supreme Court forces the
issue of the uninsured back into the center of political
debate.
“If Obamacare goes away, it doesn’t mean that the
problem of how you deliver health care affordably and
get good access goes away,” Representative Greg
Walden, Republican of Oregon, said. “Those are the
issues that are back before us.”
Republicans say they will have to make good on their
pledge to replace the health care law if the Supreme
Court strikes down any significant parts of it. They
remain optimistic about the possibility of a court
victory, even as they begin thinking more seriously
about what would follow.
“Our wheels are beginning to turn,” said
Representative Fred Upton, Republican of Michigan
and chairman of the House Energy and Commerce
Committee, which would have a large role in
developing Republican alternatives to the Obama
health care law.
Beyond some familiar ideas and slogans about
“patient-centered health care,” the Republicans
concede that they have far to go to come up with a
comprehensive policy to fill the gap that could be left
by a Supreme Court ruling this summer.
Their approach is likely to set aside universal health
insurance coverage as the main objective. Instead,
they would focus on lowering costs as “the overriding
goal,” said Senator John Barrasso, Republican of
Wyoming, a medical doctor and party spokesman on
health issues.
“If you get the costs down, then you get more people
with coverage,” Mr. Barrasso said.
Republicans are dusting off proposals that date back
more than a decade: allowing individuals to buy health
insurance across state lines, helping small businesses
band together to buy insurance, offering generous tax
deductions for the purchase of individual policies,
expanding tax-favored health savings accounts and
reining in medical malpractice suits.
Many of these ideas were included in a package
offered by Republicans in November 2009 as an
alternative to legislation pushed through the House by
Democrats. The Congressional Budget Office found
that the Republican proposal would have reduced
health insurance premiums by 5 percent to 10 percent,
compared with what they would otherwise have been.
The budget office said that the Republican proposal,
offered by Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio,
who is now the House speaker, would have provided
coverage to 3 million people, leaving 52 million
uninsured.
By contrast, the budget office estimates that the
existing law will cover about 30 million people, leaving
26 million uninsured.
Emily S. Porter, a policy adviser to Mr. Boehner, said
the House had voted 26 times to “repeal, de-fund or
dismantle” the new health care law.
A ruling striking down the health law could pose future
political problems for Republicans if Americans are still
unable to find affordable health insurance or if policies
provide inadequate coverage.
Republican lawmakers with experience on health care
issues acknowledge that they will have to take action
should the health law fall, and planning for the next
steps has kicked into high gear. Several Republicans,
like Representatives Michael C. Burgess of Texas and
Tom Price of Georgia, are developing comprehensive
alternatives, and they wish that more of their
Republican colleagues would join these efforts.
“The status quo is unacceptable,” said Mr. Price, an
orthopedic surgeon who is chairman of the House
Republican Policy Committee. “Everybody agrees on
that.”
In the spring issue of the journal National Affairs, two
conservative policy analysts, James C. Capretta and
Robert E. Moffit, lay out a road map in an article titled
“How to Replace Obamacare.”
“Despite the widespread public antipathy toward the
new health care law,” they write, “simply reverting to
the pre-Obamacare status quo would be viewed by
242

many Americans, perhaps even most, as
unacceptable.”
Mr. Upton said Republicans were already looking at
which parts of the Affordable Care Act they would
preserve. The “easiest one,” he said, is the provision
that allows young people up to the age of 26 to remain
on their parents’ insurance. That option has proved
popular and effective.
A more difficult question for Republicans is what to do
about another popular provision of the law, which will
prohibit insurers from denying coverage or charging
higher premiums to people who are sick or have
disabilities. Republicans favor incentives rather than a
mandate to carry insurance, and they acknowledge
that rates could soar unless they find ways to keep
healthy people in the insurance pool.
“We’d have to get that balance right,” Mr. Upton said.
Many of the Republican ideas are incorporated in bills
introduced last year by Representatives Wally Herger
of California and Tom Latham of Iowa, both
Republicans. These bills, like the new law, would
prohibit insurers from imposing annual or lifetime limits
on spending for covered services. And they would
generally prohibit insurers from canceling or rescinding
coverage after a person became sick.
Republicans are still weighing whether to allow
insurers to continue charging higher rates to women
than to men for the same coverage. The new health
care law will prohibit such “gender rating,” starting in
2014.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
In general, Republicans say, their alternatives would
be much less prescriptive than the new federal law,
would cost less and would give states more discretion.
Republicans are determined to scale back insurance
subsidies expected, under the new law, to cost more
than $900 billion from 2014 to 2023.
But Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers,
Republican of Washington, said her party was willing
to put more federal dollars than the Democrats into
one type of assistance: high-risk pools, which offer
subsidized coverage to people who are unable to
obtain private insurance because of medical
problems.
Senator Barrasso said such risk pools would be a
major part of the Republican response to problems of
the uninsured. But, he said, a Republican plan would
be careful to limit access to federal subsidies to people
with true existing conditions. Annual open enrollment
periods, like those held by employer-sponsored health
plans, would give qualifying individuals predictable
access to the high-risk pools, but people could not
enroll when they happen to become sick.
The main feature of a Republican plan could be federal
assistance for the purchase of catastrophic health
insurance with high deductibles, Mr. Barrasso said.
“No one would go bankrupt or lose a home as a result
of injury or disease,” Mr. Barrasso said. But patients
would face more up-front costs and would therefore
have incentives to become more discerning
consumers of health care, he said.
243

The New York Times/ - Politics, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Mayor Defends Withholding Report on
911 System
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s administration came
under attack on Tuesday for keeping secret what is
said to be a sharply critical report on New York City’s
much-delayed, wildly over-budget 911 emergency
dispatch system, as elected officials accused it of
trying to portray a technological debacle in the rosiest
possible terms.
The Manhattan borough president, Scott M. Stringer,
praised the mayor for seeking an outside review of the
revised 911 system, but he demanded that Mr.
Bloomberg abandon a legal fight to block the release
of that review. The changes to the 911 system have
become controversial because the cost has ballooned
by as much as $1 billion, thanks in part to contractors
who were later fired, feuding police and fire officials,
and revolving-door overseers at City Hall.
“City Hall has kept us in the dark for too long,” said Mr.
Stringer, a possible candidate for mayor next year,
who likened the 911 system’s problems to those of
CityTime, the scandal-marred payroll project. But Mr.
Stringer said the 911 system had much higher stakes:
life and death.
“The safety and security of our city demands swift
action,” he said. “Whatever you have, come and tell
us.”
Mr. Bloomberg did not budge, saying the report was
preliminary and would be released when it was
complete. But he suggested that doubts about the 911
system were unfounded.
“Response times are better than they’ve ever been,”
the mayor told reporters at a news conference in
Queens. “Deaths from fires and accidents are the
lowest they’ve ever been.”
“Obviously,” he added, “things are working.”
The performance of the 911 system has become an
issue in a dispute between the Bloomberg
administration and firefighters over the city’s proposal
to close some firehouses. The firefighters say the city
has claimed lower response times to justify the
proposed closings.
An audit by John C. Liu, the city comptroller, found in
October that the time it took operators to obtain vital
information from 911 callers — around two minutes —
had been subtracted from response-time calculations
since 2010, when the city shifted some 911
responsibilities from operators at the Fire Department
to operators for the Police Department.
“Nobody really cares how they break the response
time down,” said Stephen J. Cassidy, president of the
Uniformed Firefighters Association. “But if I dial 911
because somebody in my family’s having a heart
attack, or there’s a car crash, or a helicopter goes
down in the East River, and somebody shows up in six
minutes, don’t tell me you don’t count the first two
minutes and you were there in four.”
The city says that it never calculated the response time
beginning with the call to the 911 operator. Under the
old system, it began tracking the time from the moment
the call was transferred from 911 to the Fire
Department. The city further insists that a decline in
serious fires and fire-related deaths is proof that
response times have improved.
The outside review of the 911 system, formally called
the Emergency Communications Transformation
Project, was performed by Winbourne Consulting, a
technology firm based in Arlington, Va., that has been
involved in the project since 2004. Jeffrey Winbourne,
its chief executive officer, declined to comment on
Tuesday, referring inquiries to the mayor’s office.
The argument this week over the review of the 911
system, first reported by The New York Post on
Monday, was not the first time the administration’s
praise for the project was at odds with reviews of the
system’s performance.
On Jan. 5, Mr. Bloomberg and Cas Holloway, his
deputy mayor for operations, announced that the new
911 system was up and running, and that police, fire
and emergency medical dispatchers were all working
“in one place and on the same system,” as the mayor
put it.
Two weeks later, however, a confidential briefing book
prepared for Mr. Holloway warned of potential risks
and problems, including indications that the police and
fire bureaucracies had not worked out their
differences. For example, each department was still
working from separate geographic-information files,
244

meaning a fire truck might be sent to a crash on an
elevated highway while a police car was sent to the
service road beneath it.
But Mr. Holloway, in an interview, called the briefing
book a routine status update, and said that while the
system was in use, it was not finished, and much work
The New York Times/ - Politics, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
remained to be done.
More to the point, he said, the system had handled
more than 4 million calls since the Jan. 5
announcement without a single glitch that affected
operations.
245

USA Today/ - News, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Column: Shareholders should know about
political donations
As the 2012 election season heats up, campaigns
have been soliciting donations to fuel what many
expect to be the most expensive election cycle in U.S.
history. Unbridled by the 2010 Supreme Court
decision in Citizens United, which prohibited
restrictions on corporate political contributions and
gave rise to a new form of political committees known
as Super PACs, corporations have doled out millions
of dollars targeted at electing or defeating federal
candidates.
Unbeknownst to many investors, nearly 80 Super
PACs were formed and, fueled with corporate dollars,
spent more than $90 million within just ten months of
the ruling. There are now more than 300 Super PACs.
With many annual shareholder meetings taking place
this month, investors are finally asking questions about
contributions. Nearly one-third of shareholder
resolutions in 2012 will ask companies for more
disclosure about their campaign spending and
lobbying.
The government argued in Citizens United that its
decision could have special implications for
shareholder interests. But the court's majority brushed
aside any concerns, reasoning that with today's
Internet, investors could effortlessly track, monitor and
police corporate political contributions. Thus far, the
court's faith in corporate transparency has proved
largely unfounded.
Information not available
According to a recent report led by As You Sow, an
organization that tracks shareholder proposals, while
some corporations have voluntarily released their
campaign contributions to shareholders, the vast
majority have not. Countering the reassurances
offered by the court, the report found that
"comprehensive information is simply not available on
how much money companies may be spending
through intermediary groups that will play a crucial role
in deciding the 2012 presidential election."
Yet unlimited, undisclosed corporate political spending
infringes on shareholders' rights to abstain from
supporting political messages they disagree with. The
Supreme Court has recognized an individual's First
Amendment right not to speak — for example, a
student's right to abstain from reciting the Pledge of
Allegiance. Because corporate political contributions
are a form of speech, some shareholders are
effectively coerced into underwriting messages in
violation of their First Amendment right to remain
silent.
Too little, too late
Although shareholders can protest political messages
by selling their stock, firms usually disclose their
contributions, if at all, after they have already donated
them. Shareholders are thus stuck, without recourse,
prospectively footing the bill.
To counter these risks, the Securities and Exchange
Commission should implement rules to promote
disclosure and transparency of corporate political
spending, enabling shareholders to act as an effective
check. Specifically, the agency should require
companies to include political positions and
contributions in their annual reports, disclose any
anticipated political spending and describe how
political campaign contributions fit the company's
overall mission.
Thomas Jefferson once wrote that "to compel a man to
furnish contributions of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and
tyrannical." An effective disclosure regime for
corporate political spending allows shareholders,
instead of corporate insiders, to determine what type of
political messages to support while simultaneously
providing the public with more information about the
source of campaign funding.
Drew F. Cohen is a joint-degree student at the George
Washington University Law School and School of
Business.
246

USA Today/ - News, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama: GOP budget 'a prescription for
decline'
President Obama issued a scathing attack on Mitt
Romney and the Republican Party today, saying they
support a budget that is "a prescription for decline"
because it would gut such essential programs as
Medicare and education.
The GOP budget "is a Trojan horse," Obama told a
group of news editors. "Disguised as deficit reduction
plans, it is really an attempt to impose a radical vision
on our country."
Obama also called it "thinly veiled social Darwinism,"
benefiting the rich at the expense of the middle class
and the poor.
In another sign that the general election is already
here, Obama accused the Republicans of promoting
more income inequality, while Romney and other GOP
members accused the president of dividing Americans
and ignoring the threat of a crushing federal debt.
Obama mocked "Governor Romney" for describing the
GOP budget -- passed last month by the
Republican-run House -- as "marvelous." Obama
called that "a word you don't often hear when it comes
to describing a budget. ... It's a word you don't often
hear generally."
"Here's what this marvelous budget does," Obama
said, ticking off a list of possible cuts that included
Medicare, Social Security, college aid, early education,
the Federal Aviation Administration and even the
weather service.
Romney and aides said Obama distorted the impact of
a budget designed to promote economic growth that
would reduce the record federal debt that is surging
toward $16 trillion.
"If President Obama is assigning blame for the
country's debt and deficits, he should look no further
than his own budget blueprints," said Romney
spokeswoman Andrea Saul. "After piling on trillions of
dollars in new debt in his first three years in office, the
last thing President Obama is qualified to lecture on is
responsible federal spending."
Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., architect of the budget that
House Republicans passed last month, said Obama
"has chosen to distort the truth and divide Americans
in order to distract from his failed record."
Obama also chose "to duck and run" on the debt issue,
Ryan said, adding that the president's proposed
budgets have been "committed to funding ever-higher
government spending by taking more from
hardworking Americans and adding to a crushing
burden of debt."
The president spoke on the same day as the
Wisconsin primary, a race in which Ryan has endorsed
Romney and campaigned with him.
Some highlights from Obama's speech and follow-up
questions:
1:28 p.m. -- What will you do if the Supreme Court
strikes down the health care law, Obama is asked.
Obama defends his comments, saying he can't recall
the Supreme Court striking down such an important
piece of economic legislation since before the New
Deal.
"The burden is on those who would overturn a law like
this," Obama says -- adding that he is confident the
high court will uphold it.
1:21 p.m. -- Responding to a foreign policy question,
Obama says almost all world leaders still regard the
United States as "the one indispensable nation."
Therefore, it's important to get the debt under control -and
he again blasts Republican criticism.
It's not a technical problem -- "the problem is our
politics," Obama says.
1:15 p.m. -- During question time, Obama says the
U.S. fiscal problems can be solved "if we make some
sensible decisions" -- but too many Republicans don't
want to compromise, especially when it comes to
higher taxes on the wealthy.
He notes that Ronald Reagan approved of tax hikes
back in the 1980s -- "He could not get through a
Republican primary today," Obama says of "the
Gipper."
He also chides the press for suggesting there is
"equivalence" in Republican and Democratic
247

positions.
1:13 p.m. -- Wrapping up, Obama says "vigorous"
debate is "a good thing," and the focus should be on
future generations.
1:10 p.m. -- The president outlines his differences with
Republicans on health care -- he defends his plan
currently before the Supreme Court -- and taxes; he
promotes the "Buffett Rule," which would require
millionaires to pay at least 30% of their income in
taxes.
1:07 p.m. -- Obama says he is working to cut the debt,
citing a series of budget cuts.
1:04 p.m. -- Obama delivers the "Trojan horse" line,
saying the GOP isn't about the deficit, but instead
promotes "social Darwinism" and is a "prescription for
decline."
1:02 p.m. -- Tax cuts for the wealthy would cost the
U.S. investments in such key areas as education and
medical research, Obama says. (Ryan says he is
proposing a reduction in tax rates in exchange for
eliminating certain tax deductions and loopholes.)
12:59 p.m. -- The president outlines possible
Republican cuts to medical programs: Medicaid,
affecting as many as 19 million mostly poor people;
and Medicare, which would be turned into a voucher
program that would increase out-of-pocket costs.
"It's a bad idea and it will ultimately end Medicare as
we know it," Obama says.
12:55 p.m. -- Obama provides a sampling of what the
Ryan budget would do: Less financial aid for students,
less medical research, a reduced air traffic control
system, and poorer weather forecasts. There are also
unidentified mystery cuts, Obama says.
"This is to say nothing about what the budget does to
health care," Obama says.
12:51 p.m. -- Obama cites the name of another
supporter of the Ryan budget: "Gov. Romney," one of
USA Today/ - News, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
the few times he has invoked Mitt Romney's name in
public. Notes that Romney described the GOP as
"marvelous" -- not a word normally used to describe a
budget. "That's a word you don't often here generally,"
he says.
12:50 p.m. -- Indicting today's Republicans, Obama
says the Ryan budget "makes the Contract with
America look like the New Deal." Cites criticism by a
prominent Republican, Newt Gingrich.
12:48 p.m. -- Moving on to his indictment of
Republican economic policy, Obama goes after the
George W. Bush-era tax cuts and other GOP policies
-- says "prosperity sure didn't trickle down," and they
led to recession and near-financial collapse, as well as
"growing debt and widening inequality." Says its
"painfully clear" that "trickle-down" economics didn't
work.
12:45 p.m. -- The president raises the issue of income
inequality, citing a "chasm between the ultra-rich and
everybody else." Also denounces the Republican idea
of "trickle-down economics," based on tax cuts for the
wealthy.
12:43 p.m. -- Obama defends his own economic
record, and philosophy. Also talks of Republican
presidents and their actions: Abraham Lincoln and the
national railroad system, Dwight Eisenhower and the
highway system, and George W. Bush and
prescription drug coverage.
12:38 p.m. -- Obama echoes a comment he made in
his Kansas speech in December: This is "a
make-or-break moment for the middle class," and that
is the "defining issue of our time."
12:34 p.m. -- There are microphone problems, and
Obama makes a joke about last week's offhand
comment to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev:
"Please feel free to transmit it to Vladimir (Putin) if you
can hear me."
Also makes a reference to Romney's "Etch A Sketch
moment."
248

USA Today/ - News, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Column: Martin death protests mix the
old and the new
SANFORD, Fla. – For America's flagging civil rights
movement, this place has become a Resurrection
City.
The senseless death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin not
only has made the city ground zero of a protest
movement that has energized people from Boston to
Los Angeles, it has resuscitated a civil rights
movement that has long needed a cause célèbre to
generate a wider following. And that is just what it got
when gun-toting George Zimmerman killed Martin, who
was armed with just a cellphone, a bottle of ice tea and
a bag of Skittles.
Zimmerman, a 28-year-old whose father is white and
mother is Hispanic, said he killed Martin in self-defense
after trailing the black teenager inside the gated
community he patrolled as a volunteer watchman. At
some point, there was a confrontation and Zimmerman
fired a single shot into Martin's chest. The police
refused to arrest Zimmerman, who claims the
protection of Florida's "stand your ground" law, which
allows people who feel threatened to use deadly force
instead of retreating to safety.
Gunman as victim?
The idea that an armed man who stalks a teenager
who has committed no crime can get away — if only
for a time — with saying he was the victim has
outraged a lot of people. Add race to this explosive
mixture, and the case propelled civil rights activists into
the front ranks of protesters.
Over the weekend, when thousands of demonstrators
marched through Sanford demanding Zimmerman's
arrest, they were led by the "Big Three" of this nation's
aging civil rights movement. Walking behind a blue
and yellow "Justice for Trayvon" banner were NAACP
President Ben Jealous, the Rev. Jesse Jackson,
leader of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, and the Rev. Al
Sharpton, head of the National Action Network.
Unlike the old days of the movement that transformed
America, they were riding the waves of this protest,
rather than creating them. That's not an indictment of
these men, but rather an acknowledgment of their
ability to take control of a movement created largely by
social media. As a result, the campaign to get Martin's
killer arrested and tried on murder charges has
brought about an interesting fusion of the old and the
new.
Social media latest tool
The "new" movements are in cyberspace, causes such
as the Kony 2012 video, to which Millennials easily
connect. The old are the on-the-ground movements
such as the 1963 March on Washington that were
attended largely by the so-called Silent Generation,
which was anything but silent about such issues.
The mishandling of the initial police investigation of
Martin's death — and the quick recognition by civil
rights leaders that they could use this tragedy to regain
the center stage of social protest in America — has
bridged the gap between old street protesters and the
new Internet activists. The immediate effects of this will
likely result in Zimmerman's arrest and trial.
The long-term impact might well be a partnership
between the organizations that Sharpton, Jackson and
Jealous lead and those of the less organized but far
more numerous Generation Xers, who have already
used Facebook, Twitter and blogs to express outrage
nationwide over Martin's shooting.
In Amusing Ourselves to Death, Neil Postman said of
the prophesies of futurists George Orwell and Aldous
Huxley: "Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an
externally imposed oppression." But Huxley worried
that "people will come to love their oppression (and) to
adore the technologies that undo their capacities to
think."
What the broad, cross-generational response to the
death of Martin suggests about social struggle in this
country is that its future might be even better than its
past.
249

USA Today/ - News, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama defends Supreme Court remarks
President Obama defended his comments on the
Supreme Court today, even as Republicans accused
him of trying to intimidate the justices into upholding
the health care law or be attacked as being overtly
political.
"The point I was making is that the Supreme Court is
the final say on our Constitution and our laws, and all
of us have to respect it -- but it's precisely because of
that extraordinary power that the court has traditionally
exercised significant restraint and deference to our
duly elected legislature, our Congress," Obama told a
group of newspaper editors.
"And so the burden is on those who would overturn a
law like this," Obama said.
Earlier today, Senate Minority Leader Mitch
McConnell, R-Ky., said Obama's comments on
Monday "reflect not only an attempt to influence the
outcome, but a preview of Democrat attacks to come if
they don't get their way."
Earlier post:
The chattering classes in Washington are still buzzing
about President Obama's comments -- or were they
threats? -- about the pending Supreme Court decision
on the health care case.
The president expressed confidence Monday that the
court would uphold the statute this summer, but also
served warning that an adverse ruling would be viewed
(and criticized) as a political act by the justices.
"I'd just remind conservative commentators that for
years what we've heard is, the biggest problem on the
bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint
-- that an unelected group of people would somehow
overturn a duly constituted and passed law," Obama
said. "Well, this is a good example."
Republican Mitt Romney wondered if Obama was
trying to intimidate the court, but added that "I don't
think that would work."
"I also think it's quite a curious turn of events to start
complaining about an activist court," Romney also told
Fox News.
Other Republicans reacted with more ire.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said "it must be nice living in
a fantasy world where every law you like is
constitutional and every Supreme Court decision you
don't is 'activist.'" He also said it appears that Obama's
comments are part of a political strategy.
"The memo appears to have gone out from the
president's campaign that criticizing the Supreme
Court is going to help his re-election," Hatch said.
"This is disappointing, and is likely to be as successful
as his administration's defense of the unconstitutional
health care law last week."
Some of the court's more conservative justices harshly
questioned the law's key provision, the so-called
individual mandate that requires most Americans to
buy health insurance or pay a fine.
Some of the president's supporters, such as Rep.
James Clyburn, D-S.C., have suggested that Obama
make the Supreme Court a campaign issue if it rules
against health care.
A decision is expected in June.
Obama wouldn't be the first president to tangle with the
high court in public. It's been tried by presidents
ranging from Andrew Jackson to Franklin D.
Roosevelt, from Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan.
Yet the court -- an independent branch of government,
after all -- has its own unique powers.
Even some supporters of the health care law
expressed dismay over the president's comments.
Ruth Marcus, a columnist for The Washington Post,
said Obama's description of the court as "an unelected
group of people" left her cold, Marcus wrote. "I would
lament a ruling striking down the individual mandate,
but I would not denounce it as conservative justices
run amok.
"Listening to the arguments and reading the transcript,
the justices struck me as a group wrestling with a
legitimate, even difficult, constitutional question,"
Marcus wrote.
250

At the White House on Monday, Obama said, "legal
experts across the ideological spectrum" believe the
law is constitutional. He also cited the economic
aspects and "human element" of the debate:
The law that's already in place has already given 2.5
million young people health care that wouldn't
otherwise have it. There are tens of thousands of
adults with pre-existing conditions who have health
care right now because of this law. Parents don't have
to worry about their children not being able to get
health care because they can't be prevented from
getting health care as a consequence of a preexisting
condition. That's part of this law.
Millions of seniors are paying less for prescription
drugs because of this law. Americans all across the
country have greater rights and protections with
USA Today/ - News, Ter, 03 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
respect to their insurance companies and are getting
preventive care because of this law.
So that's just the part that's already been implemented.
That doesn't even speak to the 30 million people who
stand to gain coverage once it's fully implemented in
2014.
And I think it's important, and I think the American
people understand, and the I think the justices should
understand, that in the absence of an individual
mandate, you cannot have a mechanism to ensure
that people with preexisting conditions can actually get
health care. So there's not only a economic element to
this, and a legal element to this, but there's a human
element to this. And I hope that's not forgotten in this
political debate.
251

04/04/2012

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
04/04/2012
El Universal - Política
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
Crimen causa cierre de empresas: Coparmex, 255
Bloomberg - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
The Real (Moderate) Mitt Romney Finally Stands Up, 256
Business Insurance - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Judge refuses to dismiss class allegations in gender bias suit against Bayer, 258
Corriere Della Será - Politica
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Corte Costituzionale
Fiom, si chiude un'era: Papignani lascia, 259
El Dia - Noticia
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Poder Judicial
También los jueces plantean "serio retraso" de sus sueldos, 260
Expresso OnLine Lisboa - Atualidade
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Tribunal Constitucional
Constitucional lê acórdão sobre enriquecimento ilícito , 261
La Repubblica - Cronaca
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Constitución
La scacchiera di Adam Smith, 262
Le Monde - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Conseil Constitutionnel
Pour contrer Sarkozy, Hollande détaille sa "première année", 264
Los Angeles Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Peter M. Douglas dies at 69; California Coastal Commission chief, 266
Reuters General - Article
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
India army units' unusual movements spooked government: paper, 268
The Economic Times - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
No need for bounty, we are not hiding in caves: Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, 269
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Men in Black, 270
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Sentenced for Stealing Art, Man Won’t Say Where It Is, 272
The New York Times - Politics
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Liquor-License Fight Moves From Park Ave. to Albany, 273
The New York Times - Politics
253

Quarta-feira, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Civil Rights
Elizabeth Catlett, Sculptor With Eye on Social Issues, Is Dead at 96, 275
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Obama's day: Easter prayer, the STOCK Act, 277
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Medical societies urges questioning treatments, 278
USA Today - News
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL | Supreme Court
Coalition of medical societies urges questioning treatments, 279
254

El Universal/ - Política, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
Crimen causa cierre de empresas:
Coparmex
La cúpula empresarial del país advirtió que el crimen
organizado mina la competitividad de los estados y
desalienta la inversión, causando el cierre de
empresas en todo el país.
Alberto Espinosa Desigaud, presidente de la
Confederación Patronal de la República Mexicana
(Coparmex), explicó que el crimen organizado
deteriora la competitividad de las entidades
federativas, desalentando la inversión nacional y
extranjera, causando el cierre de empresas formales.
Aclaró que en los últimos cinco años más de 160 mil
empresas de todo el país han dejado de operar.
Refirió que los datos fueron proporcionados por
Seguridad Pública del organismo a través de los 65
Centros Empresariales con los que cuenta en todo el
país.
El presidente de Coparmex destacó que los estados
de México, Nuevo León, Coahuila, Durango, Guerrero,
Michoacán y Morelos son los más afectados por la
guerra anticrimen. Tan sólo en 2011, precisó el
dirigente, han cerrado sus puertas 64 mil unidades de
negocios por circunstancias ligadas al crimen
organizado y la inseguridad que prevalece en la
República.
No aclaran motivo
Datos del Instituto Nacional de Geografía y Estadística
(Inegi) muestran que entre 2010 y 2011 cerraron 166
mil 407 pequeños establecimientos. Las principales
bajas ocurrieron en los estados de México, Sinaloa,
Sonora y Nuevo León y Chiapas.
Sin embargo, no indica las razones de los cierres. En
el periodo, se sumaron 225 mil 741 pequeños
establecimientos en otras entidades, como Chihuahua
y Baja California, con lo cual en el neto se crearon 59
mil 334 establecimientos entre 2010 y 2011.
Critican lucha anticrimen
Espinosa Desigaud criticó la ineficacia en la lucha
contra el crimen organizado. Explicó que a más de
tres años y medio de la firma del Acuerdo Nacional por
la Seguridad, la Justicia y la Legalidad no se han
cumplido los compromisos adquiridos por los tres
niveles de gobierno, el Congreso y el Poder Judicial.
Dijo que hay frustración y decepción de todos los
sectores de la sociedad por la impunidad que
predomina y la falta de responsabilidad de las
autoridades. El Estado no cumple con su principal
obligación: garantizar la seguridad”, criticó.
Destacó que el crimen afecta los negocios, ya que en
el norte del país la prima de los seguros aumentó 30%
y 24 millones de viajeros fronterizos prefieren ya no
hospedarse en México, con lo que se ha perdido una
derrama de 800 millones dólares en los últimos cinco
años.
Añadió que la imagen de México se deterioró
provocando que naciones emitan alertas para evitar
que turistas viajen a nuestro país.
“Lo más grave es que empresarios y familias enteras
se van a otros países en busca de seguridad”, dijo.
255

Bloomberg/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
The Real (Moderate) Mitt Romney
Finally Stands Up
Mitt Romney, believing with good reason that he has
the Republican nomination sewn up (or at least that if
anything gets in the way at this point, it will be too
bizarre to plan for), has turned from attacks on his
fellow Republican contenders to concentrate on
President Barack Obama.
This is the campaign’s Etch A Sketch moment: time to
shake the slate clean of its hard-right positions and
start again. In other words: Flip now, flop later. With
Romney’s primary victories yesterday in Wisconsin,
Maryland and the District of Columbia, now it’s later.
On Friday in Appleton, Wisconsin, Romney delivered
what is probably Version 1.0 of what will become his
standard stump speech. It provides some clues to
Romney’s true nature.
Romney predicts, as if he were a weatherman who is
just reporting the storm, that “this campaign will
produce a deafening cacophony of charges and
countercharges.” That’s probably true, though he
theoretically has some say in the matter. His campaign
can be as high-minded as he would like. And the
speech did contain bits of statesmanlike yin-yangery.
Consider: “President Obama did not cause the
recession, but he most certainly failed to lead the
recovery.” Or: “Regulations are necessary, but they
must be continuously updated, streamlined and
modernized.”
Acknowledgment that Obama did not cause the
recession and that regulations are sometimes
necessary are welcome. They also put Romney at the
far left of his party.
Romney criticizes Obama for saying he wants to
“transform this nation,” whereas he, Romney, wants “to
restore the values of economic freedom, opportunity
and small government that have made this nation the
leader it is.”
Small government made this nation great? Uh, World
War II? Social Security? The Civil Rights Act? There
are exceptions (the Transportation Security
Administration, for example), but many of America’s
greatest moments involved an expansion of
government, not a shrinking of it.
Polls and politicians are always claiming that
Americans are fed up and want the country to change
directions in some fundamental way. But Romney, or
his advisers, is smart enough to realize that this is just
a national tic. People really don’t want fundamental
change. “Transform” is an ominous word. “Restore” is
nice and soothing.
Obama, Romney says, “was elected not on the
strength of a compelling record but a compelling
personality and story.” Interestingly, Romney says that
the differences between the candidates can be
explained by “our life experiences.” Is he actually going
to make the case that growing up in a stable, affluent
suburban family, with a father who was head of an
auto company and later governor of Michigan, is a
more useful life experience than Obama’s?
Yes, he is. Obama was a community organizer. “His
desire to help others could not be more admirable, but
…" Well, you know, this helping others stuff can be
taken too far. Says Romney, who ran the
private-equity firm Bain Capital LLC: “Apple Computer
and Microsoft weren’t started to save the world and
neither were General Motors or Alcoa. Nor were some
of the companies I helped start like Staples or The
Sports Authority. … They became great commercial
ventures, which is another way of saying they made a
lot of money.”
Romney is right that free market capitalism has done
more for the U.S. (and the world) than any do-good
organization. Nevertheless, it’s a brave politician who
builds his campaign around the idea that graduating
from Harvard Law School and going off to serve the
poor in Chicago is less admirable than graduating from
Harvard Law School and going off to advise big
corporations at a consulting firm.
Regarding the economy, Romney says that Obama’s
stimulus program was a failure because it “protected
the government, not the people,” whatever that means.
Bloomberg Government calculates that Romney’s
proposed federal budget will actually run up a larger
debt than Obama’s. That is because it includes a large
tax cut for everybody, with no compensating spending
cuts.
Romney is, at this point, far too identified as a flipflopper
to do much actual flip-flopping. He’s stuck with
the positions he had on all the right-wing hot-button
256

issues when the music stopped. But, as this Wisconsin
speech demonstrates, you can Etch A Sketch a new
Bloomberg/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
you without getting into all that.
257

Business Insurance/ - Article, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Judge refuses to dismiss class allegations
in gender bias suit against Bayer
NEWARK, N.J.—A federal judge has refused to
dismiss a lawsuit alleging gender discrimination by
Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., for which
plaintiffs have said they will seek class action status.
In his ruling Friday in Victoria Barghout et al. vs. Bayer
HealthCare Pharmaceuticals et al., U.S. District Court
Judge Dennis M. Cavanaugh said the effort to dismiss
the allegations was premature.The complaint, which
was filed last year by New York-based Sanford Wittels
& Heisler L.L.P. on behalf of eight women, alleges that
Wayne, N.J.-based Bayer and related units
discriminated in pay, promotions, pregnancy and
family responsibility issues in violation of Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Labor Standards
Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act as well as state
law, among other charges. Bayer HealthCare said in a
statement that it has “continuously denied” charges of
gender class discrimination. The company “is
committed strongly to a policy of nondiscrimination
and equal treatment for all employees.”
Judge Cavanaugh said in his decision that “plaintiffs"
complaint as a whole sufficiently shows that female
employers felt adverse effects at work especially in
terms of opportunities for promotion and the privilege
of maternity leave, despite the existence of facially
neutral policies.” The ruling also said plaintiffs “further
sufficiently plead their claims under the Equal Pay
Act.”While the plaintiffs have said they plan to seek
class certification, the defendants have said that the
U.S. Supreme Court"s decision last year in Wal-Mart
Stores Inc. vs. Betty Dukes et al. precludes certification
“because plaintiffs do not state a classwide claim for
relief.” However, the judge said in his ruling, “although
the Dukes court reasoning is binding and relevant to
analysis of whether an expansive class of
employee-plaintiffs should be certified, its applicability
is tenuous at this stage of litigation.”Commenting on
the ruling, attorney Katherine M. Kimpel, a partner in
Sanford"s Washington office, said the ruling is
“consistent with what courts across the country” have
done in response to “attempts to use the Wal-Mart
decision too broadly and too aggressively.”
258

Corriere Della Será/ - Politica, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Corte Costituzionale)
Fiom, si chiude un'era: Papignani lascia
Alla Magneti Marelli nuovo scontro:
«La Fiat ci nega l'assemblea»
Bruno Papignani
Bruno Papignani
BOLOGNA - Alla Fiom di Bologna finisce l’era di Bruno
Papignani. Il numero uno delle tute blu,
presumibilmente il 26 aprile, si insedierà alla guida
della Fiom Emilia-Romagna. Un passaggio che era
atteso da tempo e si dovrebbe ufficializzare al
massimo entro fine mese. Perché, a quanto pare, non
è possibile prolungare ulteriormente il mandato
dell’attuale leader di via Marconi.
Al posto di Papignani, alla guida delle tute blu
bolognesi, dovrebbe arrivare l’attuale numero uno
delle tute blu modenesi, Giordano Fiorani. Per il
momento si tratta di indiscrezioni che, però, si fanno
sempre insistenti. In questi giorni sono in corso contatti
tra la Fiom nazionale e la Cgil per individuare il nome
giusto per raccogliere un’eredità così pensante come
quella di Papignani che guida i metalmeccanici della
Camera del Lavoro da due lustri. Difficile, a quanto
pare, che prevalga una soluzione interna e quindi la
candidatura del segretario modenese sembra la più
accredita. Di certo Papignani, alla guida del regionale,
continuerà a far valere il suo peso specifico sotto le
Due Torri.
Intanto, il segretario uscente continua la sua battaglia
con la Magneti Marelli, l’azienda del gruppo Fiat che,
ieri ha negato un'ora di assemblea alla Fiom. Una
nuova battaglia dopo la sentenza che ha condannato
l’azienda di via Timavo per condotta anti-sindacale e
ha ordinato il rientro della Fiom in azienda. «Ci hanno
negato l’assemblea — ha tuonato Papignani —,
dicendo che le dieci ore previste erano già state
indette da Fim e Uil, se fosse vero vorrebbe dire che i
due sindacati si sono messi d’accordo con l’azienda
per escludere la Fiom. Per questo chiediamo a Cisl e
Uil di smentire la Fiat».
Una necessità che per il momento non affligge la Cisl
nonostante la Fiom abbia chiesto un passo indietro
pena la riedizione, anche quest’anno, di un Primo
maggio separato sotto le Due Torri. «Non so quante
ne abbiamo fatte di assemblee, ma di sicuro ne sono
state fatte parecchie, se sono già richieste non c’è
niente di strano e comunque è un problema tra di loro
e l’azienda — ha spiegato il segretario della Cisl
bolognese, Alessandro Alberani —. La Fiom faccia
quello che vuole, alla Marelli sono andato solo a fare le
assemblee, la verità è che cercano sempre la rissa».
Sta di fatto che la Fiom non ha intenzione di
demordere. «La Fiat per l’ennesima volta si rifiuta di
dare esecuzione a un provvedimento del giudice, è un
fatto di una gravità inaudita — ha aggiunto Papignani
—. Per questo abbiamo dato mandato ai nostri legali di
studiare tutte le vie legali per combattere questa
ingiustizia. Valuteremo se mantenere l’assemblea o
spostarla di qualche giorno o magari dichiarare uno
sciopero. Non escludo di presentarmi con i
carabinieri». E dalla Fiom bolognese arriva anche un
appello al presidente della Repubblica, Giorgio
Napolitano: «A questo punto deve dire qualcosa, sono
un cittadino che deve lavorare e la Fiat me lo
impedisce usando le rappresaglie per impedirci di
parlare con i lavoratori».
Intanto, da Torino, non arrivano reazioni di sorta. Ma il
Lingotto ha fatto sapere di voler portare la vicenda
della Magneti Marelli alla Corte Costituzionale dopo il
ricorso che era stato annunciato a seguito della
condanna per condotta anti-sindacale decisa dal
tribunale del Lavoro di Bologna. «La questione va
portata alla Corte Costituzionale, non può essere
risolta sul piano giudiziale - ha affermato Raffaele De
Luca Tamajo, il legale della Fiat -. Questa sentenza
non ci convince, per questo ci appelliamo».
Marco Madonia
259

El Dia/ - Noticia, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Poder Judicial)
También los jueces plantean "serio
retraso" de sus sueldos
El Colegio de Magistrados y Funcionarios del Poder
Judicial de la Provincia afirmó que los sueldos de los
jueces "verifican desde hace años un deterioro
considerable", y señaló que esa situación "afecta el
principio de intangibilidad" salarial "protegido por la
Constitución Nacional".
De esta forma, la entidad expresó su inquietud por los
ingresos de los magistrados y en lo que pareció una
suerte de respaldo al proyecto de Porcentualidad que
empuja el gremio que agrupa a los trabajadores de la
Justicia, reclamó "una política salarial de largo plazo
para el Poder Judicial que otorgue previsibilidad al
sistema y ofrezca una solución superadora de la
actual situación de discusiones coyunturales de
recomposición".
"Se verifica desde hace años en nuestro país un
deterioro considerable de las remuneraciones de los
magistrados y funcionarios, agravando la situación de
serio retraso que viene siendo denunciada
permanentemente por este Colegio", sostuvo la
entidad. Y añadió que esa situación "afecta el principio
de intangibilidad protegido por la Constitución
Nacional, como elemento ineludible de preservación
de la independencia judicial y agrega incertidumbre a
todos los agentes del Poder Judicial, lo que afecta
inevitablemente el funcionamiento del servicio de
justicia".
Finalmente el Colegio de Magistrados pidió las
autoridades del gobierno de la Provincia "resolver de
manera rápida y satisfactoria esta situación".
260

Expresso OnLine Lisboa / - Atualidade, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Tribunal Constitucional)
Constitucional lê acórdão sobre
enriquecimento ilícito
Acórdão do Tribunal Constitucional sobre decreto
que cria o crime de enriquecimento ilícito é divulgado
ao fim da tarde.
Aumentar Texto Diminuir Texto Link para esta página
Imprimir Enviar por email
Deixe aqui o seu comentário 2 comentários
O Tribunal Constitucional divulga hoje, pelas 18
horas, o acórdão sobre o Decreto nº 37/XII da
Assembleia da República, relativo à criminalização do
enriquecimento ilícito, que suscitara dúvidas ao
Presidente da República.
Cavaco Silva enviou o diploma ao Tribunal
Constitucional, no dia 10 de março, para efeitos de
fiscalização preventiva da constitucionalidade.
O Presidente da República, "atendendo às diversas
questões suscitadas em torno da constitucionalidade
deste diploma, que pode pôr em causa princípios
essenciais do Estado de direito democrático",
entendeu que a sua entrada em vigor deve ser
precedida da intervenção do Tribunal Constitucional,
segundo uma nota divulgada na altura.
A apreciação pelo Constitucional, de acordo com a
mesma nota, destina-se a garantir que "a
criminalização do enriquecimento ilícito se processe
sem subsistirem dúvidas quanto a eventuais riscos de
lesão dos direitos fundamentais de todos os
cidadãos".
261

La Repubblica/ - Cronaca, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Constitución)
La scacchiera di Adam Smith
OLTRE un decennio è passato, e ancora in Italia si
inveisce contro un articolo dello Statuto dei lavoratori
che incendia gli animi come se possedesse vizi ferali,
da cui deriverebbero tutti i mali.
Possibile che in piena recessione, con la
disoccupazione giovanile salita al 32 per cento,
l'infelicità e il malessere dipendano in modo così totale
dalla tutela giuridica del lavoratore allontanato per falsi
motivi economici, contemplata nell'articolo 18?
Possibile che i pochi casi di reintegrazione dei
licenziati (un migliaio in 10 anni) siano a tal punto
distruttivi della ripresa, della stabilità economica, della
reputazione esterna, dell'interesse di investitori
stranieri? Neppure la Confindustria pare crederci, tanto
che il nuovo presidente, Squinzi, considera la
burocrazia ben più devastante dell'articolo 18 ("Non è
l'articolo a fermare lo sviluppo").
Né si può abusare dell'Europa: la lettera della Bce non
parla nei dettagli dell'articolo, ma di una "revisione
delle norme che regolano assunzione e licenziamento
(...), stabilendo un sistema di assicurazione dalla
disoccupazione e un insieme di politiche attive per il
mercato del lavoro". Le autorità europee sono
"indifferenti alle classi" (class-indifferent), ha detto un
economista greco, Yanis Varoufakis: fissano obiettivi,
non come raggiungerli.
Se i detrattori dell'articolo 18 sono così rigidi vuol dire
che dietro la loro battaglia c'è un'ideologia forte, restia
alle confutazioni. C'era in Berlusconi, ma c'è anche in
quello che Ezio Mauro chiama "integralismo
accademico". Una norma dello Statuto diventa
sineddoche, cioè la parte che spiega il tutto: come
quando si dice vela e s'intende nave. Si dice articolo
18 ma s'intende la filosofia, la genealogia, la storia
dell'incandescente articolo. Con questa filosofia e
questa storia si regolano i conti, e più precisamente
con alcuni principi base della socialdemocrazia: lo
Statuto dei lavoratori del '70, e la concertazione
praticata nei primi '90 tra governi, imprenditori,
sindacati.
Ambedue sono la riposta che la nostra classe dirigente
seppe dare al ribellismo sociale, nonché al terrorismo.
Ambedue generarono un Patto sociale permanente
che in Italia era inconsueto, che consentì ai sindacati
di preferire le riforme alla rivoluzione o ai particolarismi
rivendicativi. Che li spinse a unirsi, a rendersi
autonomi dai partiti. Che diede loro un'inedita
padronanza di sé, del destino nazionale (Amartya Sen
parla di empowerment, di potere su di sé dato agli
emarginati, perché diventino cittadini responsabili).
Tutto questo è socialdemocrazia, non comunismo o
consociativismo: anche se da noi il nome era altro. Chi
se la prende con tale patrimonio trucca un po' le carte.
La crisi del 2007-2008 non sembra passata da queste
parti, intaccando vecchi dogmi e anatemi: per molti
resta una storia raccontata da un idiota, piena di
rumore e furore, che prodigiosamente colpevolizza
non i mercati poco imbrigliati, ma le riforme
socialdemocratiche e la carta d'identità dell'Europa
postbellica che è stata la creazione (non a caso
concepita durante la guerra) del Welfare.
È così che alcune parole decadono, annerite: la
concertazione, il consenso o dialogo sociale. Perfino
dialettica è parola invisa a chi, certo d'avere scienza
infusa, non vede che il conflitto di idee e progetti è sale
della democrazia.
Vale dunque la pena ripensare gli anni '70-'90, che
produssero la variante socialdemocratica italiana che è
il patto sociale permanente. Lo Statuto dei lavoratori,
divenuto legge nel '70, viene approvato dal Senato il
giorno dopo Piazza Fontana. La concertazione e la
politica dei redditi furono perfezionate da Amato e
Ciampi nel '92 e '93, quando un sistema politico
infettato dalla corruzione e tanto più vulnerabile al
terrorismo venne messo in riga da Mani Pulite.
Salvaguardare la coesione sociale d'un Paese così
provato era prioritario, e per ottenerla fu inventata non
una democrazia più autoritaria ma più plurale, che del
conflitto sapesse far tesoro "coinvolgendo (sono parole
di Gino Giugni, ministro del lavoro di Ciampi) una
platea di soggetti assai più ampia di quella uscita dal
voto".
Sin dal '94 Berlusconi mise in questione tale eredità.
La concertazione divenne il nemico, come testimonia il
Libro Bianco sul lavoro presentato nel 2001 dal
ministro del Welfare Maroni: la codecisione doveva
finire, soppiantata da mere consultazioni. Che il
bersaglio non fosse il comunismo ma la
socialdemocrazia è attestato dalla biografia di Giugni:
è nel partito socialdemocratico di Saragat che il padre
della concertazione si fece le ossa.
In un libro-intervista del 2003, Giugni disse che con lo
Statuto dei lavoratori "la Costituzione entrò in
fabbrica", e che la concertazione rese la democrazia
più plurale, efficace: "Perché ci sia intesa bisogna
262

partire dalla diversità", scrisse, aggiungendo che la
critica della concertazione in nome delle prerogative
sovrane del Parlamento era infondata, anche quando
veniva da economisti illustri come Mario Monti (Giugni,
La lunga marcia della concertazione, Mulino).
Gino Giugni fu gambizzato nell'83 dalle Br. Altri
economisti a lui vicini, riformatori del diritto del lavoro,
furono assassinati (Tarantelli, D'Antona, Biagi). Tutti
erano fautori della concertazione. Ricordiamo quel che
disse D'Antona, sull'articolo 18 e la reintegrazione
dell'operaio licenziato per fittizi motivi economici: "Il
superamento delle forme più rigide di garantismo può
portare a rivedere in cosa consiste un licenziamento
legittimo, ma non a sottoporre a revisione i rimedi che
si offrono nei confronti dei licenziamenti non
rispondenti a tale requisito". Il regolamento dei conti
non è finito, con un'epoca che vide congiungersi
concertazione, lotta alla corruzione, antimafia. Noi
commemoriamo Falcone e Borsellino, e Tarantelli,
D'Antona, Biagi. Ma volentieri ne dimentichiamo i
metodi e le fedi.
Dicono che l'articolo 18 non ha da essere tabù, e certo
i difetti non mancano: i processi sterminati sono fonte
d'incertezza. Ma i tabù sono materia combustibile, non
si spengono senza pericolo. Ci deve essere una
ragione per cui all'articolo s'aggrappa anche chi -
precario, disoccupato - non ne usufruisce. Anche chi,
col tristo nome di esodato, non ha più lavoro e non
ancora pensione. Esistono tabù civilizzatori, eretti
contro future derive. I tabù non sono idoli, feticci. È
colma di tabù, l'Europa uscita da guerre e dittature che
La Repubblica/ - Cronaca, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Constitución)
fecero strame di antichi divieti (non ucciderai, non
negherai giustizia alla vedova e all'orfano, ai deboli e
diversi). Per Hitler era tabù intollerabile anche il
Decalogo.
Gli economisti neo-liberali che denunciano mercati
troppo regolati hanno forse in mente una società
perfetta, che funziona senza lentezze né dubbi. Si
dicono ispirati da Adam Smith. Ma Smith teorizzò la
mano invisibile che in un libero mercato trasforma
l'interesse egoista in pubblica virtù, restando il filosofo
morale che era. In quanto tale se la prese con gli
ideologi, chiamati "uomini animati da spirito di
sistema".
L'uomo di sistema, scrive nella Teoria dei sentimenti
morali, "tende a essere molto saggio nel suo giudizio e
spesso è talmente innamorato della presunta bellezza
del suo progetto ideale di governo, che non riesce a
tollerare la minima deviazione da esso. Sembra
ritenere di poter sistemare i membri di una grande
società con la stessa facilità con cui sistema i pezzi su
una scacchiera.(...) Nella grande scacchiera della
società umana ogni singolo pezzo ha un principio di
moto autonomo, del tutto diverso da quello che la
legislazione può decidere di imporgli".
Forse vale la pena rileggere Smith il moralizzatore,
oltre che l'economista: l'avversario di tutti coloro che
"inebriati dalla bellezza immaginaria di sistemi ideali" si
lasciano ingannare dai loro stessi sofismi, e alla
società chiedono troppo, non ottenendo nulla.
263

Le Monde/ - Article, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Conseil Constitutionnel)
Pour contrer Sarkozy, Hollande détaille
sa "première année"
Le moment n'a pas été choisi au hasard. A la veille de
la présentation, par Nicolas Sarkozy, de son projet
présidentiel, François Hollande devait marquer les
esprits. Depuis quelques jours, il s'évertuait à
démonétiser par avance les annonces de son
adversaire, qualifié ironiquement, à La Réunion, de
"grand prometteur, petit donneur". " Jeudi, nous avons
son projet (...). Il nous annonce même des surprises.
Mais la surprise, on l'a déjà eue depuis cinq ans, et
elle est mauvaise ", a-t-il récidivé lors d'un meeting à
Blois, mardi 3 avril.
Lire aussi : Hollande durcit le ton contre Sarkozy :
"Maintenant, on va le taper"
Se contenter de jouer en contre à coup de bons mots,
pourtant, était un peu court. D'où la décision, calée en
comité stratégique mardi matin, de rendre public,
mercredi, le calendrier des réformes que la gauche
mettrait en œuvre en cas de victoire.
A Rennes, mercredi soir, lors d'un meeting
originellement prévu le 20 mars, mais ajourné à cause
de la fusillade de Toulouse, M. Hollande devait donc
présenter le calendrier de "la première année du
changement". En matière de communication, le coup
est habile. Il permet de détourner l'attention des
commentateurs de ce qui faisait jusqu'alors la seule
singularité du meeting de Rennes : la présence sur
scène, pour la seule fois de la campagne, de Ségolène
Royal. Par le contenu de son intervention, le candidat
socialiste espère que les mots primeront sur l'image,
que le fond l'emportera sur le côté "people" et que, en
parlant de l'avenir du pays, son passé conjugal
passera au second plan.
FABIUS, LA MEILLEURE SOURCE
Comment la première année de la présidence
Hollande pourrait-elle donc se dérouler ? Pour avoir la
réponse, la meilleure source s'appelle Laurent Fabius.
Chargé par Martine Aubry, au printemps 2011, de
travailler au calendrier de la première année d'un futur
gouvernement socialiste, l'ancien premier ministre a
continué son travail après la défaite à la primaire de la
première secrétaire, qu'il soutenait, pour le mettre au
service de M. Hollande, qui fut longtemps son pire
ennemi rue de Solférino.
Elu, par hypothèse, le 6 mai, le président Hollande
pourrait ne pas attendre le 16, comme en 2007, pour
entrer en fonction. "Le Conseil constitutionnel
proclamera les résultats le 10 ou le 11, et cela pourrait
se faire dans la foulée, car arrivent très vite de grands
rendez-vous internationaux comme le G8 de Camp
David [18-19 mai] et le sommet de l'OTAN à Chicago
[20-21 mai], où sera annoncé le retrait de nos troupes
d'Afghanistan", explique M. Fabius.
POUVOIR D'ACHAT
En plus de mesures symboliques prises "dès le
premier conseil des ministres", comme la réduction de
30 % de la rémunération du chef de l'Etat et des
membres du gouvernement, des décrets seront pris
"pour le pouvoir d'achat" - blocage des prix des
carburants pour trois mois, augmentation de
l'allocation de rentrée scolaire de 25 % -, ainsi que
"pour réduire les injustices" : retraite à 60 ans pour
ceux qui ont commencé à travailler à 18 ans et cotisé
41 annuités, fixation d'un écart de 1 à 20 pour les
rémunérations dans le public.
C'est lors de la session extraordinaire du Parlement,
du 3 juillet au 2 août, que seront votées les premières
lois : réforme fiscale, avec la suppression des niches,
retour au barème précédent de l'impôt de solidarité sur
la fortune (ISF), taxation à 75 % des plus hauts
revenus ou suppression de la "TVA Sarkozy". Sont
aussi prévues une loi sur "l'assainissement des
activités bancaires", séparant les activités de dépôt
des activités spéculatives, une "conférence pour la
croissance et l'emploi" et un "débat sur la transition
énergétique".
Lire aussi : Le camp Hollande consulte pour affiner la
réforme bancaire du candidat PS
Ensuite, de septembre 2012 à juin 2013, un "nouvel
acte de décentralisation" sera engagé, la Banque
publique d'investissement sera lancée, les deux tiers
des 150 000 emplois d'avenir du quinquennat seront
créés, le contrat de génération entrera en vigueur et
des réformes sociétales seront adoptées, comme le
"droit au mariage et à l'adoption pour tous les couples"
et le "droit de mourir dans la dignité".
Du concret, du précis, du minuté : le nouveau "plan
com" du staff Hollande, qui vise à saturer "pendant 48
heures" le débat pour écraser sous un tapis de
264

ombes la présentation du "programme caché" du chef
de l'Etat, tente de démentir l'idée, largement répandue,
selon laquelle la campagne socialiste est
essentiellement pensée pour capitaliser sur
l'antisarkozysme. Et que, contrairement aux
apparences, M. Hollande viserait plus un changement
de présidence qu'un changement de politique. "Le
changement, ce n'est pas simplement maintenant,
c'est tout de suite. Dès le premier jour de notre arrivée
à la présidence de la République ", s'est-il employé à
faire valoir mardi.
Le Monde/ - Article, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Conseil Constitutionnel)
L'argument est à double tranchant. Il vise aussi à
prémunir M. Hollande contre l'ascension de Jean-Luc
Mélenchon, en promouvant, face à la gauche du
verbe, celle du faire. "Je suis sérieusement de gauche
et je suis pour une gauche sérieuse. Celle qui ne
décevra pas, ne déviera pas, ne se détournera pas de
ses engagements", a assuré le candidat socialiste à
Tours.
265

Los Angeles Times/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Peter M. Douglas dies at 69; California
Coastal Commission chief
As a child crossing the English Channel with his family
to immigrate to America, Peter M. Douglas was
mesmerized by the churning seas and his first sighting
of a whale, an experience that he said forged an
"intangible, unbreakable, lifelong bond" with the ocean
that deepened as he grew up in Southern California.
That fondness for the ocean would later lead him to
become one of the fiercest and most controversial
guardians of the state's 1,100-mile-long coastline who
battled to preserve its natural beauty and public
access to its beaches.
He was the main author of California's landmark
coastal protection law and for more than a
quarter-century was executive director of the California
Coastal Commission, the powerful regulatory agency
he helped create.
Douglas, 69, who died Sunday at his sister's home in
La Quinta, relinquished his day-to-day duties at the
commission last June after a cancer diagnosis and
retired in November.
He was a seminal figure in conservation as the
principal author of Proposition 20, a grass-roots
initiative approved by voters in 1972 that created the
California Coastal Commission and gave it control over
development along the state's coast. He later helped
write the 1976 Coastal Act, a landmark law that
became a model for other states and countries and
made the commission a permanent body with an
unusual degree of autonomy.
As executive director since 1985, Douglas guided the
12-member commission on many contentious issues,
including blocking offshore oil drilling and leasing,
sharply restricting coastal construction and expanding
public access to the beach. He and his staff settled a
number of complex disputes involving coastal
resources, including an unprecedented expansion plan
for the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach that
added 500 acres of landfills and cargo terminals while
compensating for the loss of marine habitats.
"Peter maintained public access to the coast so that it
wasn't just something that belonged to the rich," said
Warner Chabot, former executive director of the
California League of Conservation Voters. "Probably
his greatest achievement wasn't what you see," he
added, "but rather a political achievement .? He
created a commission that enabled citizens to take
direct action to protect their coast and be seen as
equals with the very rich and powerful landowners
along the coast."
In the process, Douglas made many enemies. Both
Democrats and Republicans tried to remove him from
his post and slashed the commission budget.
Developers campaigned strenuously to reduce his and
the commission's influence, persuading the U.S.
Supreme Court in 1987 to limit the panel's power to
carve public access ways into private ocean-front
property in exchange for granting building permits to
the property owner.
The most fundamental challenge came in 2002, when
critics led by the conservative Pacific Legal Foundation
won lower-court rulings that found the method for
selecting commission members unconstitutional, which
threatened to overturn hundreds of commission
decisions. The conflict was settled by the California
Supreme Court, which rejected the critics'
arguments.
"The goals and objectives of the Coastal Act are to
better the environment, give due-process rights and
protect the liberties of property owners. Unfortunately
Peter Douglas and the Coastal Commission ignored
the protections that are guaranteed in the act," said
attorney Ronald Zumbrun, a frequent adversary who
led the unsuccessful constitutional challenge.
At the same time Zumbrun acknowledged that Douglas
brought formidable skills to his leadership of the
agency. "Peter has been such a dominant person and
so effective in his maneuvering and political instincts, I
doubt anyone can match that," Zumbrun said.
Bearded and fond of wearing Birkenstock sandals to
the office, Douglas described himself as a "radical
pagan heretic," who often spoke of his deep spiritual
bond with nature.
He was initially diagnosed with throat cancer in 2004
and was declared cancer-free in 2010 before
discovering a month later that he had advanced lung
cancer.
As his cancer progressed, he wrote of his beliefs about
life and death in lengthy, highly philosophical emails to
friends. He halted mainstream Western medical
treatment in favor of Eastern therapies, abandoned his
strict vegan diet and wound up outliving his doctors'
dismal prognoses by many months, applying the same
drive and optimism to his personal fight as he had to
his job as chief steward of California's coast.
"Part of the reason for his success is he was not the
typical bureaucrat," said Melvin L. Nutter, who was
commission chairman when Douglas was promoted to
executive director. "He was a poetic visionary. His
vision ? helped sustain the coastal program as well as
his career."
266

Douglas was born in the German capital of Berlin on
Aug. 22, 1942. When he was 2, Allied bombers
destroyed his home, causing him to flee with his family
to a friend's farm near the Polish border and eventually
to an area in Bavaria controlled by American forces. In
1950, he immigrated to the United States.
As a youth in Southern California, he surfed off
Redondo Beach and camped in the desert and
mountains.
In 1965 he earned an undergraduate degree in
psychology at UCLA. After studying for a year in
Germany, he entered UCLA's law school, where he
plunged into antiwar and social justice movements and
co-founded a law collective. After completing his law
degree in 1969, he and his German-born wife, Rotraut,
moved abroad for a few years. Environmentalism was
not yet on his radar.
He returned to the U.S. in 1971 and accepted a job in
Sacramento on the staff of then-Assemblyman Alan
Sieroty, a Democrat from Los Angeles, who put him in
charge of writing laws to protect the state's coastline.
The challenge "quickly grabbed me and never let me
go," Douglas recalled in a personal blog last year.
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, oil spills off Santa
Barbara and waterfront developments in enclaves
such as Malibu had created a sense of urgency about
threats to the state's scenic shoreline. The coast,
Douglas told The Times in 1996, "was in a very
precarious state. It was clear that unless something
drastic was done, it would be irretrievably lost or
compromised."
Despite fierce and well-financed opposition by coastal
landowners, developers and oil companies, the
Coastal Commission was created in 1972 when voters
passed Proposition 20. Douglas then helped craft the
Coastal Act, which was adopted in 1976 with
bipartisan support. In 1977 Douglas joined the
commission staff as deputy director. Eight years later,
Los Angeles Times/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
he was narrowly approved as executive director.
He counted among the commission's most significant
achievements defeating a proposed toll road skirting
San Onofre State Beach, a liquefied natural gas
terminal off the Ventura County coast and the
development of Hearst Ranch. He considered the
decision to allow housing subdivisions along the Bolsa
Chica wetlands one of its worst failures.
During his tenure he weathered about a dozen
attempts to oust him, the most serious of which came
in 1996, when the commission was dominated by
Republican appointees. The effort failed after
hundreds of Douglas' supporters packed the
commission meeting in protest, many of them
chastising members for what they considered a
blatantly political move. Douglas attributed the attack
on him to his opposition to the Bolsa Chica housing
project and Southern California Edison's efforts to
renege on a promise to mitigate environmental impacts
caused by the San Onofre nuclear plant in northern
San Diego County.
"The coast," Douglas told The Times in 2001, "is never
saved. It's always being saved. The job of
environmental stewardship of the coast is never done.
It's never dull, and it's never done."
Douglas, who had homes in the Marin County city of
Larkspur and on the Smith River in the state's
northernmost Del Norte County, was divorced from his
wife and is survived by her and their two sons, Vanja
Douglas and Sascha Douglas; a sister, Christina
Douglas; a brother, Dieter Claren; and two
grandchildren.
Services will be private, but the commission plans a
public memorial this summer.
elaine.woo@latimes.com
Los Angeles Times staff writer Tony Barboza
contributed to this report.
267

Reuters General/ - Article, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
India army units' unusual movements
spooked government: paper
(Reuters) - Two Indian army units that moved towards
New Delhi on a January night without notifying the
government raised alarm in the capital, the Indian
Express newspaper reported on Wednesday, but the
Defense Ministry and army quickly denied the report.
The infantry unit of the 33rd Armored Division based
150 km (90 miles) from Delhi and a unit of the airborne
50 Para brigade based in Agra to the south reached
the outskirts of Delhi before being ordered back, the
newspaper said.
The army and Defense Ministry said the units were
engaged in routine exercises to test mobility in fog and
did not need to warn the government in advance.
Ministry spokesman Sitanshu Kar told Reuters it was
not true the maneuvers had caused alarm.
Defense Minister A.K. Antony said the exercises were
normal and he was fully confident the armed forces
would not do anything to undermine India's
democracy.
"This is baseless. In the ministry, with the minister,
there is no communication gap. There is no trust
deficit. I have full faith in them. They are working
together," he told reporters after a ceremony to launch
a nuclear submarine.
The troop movements happened at a time of friction
between the army chief, General Vijay Kumar Singh,
and the government. The newspaper said the
accepted view is there was a breakdown in
communication rather than a plot of any kind.
The military in India, the world's largest democracy,
has traditionally stayed out of politics and is not known
for conspiring against governments in a region plagued
by instability.
On the night in question, lookouts confirmed the two
units were travelling towards New Delhi, the
newspaper said.
Antony was informed and the government ordered
police to check all vehicles on roads to Delhi as a way
of slowing traffic. The Defense secretary, the ministry's
top civil servant, cut short a trip to Malaysia to handle
the situation, the newspaper said.
The report highlights deep rifts and a tension in recent
months between the world's second largest standing
army and the government.
On January 16, the day the exercises took place, army
chief Singh took a case against the government to the
Supreme Court in a row about whether he could serve
another year before retiring. He later lost the case.
Last week, Singh said he was offered a $2.8 million
bribe and accused the Defense minister of not acting
on information about corruption in the forces. He also
wrote a letter to the prime minister in March saying the
army was not in proper shape to defend the country.
The letter was leaked.
(Reporting by Anurag Kotoky, Annie Banerji and Frank
Jack Daniel; Editing by Robert Birsel)
268

The Economic Times/ - News, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
No need for bounty, we are not hiding in
caves: Hafiz Muhammad Saeed
ISLAMABAD: Responding to the $10 million US
bounty on information leading to his arrest, the founder
of Lashkare-Taiba, Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, on
Tuesday said America is frustrated with his protests
against resumption of Nato supplies, and it must
immediately vacate South Asia and avoid pleasing
India through "cheap strategies".
"There's no need of announcing bounties. We are not
hiding in caves. I think the US is frustrated with our
protests against the resumption of Nato supplies and
drone attacks," Hafiz Saeed told television channels.
"I believe the US has either very little knowledge and is
basing its decisions on wrong information provided by
India or it is just frustrated," he said, adding that
Americans are trying to please India by using cheap
strategies. "The US should immediately vacate the
subcontinent," Saeed said.
The US rewards for justice programme sponsored by
the state department had announced a cash reward of
$10 million for the 62-year-old Saeed on its website on
Monday . US undersecretary of state Wendy Sherman,
on a visit to India, also announced a $3 million bounty
on Abul Rehman Makki, Saeed's brother-in-law.
The bounty on Saeed is same as the one on Afghan
Taliban leader Mullah Omar, and second only to
al-Qaida number one Ayman al Zawahiri, who
succeeded Osama bin Laden after his liquidation in
Abbottabad in Pakistan in May last year.
Pakistan had put Saeed under house arrest a month
after the 2008 Mumbai attacks , but he was released in
2009. In 2010, the Pakistan Supreme Court upheld
his release on the grounds that there was insufficient
evidence to detain him.
The reward announcement comes at a time when
president Asif Ali Zardari is due to visit India.
Analysts believe that the US move is designed to
pressure Saeed and the Pakistan government. "Saeed
has been the key person organizing rallies against the
reopening of Nato supply lines through Pakistan. The
US wants to curtail his activities at a time when the
government is debating the reopening of supply lines
to Nato forces in Afghanistan," said Hasan Askari
Rizvi, a defence analyst.
269

How dare President Obama brush back the Supreme
Court like that?
Has this former constitutional law instructor no respect
for our venerable system of checks and balances?
Nah. And why should he?
This court, cosseted behind white marble pillars, out of
reach of TV, accountable to no one once they give the
last word, is well on its way to becoming one of the
most divisive in modern American history.
It has squandered even the semi-illusion that it is the
unbiased, honest guardian of the Constitution. It is
run by hacks dressed up in black robes.
All the fancy diplomas of the conservative majority
cannot disguise the fact that its reasoning on the most
important decisions affecting Americans seems
shaped more by a political handbook than a legal
brief.
President Obama never should have waded into the
health care thicket back when the economy was
teetering. He should have listened to David Axelrod
and Rahm Emanuel and not Michelle.
His failure from the start to sell his plan or even explain
it is bizarre and self-destructive. And certainly he
needs a more persuasive solicitor general.
Still, it was stunning to hear Antonin Scalia talking like
a Senate whip during oral arguments last week on the
constitutionality of the health care law. He mused on
how hard it would be to get 60 votes to repeal parts of
the act, explaining why the court may just throw out the
whole thing. And, sounding like a campaign’s
oppo-research guy, he batted around politically
charged terms like “Cornhusker Kickback,” referring to
a sweetheart deal that isn’t even in the law.
If he’s so brilliant, why is he drawing a risible parallel
between buying health care and buying broccoli?
The justices want to be above it all, beyond reproach
or criticism. But why should they be?
In 2000, the Republican majority put aside its
professed disdain of judicial activism and helped to
purloin the election for W., who went on to heedlessly
invade Iraq and callously ignore Katrina.
Men in Black
The New York Times/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
As Anthony Lewis wrote in The Times back then,
“Deciding a case of this magnitude with such disregard
for reason invites people to treat the court’s aura of
reason as an illusion.”
The 2010 House takeover by Republicans and the
G.O.P. presidential primary have shown what a fiasco
the Citizens United decision is, with self-interested
sugar daddies and wealthy cronies overwhelming the
democratic process.
On Monday, the court astoundingly ruled — 5
Republican appointees to 4 Democratic appointees —
to give police carte blanche on strip-searches, even for
minor offenses such as driving without a license or
violating a leash law. Justice Stephen Breyer’s warning
that wholesale strip-searches were “a serious affront to
human dignity and to individual privacy” fell on deaf
ears. So much for the conservatives’ obsession with
“liberty.”
The Supreme Court mirrors the setup on Fox News:
There are liberals who make arguments, but they are
weak foils, relegated to the background and trying to
get in a few words before the commercials.
Just as in the Senate’s shameful Anita Hill-Clarence
Thomas hearings, the liberals on the court focus on
process and the conservatives focus on results. John
Roberts Jr.’s benign beige facade is deceiving; he’s a
crimson partisan, simply more cloaked than the
ideologically rigid and often venomous Scalia.
Just as Scalia voted to bypass that little thing called
democracy and crown W. president, so he expressed
ennui at the idea that, even if parts of the health care
law are struck down, some provisions could be saved:
“You really want us to go through these 2,700 pages?”
he asked, adding: “Is this not totally unrealistic?”
Inexplicably mute 20 years after he lied his way onto
the court, Clarence Thomas didn’t ask a single
question during oral arguments for one of the biggest
cases in the court’s history.
When the Supreme Court building across from the
Capitol opened in 1935, the architect, Cass Gilbert,
played up the pomp, wanting to reflect the court’s role
as the national ideal of justice.
With conservatives on that court trying to block F.D.R.,
and with Roosevelt prepared to pack the court, the
New Yorker columnist Howard Brubaker noted that the
270

new citadel had “fine big windows to throw the New
Deal out of.”
Now conservative justices may throw Obama’s
hard-won law out of those fine big windows. They’ve
already been playing Twister, turning precedents into
pretzels to achieve their political objective. In 2005,
Scalia was endorsing a broad interpretation of the
commerce clause and the necessary and proper
clause, the clauses now coming under scrutiny from
the majority, including the swing vote, Justice Anthony
Kennedy. (Could the dream of expanded health care
die at the hands of a Kennedy?)
The New York Times/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Scalia, Roberts, Thomas and the insufferable Samuel
Alito were nurtured in the conservative Federalist
Society, which asserts that “it is emphatically the
province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law
is, not what it should be.”
But it isn’t conservative to overturn a major law passed
by Congress in the middle of an election. The
majority’s political motives are as naked as a
strip-search.
271

The New York Times/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Sentenced for Stealing Art, Man Won’t
Say Where It Is
For more than a year, Roxane West spared few efforts
while searching for hundreds of oil paintings by her
aunt that were stolen from a building in TriBeCa.
Ms. West, who had promised the aunt, Shirley Almeda
West, that she would preserve her life’s work, said she
spent almost $100,000 trying to track the paintings
down. She hired two private investigators and even
consulted a psychic. All the while, she hoped that
Mihaly Kovacsevics, the superintendent of the building
where her aunt had lived and worked, and the man
charged with stealing the paintings, would reveal their
whereabouts.
But Mr. Kovacsevics has remained silent.
On Tuesday, just before he was sentenced, Ms. West
beseeched Mr. Kovacsevics a final time.
“I beg you to tell me where my paintings are,” she said,
her voice quavering. “Please, please, let me have her
lifetime work back, please.”
Mr. Kovacsevics, sitting handcuffed in a chair facing
Justice Charles H. Solomon in State Supreme Court
in Manhattan, spoke softly to his lawyer, Marnie Zien.
“Does your client want to say something?” the judge
asked.
“No, Judge,” Ms. Zien replied.
With that, Justice Solomon sentenced Mr.
Kovacsevics, a native of Hungary, to three to nine
years in prison and said he should be deported after
serving his time.
Mr. Kovacsevics was arrested in August as he was
about to board a plane to Germany. About a week
later, he was indicted on three counts of grand larceny
stemming from the theft of the paintings from Ms. West
and jewelry from two other people. In February, he
pleaded guilty to those charges.
Ms. West said she got to know Mr. Kovacsevics while
visiting her aunt, who obtained a master of fine arts
degree from Columbia University in 1958 and who
studied in the 1940s and ’50s with noted artists,
including the German expressionist Max Beckmann
and Robert Beverly Hale, curator of American painting
at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
To Ms. West, Mr. Kovacsevics, known as Mike, was a
“super super,” she told the judge during a statement in
court, one who picked up pastrami sandwiches for her
aunt, from the Lower East Side, and brought her bags
of apples.
“He was almost like family,” she told the judge. “I
trusted him completely.”
When her aunt was ailing, Ms. West said, she
summoned a priest to her bedside. Mr. Kovacsevics
showed up too, she said, and participated in “the holy
sacrament.”
After Ms. West’s aunt died in June 2010, she was
comforted at first when Mr. Kovacsevics told her that
he had secured 497 paintings and thousands of works
on paper by Shirley Almeda West in the building’s
basement. Not long afterward, though, he seemed to
vanish, Ms. West said, adding that at first she was
concerned that he might be in some sort of trouble.
Later she realized that most of the drawings, and
about 450 of the paintings, were missing, and came to
believe that Mr. Kovacsevics was responsible. Ms.
West said it was impossible to place a dollar value on
the lost art because her aunt had never sold her work.
But she added that the paintings and drawings had
held a strong sentimental value, and made her feel as
if she were “surrounded by Shirley’s spirit.”
The fact that a trusted friend had committed the theft
plunged Ms. West into a deep gloom that she said had
not been relieved by visits to a hypnotherapist and a
psychologist. “For Mike to steal from my aunt and me
is a complete betrayal,” she told the judge. “It is
something that I will never get over.”
As Ms. West spoke, Mr. Kovacsevics, who was
wearing a gray sweatsuit and staring straight ahead,
leaned back in his chair. After being sentenced, he
rose and walked slowly back to a holding cell. Ms.
West, her eyes brimming, looked at him as she left the
courtroom, but Mr. Kovacsevics did not look back.
272

The New York Times/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Liquor-License Fight Moves From Park
Ave. to Albany
A bill quietly surfaced in Albany last week that would
overrule regulators and grant a liquor license to an
unnamed establishment on Park Avenue.
It was the latest maneuver in a nasty, six-year-old fight
that has bounced from one of Manhattan’s most
exclusive neighborhoods to the State Liquor Authority
and the courts. Now it has caused an unusual rift
among Democratic lawmakers because the bill’s
sponsor is from Brooklyn and is being accused of
meddling.
The dispute has pitted local residents against the Third
Church of Christ Scientist, which leases much of its
stately neo-Georgian building at the northeast corner
of Park Avenue and 63rd Street to a caterer, who
hosts lavish weddings, bar mitzvahs, fashion shows
and charity events that draw traffic, noise and
hundreds of guests.
The caterer wants a liquor license as a matter of
course. Residents want peace and quiet. Both sides
seem to have the stamina and the wherewithal to carry
on for years.
State law prohibits the issuance of a liquor license to a
business that is within 200 feet of a school or place of
worship, like Central Presbyterian Church, two doors to
the north of the Third Church. But the proposed
legislation — introduced by Assemblyman Joseph R.
Lentol of Brooklyn — would carve out an exception for
the caterer, Rose Group Park Avenue, allowing it to
serve liquor to patrons.
Mr. Lentol listed Dan Quart, the assemblyman who
represents the Upper East Side, as a co-sponsor of
the bill, but shortly after it was submitted, Mr. Quart
asked Mr. Lentol to remove his name. State Senator
Liz Krueger, who also represents the district, told Mr.
Lentol that she was “not interested in any shape or
form” in providing Rose with an exemption from liquor
laws. All three lawmakers are Democrats.
Mr. Lentol said he met Louis Rose, owner of the Rose
Group, at the Jan. 29 wedding of Assemblyman Daniel
O’Donnell at Guastavino’s, an Upper East Side
catering hall also operated by the Rose Group. He said
Mr. Rose had asked for help.
Mr. Lentol said he submitted the bill to prod the liquor
authority into being “more reasonable” about a
decision that would force the cancellation of events
booked before the court’s decision, not imagining that
the bill might be adopted. Until recently, the Rose
Group appeared to be on the road to obtaining a liquor
license, winning court decisions against the State
Liquor Authority.
But in January, the Appellate Division of the State
Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the liquor
authority had properly denied Rose a liquor license.
Both the Rose Group and the Third Church of Christ
Scientist, which was not a party to the lawsuit, insisted
that they shared the building and deserved special
consideration. (One more indication of how tangled the
dispute has gotten: Christian Scientists do not drink,
yet the church is supporting the Rose Group’s bid for
the liquor license.)
Mr. Rose, who says he has spent $6 million repairing
the church and creating the catering hall, did not return
calls seeking comment.
Under certain circumstances, religious institutions are
exempt from liquor restrictions: while state law
prohibits liquor licenses for businesses that are within
200 feet of a church, the church itself might be able to
serve liquor at some functions.
But the court said the Rose Group had clearly turned
the building into a catering hall by removing all the
church pews and installing kitchen equipment and a
V.I.P. room.
Last week, two days after Mr. Lentol submitted his bill,
the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals,
declined to hear the Rose Group’s appeal.
But this battle on the East Side is far from over. “We
plan to stay in business,” said the Rose Group’s
lawyer, Victor A. Kovner. “Our client plans to apply for
a wine and beer license. The 200-foot rule applies only
to a liquor license.”
That brought no comfort to Adele Hogan, a longtime
opponent who lives nearby with her husband and two
children. “It’s a very disruptive presence in an already
congested area that’s zoned residential,” said Ms.
Hogan, a member of the Preservation Coalition,
formed to oppose the catering hall. “I don’t understand
273

how an assemblyman from Brooklyn proposes
legislation affecting a Manhattan community.”
On Monday night, unhappy residents watched black
cars blocking a traffic lane as guests dismounted to
attend the “Save Venice” charity event at the building,
at 583 Park Avenue.
Thomas Draper, chairman of the trustees overseeing
the church, also expressed disappointment over the
turn of events.
The church had turned to Mr. Rose in 2006 because
its dwindling congregation could not handle the cost of
The New York Times/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
maintaining and restoring its 88-year-old, four-story
building. Under the long-term lease, Rose Group pays
the church more than $250,000 a year in rent as well
as 10 percent of sales.
For now, the fate of Assemblyman Lentol’s bill remains
unclear. But he indicated some regret at getting
involved.
“I didn’t realize there was so much adverse feeling
about it,” he said. “I was told there was a small group
that objected, but the community at large was not
against it.”
274

The New York Times/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
Elizabeth Catlett, Sculptor With Eye on
Social Issues, Is Dead at 96
Elizabeth Catlett, whose abstracted sculptures of the
human form reflected her deep concern with the
African-American experience and the struggle for civil
rights, died on Monday at her home in Cuernavaca,
Mexico, where she had lived since the late 1940s. She
was 96.
June Kelly, one of her American dealers, said Ms.
Catlett died in her sleep.
In her smoothly modeled clay, wood and stone
sculptures, and vigorous woodcuts and linocuts, Ms.
Catlett drew on her experience as an African-American
woman who had come of age at a time of widespread
segregation and who had felt its sting. But her art had
other influences, including pre-Columbian sculpture,
Henry Moore’s sensuous reclining nudes and Diego
Rivera’s political murals.
Her best-known works depict black women as strong,
maternal figures. In one early sculpture, “Mother and
Child” (1939), a young woman with close-cropped hair
and features resembling a Gabon mask cradles a child
against her shoulder. It won first prize in sculpture at
the American Negro Exposition in Chicago. In a recent
piece, “Bather” (2009), a similar-looking subject flexes
her triceps in a gesture of vitality and confidence.
Her art did not exclude men; “Invisible Man,” her
15-foot-high bronze memorial to the author Ralph
Ellison, can be seen in Riverside Park in Manhattan, at
150th Street.
Her art was often presented in the United States, in
major surveys in the 1960s and ’70s in particular,
among them “Two Centuries of Black American Art,” at
the Los Angeles County Museum of Art in 1976. Her
posters of Harriet Tubman, Angela Davis, Malcolm X
and other figures were widely distributed.
Alice Elizabeth Catlett was born on April 15, 1915, in
Washington, the youngest of three children. Her
mother, the former Mary Carson, was a truant officer;
her father, John, who died before she was born, had
taught at Tuskegee University and in the local public
school system.
Ms. Catlett became an educator, too. After graduating
cum laude from Howard University in 1935, she taught
high school in Durham, N.C.
Howard hadn’t been her first choice. She had won a
scholarship to the Carnegie Institute of Technology, in
Pittsburgh, but the college refused to allow her to
matriculate when it learned she was black. So she
entered historically black Howard, with one semester’s
worth of tuition saved by her mother. She earned
scholarships to cover the rest.
An interest in the painter Grant Wood led her to pursue
an M.F.A. at the University of Iowa, where Wood was
teaching. There she focused on stone carvings rooted
in her own experience — sensitive portraits of
African-American women and children.
After graduating she moved to New Orleans to teach
at Dillard University, another historically black
institution. There she organized a trip to the Delgado
Museum of Art so that her students could see a
Picasso exhibition. But this was no ordinary school trip;
the museum was officially off-limits to blacks, so Ms.
Catlett arranged to visit on a day when it was closed to
the public.
While on a summer break from Dillard, she met the
artist Charles White in Chicago. They married in 1941
and divorced five years later.
She left New Orleans to study with the Russian-born
sculptor Ossip Zadkine in New York. Mr. Zadkine, who
spent his formative years in Montparnasse alongside
Modigliani and Brancusi, nudged her work in a more
abstract direction. During this time, the early 1940s,
Ms. Catlett also worked in adult education at the
George Washington Carver School in Harlem, a
program that nurtured the photographer Roy
DeCarava, among others.
In 1946 Ms. Catlett traveled to Mexico on a fellowship.
There she married the artist Francisco Mora and
accepted an invitation to work at Taller de Gráfica
Popular (TGP), a workshop in Mexico City for murals
and graphic arts. The TGP inspired her to reach out to
the broadest possible audience, which often meant
balancing abstraction with figuration.
“I learned how you use your art for the service of
people, struggling people, to whom only realism is
meaningful,” she later said of this period.
275

Like other artists and activists, Ms. Catlett felt the
political tensions of the McCarthy years. The TGP was
thought to have ties to the Communist Party; Ms.
Catlett never joined the party, but Mr. White, her first
husband, had been a member, and she was closely
watched by the United States Embassy.
In 1949 she was arrested, along with other expatriates,
during a railroad workers’ strike in Mexico City.
Eventually she gave up her American citizenship and
was declared an undesirable alien by the State
Department. In 1971 she had to obtain a special visa
to attend the opening of her one-woman show at the
Studio Museum in Harlem.
Ms. Catlett continued to teach even after becoming a
successful artist. In 1958 she became the first female
professor of sculpture and head of the sculpture
department at the National Autonomous University of
Mexico’s School of Fine Arts in Mexico City. She
retired to Cuernavaca, about 35 miles southwest of
Mexico City, in 1975.
Ms. Catlett’s art is in museums around the world,
including the Museum of Modern Art and the
Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York; the High
Museum in Atlanta; the Museum of Modern Art in
Mexico City; and the National Museum of Prague. In
2003, the International Sculpture Center gave her a
lifetime achievement award.
Mr. Mora, her husband, died in 2002. She is survived
by three sons, Francisco, Juan and David Mora
Catlett, 10 grandchildren and six great-grandchildren.
The New York Times/ - Politics, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Civil Rights)
In 1998, the Neuberger Museum of Art at Purchase
College in Westchester County exhibited a 50-year
retrospective of Ms. Catlett’s sculpture. The critic
Michael Brenson wrote in the show’s catalog, “Ms.
Catlett’s sculptures communicate a deeply human
image of African-Americans while appealing to values
and virtues that encourage a sense of common
humanity.” He also singled out the “fluid, sensual
surfaces” of her sculptures, which he said “seem to
welcome not just the embrace of light but also the
caress of the viewer’s hand.”
In his review of that show for The New York Times,
Ken Johnson wrote that Ms. Catlett “gives wood and
stone a melting, almost erotic luminosity.” But he also
found her iconography “generic and clichéd.”
Last year, the Bronx Museum mounted “Stargazers:
Elizabeth Catlett in Conversation With 21
Contemporary Artists,” an exhibition that placed her
sculptures, prints and drawings in the company of
works by Ellen Gallagher, Kalup Linzy, Wangechi Mutu
and others at the forefront of the contemporary art
scene.
In her own words, Ms. Catlett was more concerned
with the social dimension of her art than its novelty or
originality. As she told a former student, the artist and
art historian Samella S. Lewis, “I have always wanted
my art to service my people — to reflect us, to relate to
us, to stimulate us, to make us aware of our potential.”
Daniel E. Slotnik contributed reporting.
276

USA Today/ - News, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Obama's day: Easter prayer, the STOCK
Act
Good morning from The Oval, on a day when
President Obama makes a religious observance and
signs a bipartisan congressional bill.
This morning, Obama hosts an Easter Prayer
Breakfast at the White House. "Christian leaders from
across the country will join the President at this
breakfast for a time of prayer, reflection, and
celebration of Easter," says the White House.
Late this morning, Obama signs what Congress calls
the STOCK Act. The acronym stands for Stop Trading
On Congressional Knowledge, and the law is designed
to clarify the fact that members of Congress are
subject to the same insider trading laws as everybody
else.
All this comes a day after Obama delivered a scathing
speech attacking the Republican proposed budget,
and linking it to likely election opponent Mitt Romney.
In other news:
Romney moves closer to the GOP nomination by
winning three more contests, report William Welch and
Judy Keen of USA TODAY.
Republicans are confident of a health care win at the
Supreme Court.
At least one judge wants Obama to clarify his
comments about judicial power.
Tornadoes cut a swath through Dallas, report Rick
Jervis and Doyle Rice of USA TODAY.
And the Baylor women's team makes college
basketball history by winning the title and finishing with
a record of 40-0.
We're fast breaking here at The Oval, so please join us
as we report on the president's prayer service, bill
signing, and other activities. Thank you.
277

USA Today/ - News, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Medical societies urges questioning
treatments
Physicians and patients should question some
commonly used tests and treatments that often are
unnecessary and costly and may in some cases be
harmful, says a report out today that's part of a new
campaign to improve care and cut waste.
Some of the recommendations have been around, but
the campaign represents a rare coordinated effort
among multiple medical societies.
Nine leading physician specialty societies — including
the American Academy of Family Physicians, the
American College of Cardiology and the American
College of Physicians — each identified five
procedures, treatments and tests (for a total of 45) that
the groups say are routinely used but may not always
be necessary. Their lists are being released today as
part of the ABIM (American Board of Internal Medicine)
Foundation's Choosing Wisely campaign
(choosingwisely.org), which is being done in
conjunction with Consumer Reports magazine.
For instance, the American College of Radiology says
people don't need routine chest X-rays before surgery
if the patient has an "unremarkable" medical history
and physical exam.
One goal of the campaign is to make people "feel
empowered to go to their doctor and say, 'Do I really
need this test?' " says Christine Cassel, president of
the ABIM and the group's foundation.
John Santa, an internist and the director of the Health
Ratings Center for Consumer Reports, says, "I think
it's courageous of cardiologists, internists and family
physicians to suggest reducing services that they know
generate income for some of their members. I'm sure
some of their members won't be happy."
Among the campaign's advice to physicians and
patients:
•Don't do imaging for lower back pain within the first six
weeks unless there are red flags, such as decreased
strength in a leg, says the American Academy of
Family Physicians. It does not improve outcomes but
does increase costs.
•There's no need to repeat colorectal cancer screening
for 10 years if a high-quality colonoscopy comes back
negative in average-risk individuals, the American
Gastroenterological Association says.
•Don't routinely prescribe antibiotics for acute
mild-to-moderate sinus infection unless symptoms last
for seven or more days, the American Academy of
Family Physicians says. Most sinusitis is due to a viral
infection and will resolve on its own.
•Don't use dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)
screening for osteoporosis in women younger than 65
or men younger than 70 with no risk factors, the family
physicians group says.
•Don't obtain a stress test or treadmill test for
individuals who have no symptoms of heart troubles
and are at low risk for coronary heart disease, the
American College of Physicians says.
The report's release was not timed to coincide with the
current Supreme Court debate on health-care
legislation, Cassel says. "But we live in the same
world. We all know we are paying too much on health
care. If we can cut some of our costs, then we can
have enough resources to provide health care for
those who need it."
Sidney Wolfe, an internist and director of the health
research group at Public Citizen, a consumer group,
was not involved in creating the new campaign. But he
says it is "identifying unnecessary, overused tests.
Unnecessary tests frequently lead to unnecessary
surgery or unnecessary drugs being prescribed, which
can lead to unnecessary injuries, unnecessary
surgeries and unnecessary deaths."
278

USA Today/ - News, Qua, 04 de Abril de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Coalition of medical societies urges
questioning treatments
Physicians and patients should question some
commonly used tests and treatments that often are
unnecessary, costly and may in some cases be
harmful, says a report out today that's part of a new
campaign to improve care and cut waste. Some of the
recommendations have been around, but the
campaign represents a rare coordinated effort among
multiple medical societies. Nine leading physician
specialty societies ??" including the American
Academy of Family Physicians, the American College
of Cardiology and the American College of Physicians
??" each identified five procedures, treatments and
tests (for a total of 45) that the groups say are routinely
used but may not always be necessary. Their lists are
being released today as part of the ABIM (American
Board of Internal Medicine) Foundation's Choosing
Wisely campaign (choosingwisely.org), which is being
done in conjunction with Consumer Reports For
instance, the American College of Radiology says
people don't need routine chest X-rays before surgery
if the patient has an "unremarkable" medical history
and physical exam. One goal of the campaign is to
make people "feel empowered to go to their doctor and
say, 'Do I really need this test?' " says Christine
Cassel, president of the ABIM and the group's
foundation. John Santa, an internist and the director of
the Health Ratings Center for Consumer Reports,
says, "I think it's courageous of cardiologists, internists
and family physicians to suggest reducing services
that they know generate income for some of their
members. I'm sure some of their members won't be
happy." Among the campaign's advice to physicians
and patients: ???Don't do imaging for lower back pain
within the first six weeks unless there are red flags,
such as decreased strength in a leg, says the
American Academy of Family Physicians. It does not
improve outcomes but does increase costs.
???There's no need to repeat colorectal cancer
screening for 10 years if a high-quality colonoscopy
comes back negative in average-risk individuals, the
American Gastroenterological Association says.
???Don't routinely prescribe antibiotics for acute
mild-to-moderate sinus infection unless symptoms last
for seven or more days, the American Academy of
Family Physicians says. Most sinusitis is due to a viral
infection and will resolve on its own. ???Don't use
dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) screening for
osteoporosis in women younger than 65 or men
younger than 70 with no risk factors, the family
physicians group says. ???Don't obtain a stress test or
treadmill test for individuals who have no symptoms of
heart troubles and are at low risk for coronary heart
disease, the American College of Physicians says. The
report's release was not timed to coincide with the
current Supreme Court debate on health-care
legislation, Cassel says. "But we live in the same
world. We all know we are paying too much on health
care. If we can cut some of our costs, then we can
have enough resources to provide health care for
those who need it." Sidney Wolfe, an internist and
director of the health research group at Public Citizen,
a consumer group, was not involved in creating the
new campaign. But he says it is "identifying
unnecessary, overused tests. Unnecessary tests
frequently lead to unnecessary surgery or unnecessary
drugs being prescribed, which can lead to
unnecessary injuries, unnecessary surgeries and
unnecessary deaths."
279