The Times-Standard: Free legal work fuels Youth Protection Act appeals
By Thadeus Greenson, The Times-Standard
July 13, 2009
Apparently, it takes more than a federal judge to scare off Eureka and Arcata.
Both cities voted this month to continue mounting a defense of the cities' twin Youth Protection Acts after a federal judge ruled the voter-approved measures to be null and void and prohibited the cities from enforcing them. The measures aimed to prohibit the military recruitment of minors within city limits.
Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong's ruling seemingly left little gray area, finding that the ordinances violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution by seeking to subject the federal government to local control. Further, Armstrong found that the cities hadn't shown any injury by the government's purported recruiting violations, and instead leaned on media reports alleging abuses by military recruiters elsewhere.
But, undeterred, both the Arcata and Eureka city councils recently voted to continue defending the measures, clearing the way for attorneys to work on an appeal to the court's ruling. The councils knew that most experts agree their cities don't stand much of a chance, if any at all, of prevailing in court, but the councils decided to forge ahead anyway, largely because a number of San Francisco Bay Area law firms are giving them virtual mountains of pro bono legal work on the case.
”Why wouldn't we appeal?” Eureka City Councilman Jeff Leonard said of the council's unanimous decision to move forward. “There is no additional liability or no additional costs involved with our going forward at this point.”
Eureka City Attorney Sheryl Schaffner said pro bono attorneys -- primarily Brad Yamauchi of the San Francisco firm Minami and Tamaki -- have done nearly all the work on the case.
”So far, my total expense has been a couple of phone calls,” Schaffner said, adding that she hasn't spent more than 10 or 15 hours of her time working on the case in recent months.
Perhaps surprisingly, the decision to move forward was more contentious in Arcata, where the measure garnered more voter support. Mayor Mark Wheetley said the matter came to a split vote, with three councilmembers voting to move ahead with the appeal and Wheetley and councilmember Michael Winkler voting in favor of the city cutting its losses.
Wheetley said his reasoning for the vote was simple, and strictly financial.
In part because Arcata has a different structure than Eureka, the city has already shelled out more than $7,000 defending the act, according to Wheetley. While Schaffner is a full-time employee of Eureka, Arcata has a different situation with its city attorney, Nancy Diamond.
Instead of being on salary, Wheetley said Arcata pays Diamond hourly for the work she does on behalf of the city.
”Every hour she spends (working on the case) is a billable hour,” Wheetley said.
While Wheetley felt it was financially irresponsible to enter into an open-ended defense of the Youth Protection Act while the city is facing tight financial times, a majority of his colleagues disagreed.
Councilman Shane Brinton said he voted to continue defending the act both to stand up for the will of the city's voters and because he thinks the issue is important.
”This is really a test case and we really need to push forward and get some answers,” Brinton said. “There are very qualified attorneys interested in helping us and, to me, that says a lot about the strength of our argument.”
Yamauchi agrees that there are strong arguments to be made, but said in a previous interview with the Times-Standard that he's not entirely optimistic about the Youth Protection Act's chances. But, he said that even in defeat, there are important things that can be learned.
How the court responds to the hearings, Yamauchi said, can offer important information about the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments for the measures. Similarly, Yamauchi said the courts' decisions and rulings can also help people craft similar military recruiting ballot measures in the future that might stand a better chance of holding up to legal challenges. Consequently, he said he is ready to appeal the case all the way to the Supreme Court.
Dave Meserve, the primary proponent of the twin acts, said he's very happy that both cities have agreed to move forward with the appeal process, and said his newly dubbed Stop Recruiting Kids Coalition is starting a fundraising campaign to reimburse Eureka and Arcata for any out-of-pocket expenses they have incurred.
”Our intention is that it costs the city little or nothing to defend these measures,” Meserve said. “We understand very clearly that these are tough financial times and no one wants to throw money at legal representation.”
Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or tgreenson@times-standard.com.
(Original article as posted online)
July 13, 2009
Apparently, it takes more than a federal judge to scare off Eureka and Arcata.
Both cities voted this month to continue mounting a defense of the cities' twin Youth Protection Acts after a federal judge ruled the voter-approved measures to be null and void and prohibited the cities from enforcing them. The measures aimed to prohibit the military recruitment of minors within city limits.
Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong's ruling seemingly left little gray area, finding that the ordinances violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution by seeking to subject the federal government to local control. Further, Armstrong found that the cities hadn't shown any injury by the government's purported recruiting violations, and instead leaned on media reports alleging abuses by military recruiters elsewhere.
But, undeterred, both the Arcata and Eureka city councils recently voted to continue defending the measures, clearing the way for attorneys to work on an appeal to the court's ruling. The councils knew that most experts agree their cities don't stand much of a chance, if any at all, of prevailing in court, but the councils decided to forge ahead anyway, largely because a number of San Francisco Bay Area law firms are giving them virtual mountains of pro bono legal work on the case.
”Why wouldn't we appeal?” Eureka City Councilman Jeff Leonard said of the council's unanimous decision to move forward. “There is no additional liability or no additional costs involved with our going forward at this point.”
Eureka City Attorney Sheryl Schaffner said pro bono attorneys -- primarily Brad Yamauchi of the San Francisco firm Minami and Tamaki -- have done nearly all the work on the case.
”So far, my total expense has been a couple of phone calls,” Schaffner said, adding that she hasn't spent more than 10 or 15 hours of her time working on the case in recent months.
Perhaps surprisingly, the decision to move forward was more contentious in Arcata, where the measure garnered more voter support. Mayor Mark Wheetley said the matter came to a split vote, with three councilmembers voting to move ahead with the appeal and Wheetley and councilmember Michael Winkler voting in favor of the city cutting its losses.
Wheetley said his reasoning for the vote was simple, and strictly financial.
In part because Arcata has a different structure than Eureka, the city has already shelled out more than $7,000 defending the act, according to Wheetley. While Schaffner is a full-time employee of Eureka, Arcata has a different situation with its city attorney, Nancy Diamond.
Instead of being on salary, Wheetley said Arcata pays Diamond hourly for the work she does on behalf of the city.
”Every hour she spends (working on the case) is a billable hour,” Wheetley said.
While Wheetley felt it was financially irresponsible to enter into an open-ended defense of the Youth Protection Act while the city is facing tight financial times, a majority of his colleagues disagreed.
Councilman Shane Brinton said he voted to continue defending the act both to stand up for the will of the city's voters and because he thinks the issue is important.
”This is really a test case and we really need to push forward and get some answers,” Brinton said. “There are very qualified attorneys interested in helping us and, to me, that says a lot about the strength of our argument.”
Yamauchi agrees that there are strong arguments to be made, but said in a previous interview with the Times-Standard that he's not entirely optimistic about the Youth Protection Act's chances. But, he said that even in defeat, there are important things that can be learned.
How the court responds to the hearings, Yamauchi said, can offer important information about the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments for the measures. Similarly, Yamauchi said the courts' decisions and rulings can also help people craft similar military recruiting ballot measures in the future that might stand a better chance of holding up to legal challenges. Consequently, he said he is ready to appeal the case all the way to the Supreme Court.
Dave Meserve, the primary proponent of the twin acts, said he's very happy that both cities have agreed to move forward with the appeal process, and said his newly dubbed Stop Recruiting Kids Coalition is starting a fundraising campaign to reimburse Eureka and Arcata for any out-of-pocket expenses they have incurred.
”Our intention is that it costs the city little or nothing to defend these measures,” Meserve said. “We understand very clearly that these are tough financial times and no one wants to throw money at legal representation.”
Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or tgreenson@times-standard.com.
(Original article as posted online)