“The participation in government of the corporation as a corporation is a menace.  Its action is governed by no sense of individual or personal responsibility.  It is controlled by no sentiment of patriotism.  Corporations are organized for profit and gain, and enter the field of politics solely in the interests of the business for which they were created.”

He continued his speech in support of legislation to outlaw political contributions by corporations in any political activity.

“I believe it to be vitally important that corporations should be prohibited by law from contributing money for political purposes.  Individuals may properly contribute to pay the legitimate expenses of conducting political campaigns. Money so contributed is given with the personal responsibility of the individual making the contribution.  But when corporations can furnish money from corporation treasuries to carry elections individual free-will and responsibility is gone.  Should the custom of the corporation contributions to campaigns grow broad enough, the whole character of the government would be changed, and corporations not men would rule.  The money power would then become the controlling power in the state.  There is no surer way of undermining and finally overthrowing free popular government than allowing the system of corporation contributions in political contests and campaigns.” (Journal of the Senate of the Wisconsin Legislature, Volume 1, 1905, pg 89).

The Wisconsin legislature went on to pass a law that stated:

Chapter 492, Section 1:  No corporation doing business in this state, shall pay or contribute, or offer, consent or agree to pay or contribute, directly or indirectly, any money, property, free service of its officers or employees or thing of value to any political party, organization, committee or individual for any political purpose whatsoever, or for the purpose of influencing legislation of any kind, or to promote or defeat the candidacy of any person for nomination, appointment or election to any political office.

Wisconsin restricted corporate involvement in politics and the governor was almost prophetic in what could occur if corporations weren’t kept out of the political arena.  However, the United States Supreme Court has rendered several opinions that have granted corporations the same rights as individuals, even though they are a fictitious entity.  What is left of the Wisconsin law is only that corporations can’t contribute directly to candidates.  They can actively participate in ballot initiatives and give monetary support to PACs and political parties.  So what the governor feared in 1905 has in part come to pass.

Why should a corporation, an entity that can’t vote and isn’t even alive, be allowed to participate at all in politics?  The character of our government has changed and is now run by corporations such as Halliburton, Exxon, and Wal-Mart and not by the people.  There is no disputing corporate power in America today.  Their money is the controlling power in the state and federal government.  Our free and popular government has effectively been replaced by corporate influence.

We need federal legislation to set aside the Supreme Court’s decisions granting corporation the rights of individuals.  Individuals make up our democracy based on one person one vote.  Corporations aren’t people and shouldn’t be allowed to have the rights of individuals.  The Governor of Wisconsin was right in 1905, and he would be right on point today.  We should learn from our history and not make the same mistakes.

Many people are under the impression that students are prohibited from praying at public schools.  This is far from the truth.  At any point during the school day a student can pray quietly.  If the prayers are more active or verbal, they can do it at recess and at lunch.  What is prohibited is the school bringing clergy onto campus to lead prayers.

The Court has also held that employees or agents of the school district cannot lead students in prayer.  This is prohibited by the First Amendment to the Constitution that requires the separation of church and state.  But if students can pray anytime on their own what is all the uproar about letting teachers lead prayers?

First and foremost is that school personnel are not trained to lead prayers and are already overworked and underpaid without adding this new religious task to their list.  And then there is always the question of which prayer is acceptable to everyone?

Many people think there is no harm in having a teacher lead a class in a Christian prayer because we are a Christian country.  But actually we are not a Christian country.  Our nation’s founding fathers had that choice to make and decided against it, referring to God but to no specific faith.  European history is riddled with problems that arose when church and state were not separated.  Take the Inquisition for example.

Our teachers are trained in education not religion.  No one is prohibited from attending the church or religious institution of their choice.  Also, no one is precluded from having their children say a prayer before they go to school or after they come home.  And as I stated before a child can pray all they want at school on their own.

So religion has not been banned at our public schools, it is just not conducted by school officials.  And the school is not deciding what is the correct prayer for all our children to recite.  Whether you are Catholic, Baptist, Jew or Muslim your child’s school won’t be infringing on your religious practices.

As the saying goes:  “As long as there are tests there will always be prayer at schools.”  These will be student prayers, not someone else’s.

When it comes to student discipline the IDEA also provides protection for children who display behaviors that are manifestations of their disabilities.  The IDEA prevents a change in placement of the student unless certain procedures are followed.  These were adopted in part to prevent the “warehousing” of special education students or forcing them out of school.

One of the most important provisions is the “stay put” provision.  This prevents a change in the student’s placement if the parent has requested a due process hearing.  The child remains in the same placement until a decision is made by a hearing officer on the alleged problems with the child at school.

Not all actions fall within a child’s disability.  The more planning and premeditation involved in the breach of discipline may result in a determination that such conscious acts are not subject to a disability.  If the act was not a manifestation of the disability then normal discipline may be imposed.  If the act is determined to be a result of the child’s disability then the child may not be suspended or have his placement changed except through the IEP process.  If the IEP team recommends a change in placement and the parent disagrees then the parents can request a due process hearing and the child “stays put”.

A short term suspension of 10 days or less does not trigger the same protections for students with disabilities as do longer suspensions or expulsions.  These ten days are cumulative for a school year.  In-school suspensions do not count toward the ten days if the child continues to receive services as specified in his IEP.

Prior to implementing a long term suspension or expulsion the school must notify the parents of the procedural safeguards of IDEA.  These include the basis for the proposed suspension, options considered and the right to file for due process hearing.  Also before there is any change in placement the IEP team must make a “manifestation determination” that the behavior is or is not related to the child’s disability.  This determination must be made within 10 days after the student has been suspended for 10 days.

There are many more provisions and requirements set forth in the IDEA.  With the rise in student violence many districts have adopted zero tolerance rules.  If you have a child with a disability you are entitled to certain procedural safeguards against having your son or daughter removed from their school.  You don’t have to accept what the district proposes.  You may need to request a due process hearing to ensure that the law is followed.

Jeff Blanck is the former General Counsel for the Washoe County School District and now is in private practice in Reno.  He can be reached at:  jblanck@jeffreyblancklaw.com

I doubt the police will want to contact the child at home in any event because that is usually why they come to the school, to avoid the parents.  If the police still want to see the child at school on an issue other than abuse then the principal should comply with the request but also immediately notify the child’s parent that the police are there and want to interview their child. If the parent wants to talk to their child then put them on the phone.  The principal should not stop the police from doing an interview but the principal has the right to be present and should be in the room.

If a child asks for their parent during a police interview it is the same as an adult asking for a lawyer.  All questioning should stop until the parent is present.  The principal can even ask the child if they want their parent there and let the parent know that they can request this of their child when they are talking on the phone.

So what is the big deal of letting your child talk to the police at school?  Well, first off, if your child is a suspect in a crime you don’t want them to incriminate themselves.  Second if your child is a witness to a crime you want to know first.  You don’t know if what your child saw could put them in danger of retaliation by the accused and the police can’t protect them from retaliatory acts.  Additionally, as a parent you have the right to know that your child was pulled from class and is talking to the police instead of studying English or some other topic.

Putting all this in context, what I am referring to are formal interviews by the police.  If the police want to question your child about a specific event that is the subject of an investigation, you should insist that the above procedures are followed.  If your child has a passing conversation with a school police officer or city police officer that is generally not a problem.  You need not discourage your child from having any conversation with a police officer especially if someone needs help.

But you do need to let your children know that they should always ask for their parent if they are taken aside and questioned in a room or office by the police and not to say anything until you arrive.  They are your children and you have a right as a parent to be there when they are questioned by the police.

Jeff Blanck is the former General Counsel for the Washoe County School District and now in private practice in Reno.  He can be reached at:  jblanck@jeffreyblancklaw.com.

The typical situation for an emergency suspension is when a student starts a fight, brings a weapon to school or hits a teacher.  The student is removed and given a suspension of up to ten days.   But this assumes that the student did the act and we live in a country where you are innocent until proven guilty.  So the Supreme Court ruled back in 1975 in Goss v. Lopez that a post-suspension hearing must be held as soon as practical after the emergency suspension.  This applied to suspensions for up to ten days.  Longer suspensions require a more formal process.  But school districts think that they can kick a kid out of school for up to ten days with no process at all.   When they do, it violates a students due process rights.

The district is supposed to conduct an immediate inquiry and meet with the student and parents as soon as practical after the suspension to inform the family of the charges and evidence against the student as well as give the student an opportunity to respond.  According to Nevada State law students have a property right in their public education and they can’t lose this right without due process.

But school districts are omitting the second step after the student is initially removed.  There is no post suspension hearing, no distribution of evidence and no ability for the student to refute the allegations against him.  School districts think that they have ten days to hold a hearing not just on the emergency suspension but on any longer suspension as well.  They’re wrong

The Goss case clearly stated that a post suspension hearing had to be held as soon as possible.  That case also stated that the loss of school time and the negative stigma attached to a suspension of even less than ten days was significant to a student.  This was recently reaffirmed right here in Reno in Federal Court.

In two separate cases the Washoe County School District was found to have violated a students due process rights by issuing an emergency suspension and not having a hearing shortly thereafter but postponing the hearing for nine or ten schooldays later.  The court found that this delay substantially prejudiced the student and was unjustified by the alleged heavy workload of administrators.

Ironically the District’s defense was that the ten days was insignificant.  Their lawyers from Maupin Cox and LeGoy stated that ten days was no big deal and that the students ended up graduating anyway so no harm no foul.  How did their lawyers reconcile this attitude with the District’s attendance policy requiring 90% attendance for students or they will get an “F”?  This policy means that in a semester if a student misses nine unexcused days they will fail the class.

The District adopted this rule because of how important class time is for a student as well as just learning the curriculum.  Fortunately the judge saw this hypocrisy and followed the longstanding law set forth by the Supreme Court.  Now the Washoe County School District has to do the same.

If your child gets an emergency suspension, demand a hearing immediately.  If a hearing is not provided, you can file an action in Federal Court.  Waiting ten or more days for a hearing is against the law and the District is now well aware of that fact.

Jeff Blanck is the former General Counsel for the Washoe County School District and now is in private practice in Reno.  He can be reached at:  jblanck@jeffreyblancklaw.com

Poor economies often adversely affect the people least able to weather any kind of additional financial problems.  Many Americans live paycheck to paycheck.  So what happens to these Americans when the entire country hits a financial iceberg?  It is usually not a pretty picture.  First of all their employers business slows down.  Their hours can be reduced and the overtime disappears.  Or worse yet they could get laid off.

If you already owe the IRS money it could be harder to make the payments you have agreed upon as well as just paying monthly bills.  The IRS is not very sensitive to taxpayers who not only default on agreements to pay back taxes but who also get behind on current taxes.  In fact this is one of the worst things a taxpayer can do.

Taxpayers who find themselves in cash flow trouble during a recession should consider some of the following actions to help themselves avoid an IRS problem:

1.  Try to save some money now before the full recession hits and your paycheck is decreased.

2.  Don’t change your withholdings at work to give yourself more take home pay.

3.  Contact the IRS immediately if you know you are not able to make any agreed upon monthly payments.

4.  Make sure you keep current on your tax filings so you avoid IRS penalties.

If your situation gets extremely bad financially you might be eligible to settle with the IRS through an Offer in Compromise.  At the very least you may need to renegotiate your payment amount.  The IRS won’t just take your word that your financial situation is difficult so you will have to provide them with the appropriate documentation.

If you are contacted by the IRS don’t ignore them.  They will become steadily more aggressive if you do not respond to their inquiries.  It can start with liens on your home, and then they can attach your wages and start taking your personal property.  Settling claims or entering into payment plans can take up to several months but the IRS will hold off on enforcing their claim if you are working with them.

So will there really be a recession later this year?  I don’t know.  But it doesn’t  hurt to be as prepared as you can and know what choices are available to you.

But how can they conduct the search?  The can look in your closets, open your drawers, go through your shelves, and lift up your bed.   But can they slice open your mattresses, rip open your walls and tear up your floors?  That would depend on the warrant and the probable cause that allowed the search.

And if they do destroy your property and find nothing who has to pay for the damage?

A lawsuit was filed in February against the City of Sparks on that exact issue.  The Fleiners own a home in Sparks that they have leased out for 8 years to Mr. Ramirez.  A Federal search warrant was issued for a search of the Ramirez residence.  Multiple police agencies went into the house.  The complaint alleges that the officers conducted the search in an unreasonable and excessive manner that destroyed window, doors, gates, fencing carpets, walls and other fixtures in the home.  The Fleiners want the police to pay for the damage.

The key words in the Complaint are “unreasonable” and “excessive”.  If the police are looking for drugs can they tear up all your walls and your floor?  I would argue probably not unless a drug dog indicated a specific location.  Also can the police break all the windows in the home?  Not if it doesn’t serve any purpose related to the search.  Can the police break your dishes and smash your photos?  I would hope not.

The police have no right to trash your home and if they do they should be responsible for the damage.  Unfortunately you will probably have to file a suit to collect for the damage as the Fleiners are doing.  You probably won’t be able to collect for the cost of straightening up your home or just cleaning up a mess but the wanton destruction of your property should not be allowed.

Search warrants should be specify what they are looking for and define the scope of the search.  If the police are looking for a stolen car they can search your garage but not your bedroom.  If they are looking for drugs the entire house could be fair game but it doesn’t give the police the right to needlessly destroy your possessions or property.

The majority of searches with warrants are done without any problems.  But sometimes the police can get carried away and do real damage.  If the public entity agrees on the damage you will be compensated.  If not, you have to file an action in court, just like the Fleiners did.

Civil litigation is a dispute between two or more parties.  Criminal actions involve the State trying to incarcerate someone for committing a crime.  A typical civil lawsuit is for breach of a contract or for injuries suffered in an automobile accident.  If you are the aggrieved party you can file an action in state or federal court.  Lawsuits in Federal Court must meet certain requirements such as involving federal questions of law, the federal government is a party, or the parties live in different states.

In either court you initiate a lawsuit by filing a complaint.  You then have 120 days to serve (give a copy to the defendant) the complaint.  After the defendant is served he has 20 days to file an answer.  Usually both sides will have an attorney.  But a defense attorney has much different motivation than the plaintiff’s attorney.  Defense attorneys are usually paid by the hour.  Plaintiff’s attorneys can be hourly but in personal injury cases and employment cases they are usually on a contingency.  This means that the plaintiff’s lawyer doesn’t get paid unless they win and he gets a percentage of the winnings.

A plaintiff’s attorney on a contingency matter wants to move the matter along and get it resolved either through settlement or by trial.  But a defense attorney doesn’t have the same motivation, because they are paid by the hour.   If they settle early they don’t make much money.  But if they can conduct extensive discovery (gathering of evidence) over a period of years they can make a huge amount of money.  And that is what they like to do.

Now, spending a lot of time and money on discovery, costs a client a lot of money.  But it is not uncommon for a defense attorney to be retained and paid by an insurance company where money is plentiful.  Under the guise of needing all the information they can get, defense firms do massive discovery before they advise their client on whether or not to settle the matter.

Before settlement even is considered they make their motion to have the case dismissed by a process called Summary Judgment.  Summary Judgment will only be granted if the facts are not in dispute.  In such a case, as a matter of law, the plaintiff loses.  These motions can be hundreds of pages long and take months to resolve.   The defendants have nothing to lose if it is denied.  They still get to go to trial.   The defense attorney makes another bundle of money by filing these motions.

So how long does all this take before you even get to go to trial?  It can take three or four years.  Who does this delay favor?  The defendant because he doesn’t have to pay any judgment for several years and maybe the plaintiff will just get worn down and take less than he is entitled to.

Is this fair?  Is this justice?  No.  But it is the system.  If you have been injured or wronged you can file a lawsuit.  Just be ready to hunker down for several years as the defense lawyers run up their fees.

In Nevada, working in a hostile work environment is not by itself actionable in court.  You boss can be a mean jerk who constantly checks your work and spies on you and this does not create a cause of action for a hostile work environment.  If you are and “at will” employee (and most are) your remedy for this type of job situation is to find another job.  If you are always falsely accused of taking property from work or of coming in late, you can be fired and there is no recourse through the courts.  If you are an “at will” employee your only recourse is to find a better job.  If you have a written employment contract or are in a Union you may have some contractual remedies.

However, if you are being harassed and verbally abused because of your race, religion, gender, sexual orientation or old age you may have recourse under federal law.  If your environment at work is hostile for any of these reasons then the actions of your employer could be illegal.  But your employer has to know about it or should have known about it.

The best way to make it known is to complain to a supervisor or a Human Resource representative.  Companies with 15 or more employees are prohibited from discriminating against their employees.  These days most companies have policies and procedures for dealing with Harassment and Discrimination claims.  Before you quit your job you must first comply with company policy.  If that doesn’t resolve the situation and it continues you can go further with your action or possibly leave your job under what could qualify as a constructive discharge.

The problem with these situations is that they require you to complain to someone at work.  In some companies this can be enough to get you fired.  As an “at will” employee they don’t need a reason to fire you.  If your situation at work is really bad or “hostile” go consult an attorney.  If there is no legal recourse you need to look for a better job.  That is the most common resolution in Nevada for a “hostile work environment”.

What is prohibited is having employees or agents of the school district lead students in prayer.  This is prohibited by the First Amendment to the Constitution that requires the separation of church and state.  So if students can pray anytime on their own what is all the uproar about letting teachers lead prayers in class?

Well for one, school personnel are not trained to lead prayers; they are not clergy. Why would you want someone who works for the government (who has no religious instructional training) teaching you child religion anyway. Also teachers are authority figures for students so if the teacher does it in class, then it must be right, regardless of the students religion.   There is also always the question of who chooses the prayer?  Should it be Catholic, Mormon, Lutheran, Unitarian, or the just the faith of the teacher?  What if the teacher is Jewish or Muslim?

I can hear the other related questions already.  What is wrong with putting up a Christmas tree and singing silent night, that isn’t even praying?  The answer is nothing is wrong.  The Supreme Court (whether you agree with them or not) has ruled that a Christmas tree is not a religious symbol but a holiday symbol.  They made the same finding about a Chanukah Menorah. Christmas carols can be sung at school as long as other songs from other traditions are also sung.  The schools need to be inclusive.

I have heard many people state that America is a Christian country.  It is a fact that a majority of the founding fathers (if not all) were Christian.  But our nation’s founding fathers decided not to make this a Christian state and required the separation of the church and the state.  European history is riddled with problems that arose when church and state were not separated. The Inquisition is a prime example and our forefathers were keenly aware of those problems and chose to avoid them.  The wisdom of our original leaders is still valid today.

Over the past several elections there has always been claims made that our government is too big and that less governmental intervention is better.  Let’s not contradict this philosophy by allowing our government to intrude into our religious lives.  Let’s leave religious instruction to clergy and our houses of worship.