{"id":8420,"date":"2016-09-24T01:08:08","date_gmt":"2016-09-24T08:08:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/?p=8420"},"modified":"2016-09-24T01:16:39","modified_gmt":"2016-09-24T08:16:39","slug":"ninth-circuit-court-judge-friedlands-conflict-of-interest","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/?p=8420","title":{"rendered":"Ninth Circuit Court Judge Friedland&#8217;s Conflict of Interest"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><b>Ninth Circuit Court Judge Friedland&#8217;s Conflict of Interest<\/b><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>On September 13 th, 2016 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals he ard the CTIA- Wireless Association&#8217;s\u00a0appeal in their\u00a0lawsuit against the City of Berkeley&#8217;s Cell Phone Right to Know ordinance which was implemented in March, 2016. A decision has not yet been rendered. Video of hearing below.<\/p>\n<p>The\u00a0three presiding judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals were Judge William Fletcher, Judge Morgan\u00a0Christen and Judge Michelle Friedland. The potential conflict of interest rests with Judge Michelle Friedland.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><b><i>Friedland&#8217;s\u00a0husband&#8217;s career included design\u00a0engineering in the wireless telecommunication industry <\/i><\/b><b><i>with Cisco Systems, a member of the CTIA- wireless association .<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2000\/06\/18\/style\/weddings-michelle-friedland-daniel-kelly.html?_r=0\">http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2000\/06\/18\/style\/weddings-michelle-friedland-daniel-kelly.html?_r=0<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>This case has high visibility on the basis of constitutionality of the law and\u00a0because the CTIA is represented by Theodore Olson, past Solicitor General for\u00a0 George W. Bush. The City of Berkeley is defended<i> pro bono<\/i> by Harvard Constitutional\u00a0Law Professor\u00a0Lawrence Lessig. Lessig is also a past United States presidential candidate.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The outcome of this case is much anticipated as many cities and states are awaiting this critical ruling as they plan to enact their own versions of Berkeley&#8217;s cell phone right to know label.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>California Attorney General Harris&#8217;s office submitted an Amicus Brief in support of Berkeley with concerns that a ruling against\u00a0Berkeley&#8217;s ordinance\u00a0may\u00a0harm other important disclosures protecting the welfare of California citizens.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>During the hearing Judge Michelle Friedland seemed to have an unfavorable opinion regarding the City of Berkeley&#8217;s position giving consumers the right to know. This predisposed bias was present in the form of questions and statements made by the judge.<\/p>\n<p>The case before the federal Court of Appeals is CTIA-The Wireless Association v. City of Berkeley et al., case number <a href=\"http:\/\/www.law360.com\/cases\/56b0941edda60864fa0004fe\">16-15141<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>In past years Friedland also submitted an amicus brief supporting the work of Theodore Olson in regard to prop 8 (same sex marriage).<\/p>\n<p>Link to the hearing:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=NU2IqWFM5KY\"><b>https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=NU2IqWFM5KY<\/b><\/a><b>.<\/b><\/p>\n<div data-mode=\"normal\" data-oembed=\"1\" data-provider=\"youtube\" id=\"arve-youtube-nu2iqwfm5ky\" style=\"max-width:900px;\" class=\"arve\">\n<div class=\"arve-inner\">\n<div style=\"aspect-ratio:500\/281\" class=\"arve-embed arve-embed--has-aspect-ratio\">\n<div class=\"arve-ar\" style=\"padding-top:56.200000%\"><\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t<iframe allow=\"accelerometer &apos;none&apos;;autoplay &apos;none&apos;;bluetooth &apos;none&apos;;browsing-topics &apos;none&apos;;camera &apos;none&apos;;clipboard-read &apos;none&apos;;clipboard-write;display-capture &apos;none&apos;;encrypted-media &apos;none&apos;;gamepad &apos;none&apos;;geolocation &apos;none&apos;;gyroscope &apos;none&apos;;hid &apos;none&apos;;identity-credentials-get &apos;none&apos;;idle-detection &apos;none&apos;;keyboard-map &apos;none&apos;;local-fonts;magnetometer &apos;none&apos;;microphone &apos;none&apos;;midi &apos;none&apos;;otp-credentials &apos;none&apos;;payment &apos;none&apos;;picture-in-picture;publickey-credentials-create &apos;none&apos;;publickey-credentials-get &apos;none&apos;;screen-wake-lock &apos;none&apos;;serial &apos;none&apos;;summarizer &apos;none&apos;;sync-xhr;usb &apos;none&apos;;web-share;window-management &apos;none&apos;;xr-spatial-tracking &apos;none&apos;;\" allowfullscreen=\"\" class=\"arve-iframe fitvidsignore\" credentialless data-arve=\"arve-youtube-nu2iqwfm5ky\" data-lenis-prevent=\"\" data-src-no-ap=\"https:\/\/www.youtube-nocookie.com\/embed\/NU2IqWFM5KY?feature=oembed&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;modestbranding=1&amp;rel=0&amp;autohide=1&amp;playsinline=0&amp;autoplay=0\" frameborder=\"0\" height=\"505.8\" loading=\"lazy\" name=\"\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts allow-same-origin allow-presentation allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox\" scrolling=\"no\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube-nocookie.com\/embed\/NU2IqWFM5KY?feature=oembed&#038;iv_load_policy=3&#038;modestbranding=1&#038;rel=0&#038;autohide=1&#038;playsinline=0&#038;autoplay=0\" title=\"\" width=\"900\"><\/iframe><\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p>\t<script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"http:\\\/\\\/schema.org\\\/\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/emrabc.ca\\\/?p=8420#arve-youtube-nu2iqwfm5ky\",\"type\":\"VideoObject\",\"embedURL\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube-nocookie.com\\\/embed\\\/NU2IqWFM5KY?feature=oembed&iv_load_policy=3&modestbranding=1&rel=0&autohide=1&playsinline=0&autoplay=0\"}<\/script><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p><b>\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Ninth Circuit Court Judge Friedland&#8217;s Conflict of Interest &nbsp; On September 13 th, 2016 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals he ard the CTIA- Wireless Association&#8217;s\u00a0appeal in their\u00a0lawsuit against the City of Berkeley&#8217;s Cell Phone Right to Know ordinance which was implemented in March, 2016. A decision has not yet been rendered. Video of hearing [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[291,6,109,3,9,161,289,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8420","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-california-usa-2","category-cellular","category-cisco","category-health_and_safety","category-law","category-legal-action","category-usa-2","category-wireless_devices"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8420","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=8420"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8420\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8430,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8420\/revisions\/8430"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=8420"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=8420"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=8420"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}