I need to bury my head

[klmno]

in the sand, under a bag, or somewhere. LOL! The more I look into what goes on in this state, the more perplexed I am and can only sit here and roll my eyes.

I won't go into all of it, but I looked over the salaries of all school employees and court/legal employess of a neighboring county. That didn't leave me feeling too good. Then, I read an article where in another nearby county, the softball coach is in trouble for giving minor girls (high school age) on his team alcohol at his home- the girls were suspended from the team and they are in trouble as well but not as much trouble as the coach. Actually, I already knew that part of the story, but here's what I read tonight- "the suspension from playing baseball was removed from the girls" and it goes on to say that now they have enough people back on the team to have a chance of winning. It wasn't their own group that lifted the suspension- it was the area softball association or something like that. It wasn't actually a school team but the school suspended them over it. So the outcome is- they are suspended from school, but not the team. (I'm sure there is logic in there somewhere.)


But the real clincher- apparently our State Office of Protection and Advocacy (for Special Education kids and mentally ill, etc) sued some higher ups in the state's mental health dept saying they refused to open records regarding several patients that had been injured or died in state mental health facilities- the OPA only wanted access to review the cases, they weren't trying to make them public- AND. THEY. LOST. (Yes- you got that right- the Office of Protection and Advocacy lost against state officials who refused to open files related to injured and dead mental health patients in the state's care.) Specifically, the US Circuit Court of Appeals threw it out saying that one state agency cannot sue another in Federal court- there is a "doctrine of sovereign immunity". So much for accountability in this state. Our legal people have that immunity, too.

 

[gcvmom]

I hope you find something more, umm, entertaining to read in the morning!

 

[klmno]

Thank you!

(klmno makes mental note NOT to read news after 10:00 pm again or else she will be awake at 1:30 am playing with smilies on cd board.)

 

[gcvmom]

Hey, you aren't the only one who stays up too late wearing out her mouse and keyboard!

If there's one thing my family would probably change about me, I think that's it.

 

[klmno]

Oh, gosh- that was one of difficult child's biggest complaints about me there "toward the end". I guess the less stable he was, the more I was on the board, and the more he got upset over it.

I finally got to sleep- I hope you got some sleep, too!

 

[eekysign]

But the real clincher- apparently our State Office of Protection and Advocacy (for Special Education kids and mentally ill, etc) sued some higher ups in the state's mental health dept saying they refused to open records regarding several patients that had been injured or died in state mental health facilities- the OPA only wanted access to review the cases, they weren't trying to make them public- AND. THEY. LOST. (Yes- you got that right- the Office of Protection and Advocacy lost against state officials who refused to open files related to injured and dead mental health patients in the state's care.) Specifically, the US Circuit Court of Appeals threw it out saying that one state agency cannot sue another in Federal court- there is a "doctrine of sovereign immunity". So much for accountability in this state. Our legal people have that immunity, too.

That's a no-brainer. Two state agencies should not be suing each other in federal court....god knows how it ended up there. You'd think THEIR attorneys would understand that. But all of the articles I've seen on that issue go on to say that "the matter will be taken up in state court". Basically this was a fed/state issue - the case is between two state agencies, and therefore it should be heard before a state (err, commonwealth) court. It's got absolutely nothing to do with accountability, so no worries.

 

[klmno]

Well I could see that if it were state agencies like DSS trying to sue Department of Juvenile Justice, for instance. But when it's the very agency that was created to help and advocate for those who are most vunerable and another state agency is being uncooperative and no one in this state will do anything about it, it rubs me the wrong way. Why bother having the OPA then if people can just refuse to let them review anything that might implicate them?

 

[DammitJanet]

Eeky is right. Which of course she would be...lol. Also I remember something from working in government that an employee of government cannot be sued for doing their job correctly by a citizen personally...I think. I think that has something to do with that immunity. Its been a long time.

 

[eekysign]

Well I could see that if it were state agencies like DSS trying to sue Department of Juvenile Justice, for instance. But when it's the very agency that was created to help and advocate for those who are most vunerable and another state agency is being uncooperative and no one in this state will do anything about it, it rubs me the wrong way. Why bother having the OPA then if people can just refuse to let them review anything that might implicate them?

They can't. They just need to petition the state court, not the feds. Two state agencies, or members of the same state agencies shouldn't be fussing at each other in federal court (there are very limited exceptions to this).

It's a state matter, the state court is the most appropriate place for it, with judges that know most about state law. It's not a fairness or accountability issue. It's simply an administrative issue. The federal court didn't say, "You can't have those records!". They said, "Go tell the state court your problems, we're not the right place for this!".

It's like asking Santa Claus to bring you a dollar for your tooth under your pillow. Wrong person.

 

[klmno]

I thought they went to fed court because they had already tried the state court and it wouldn't do anything- the fed court was a court of appeals. If it hadn't already been to state court, there was nothing to appeal, right?

 

[eekysign]

I thought they went to fed court because they had already tried the state court and it wouldn't do anything- the fed court was a court of appeals. If it hadn't already been to state court, there was nothing to appeal, right?

Oh, naw - the Federal Courts of Appeals are appealed to from the U.S. District Courts - which are also federal courts.

I just scanned through the opinion. Yup - the COA said "we're not getting in the middle of an "intramural contest" between two state agencies". That's why they bounced it back to the Commonwealth courts to decide.