- Faking a Sept. 11 injury would seem basically as disgraceful as faking a war injury, no? [NY Post, Legal Ethics Forum; earlier on Ground Zero compensation here, here, here, here, here (2008 fraud), here, etc. ]
- “Illegal Aliens May Get License to Practice Law in California” [Volokh, earlier] A curious companion headline from only three and a half years ago, and also from California: “Government seeks forfeiture, managers’ prison time for hiring illegal aliens”
- A look back at the Keller Satanic-ritual-abuse case from Texas [Slate]
- Piacentile v. Amgen case “offers a little window into the ugly side of the qui tam business” [Steve McConnell, Drug and Device Law; related from same blog on case of U.S. ex rel. Watson v. King-Vassel, here and here]
- “Father and Daughter Sentenced in $1.5 Million Insurance Fraud Case” [San Diego D.A.]
-
Michael McConnell in the Yale Law Journal on religious freedom;
- Child support law madness, Virginia division [Hans Bader]
Filed under: California, child abuse, child support, immigration law, insurance fraud, qui tam, religious liberty, September 11, Virginia
2 Comments
Thanks for the link about the Virginia child support legislation. It has now been introduced as HB 933.
HB 933, a bill introduced on January 8 in Virginia’s House of Delegates, would increase the state’s child-support schedule. It would further increase child-support obligations that are already excessive for many non-custodial parents. The “bill is a recommendation of the Child Support Guidelines Review Panel,” whose proposed child-support increase ignores basic economic realities and overestimates the cost of raising children. I elaborate on that here:
http://www.openmarket.org/2014/01/08/virginia-bill-hb-933-would-increase-excessive-child-support-obligations-by-ignoring-economic-realities/
The methods used to come up with the increased child support schedule were flawed, such as double-counting expenses and making non-custodial parents pay custodial parents for costs that custodial parents have indirectly been reimbursed for by federal and state tax codes.
The bill would force some low-income parents to pay what they cannot possibly pay, and substantially increase high-income parents’ obligations based on a misreading of Virginia child-support history and a likely failure to consider tax increases recently imposed on upper-income households.
Note: I am married, not divorced, and neither a non-custodial nor a custodial parent.
[…] up on the mention of the issue earlier this month, “Virginia is on the verge of substantially increasing child-support obligations for the […]