Bradford, England: “A judge has condemned a ‘grotesque’ waste of taxpayers’ money spent on prosecuting teenager Larissa Wilkinson for allowing her 18 month-old niece to drop a sweet wrapper.” [Telegraph]
Posts Tagged ‘environment’
CPSIA: “Blowback” on Capitol Hill
Neil Munro covers it at National Journal (PDF, courtesy AmendTheCPSIA), and mentions toward the end a certain blog that “has rallied opponents of the law”. A few highlights: 
- “‘Like every member of Congress, I’ve heard from people in my district … [who say] they will literally be put out of business because of something that China did,’ said Rep. Jason Altmire, D-Pa., chairman of the House Small Business Committee’s Investigations and Oversight Panel. ‘We cast the net wider than we should have.'”
- Later, however: “Altmire’s position reflects tensions in the Democratic caucus.” You bet it does: “Most Democratic legislators, staff aides, and allied advocates have resisted calls for a change in the law”, and one, regrettably anonymous, claims that opponents “are deliberately misreading the law to make it unworkable” so as to get it reopened. Among “allied advocates”, there’s Elizabeth Hitchcock, the public health advocate for the federation of state Public Interest Research Groups, who is quite dismissive of the cries of small makers going under: “Complaints about job losses in the small-business sector are usually a mask for the interests of large firms, Hitchcock said.” More on the PIRG groups here, here, here, here, here, and here (& more in comments and from Deputy Headmistress).
- “Lobbyists on both sides of the issue” say the CPSIA outcry could affect the fate of an upcoming Waxman-backed bill called the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act, “which would apply the environmentalists’ ‘precautionary principle’ by requiring extensive safety testing of chemicals found in plastics, food, textiles, and manufactured goods before they could be sold.”
Federal override of local building codes
Apparently there are a lot of hidden surprises in this Waxman-Markey “cap and trade” energy/environment bill we’ll be hearing about in coming weeks [Washington Post via Virginia Postrel].
“The lethal dangers of sand”
Wear appropriate protective clothing, “do not let this chemical enter the environment”, and if you come in contact with it, “immediately flush skin with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes while removing contaminated clothing and shoes”. It’s ocean sand! MSDSs (Material Safety Data Sheets) are by and for lawyers: “Very few chemists, in my experience, spend much time with these forms at all, preferring to get their information from almost any other source.” [Derek Lowe via Virginia Postrel]
More: Interesting comments, including one on ionized water (if exposed, “flush the contaminated area with water”) and this from reader John: “Good news: if the sand is intended for use by children under 12, as of August 14 the sand itself will have to be permanently labeled with a batch number so it can be easily recalled.”
May 18 roundup
- Historic preservation and habitat preservation laws can backfire in similar ways [Dubner, Freakonomics]
- Serious points about wacky warnings [Bob Dorigo Jones, Detroit News]
- Texas solons consider lengthening statute of limitations to save Yearning for Zion prosecutions [The Common Room]
- A call for law bloggers to unite against content-swiping site [Scott Greenfield]
- Drawbacks of CFC-free pulmonary inhalers leave asthma sufferers gasping [McArdle, Atlantic]
- Try, try again: yet another academic proposal for charging gunmakers with costs of crime [Eggen/Culhane, SSRN, via Robinette/TortsProf] More/correction: not a new paper, just new to SSRN; see comments.
- California businesses paid $17 million last year in bounty-hunting suits under Prop 65 [Cal Biz Lit]
- Trial lawyer lobby AAJ puts out all-points bulletin to members: send us your horror stories so we can parade ’em in the media! [ShopFloor]
California vs. big-screen TVs
The state may ban many popular models on the at-best-paternalistic grounds that they consume too much energy.
Disposable coffee cups
Toronto considers a ban (via Fountain).
“Exxon’s Endless Lawsuit”
Dirk Olin at Portfolio magazine on the Valdez spill litigation.
April 7 roundup
- Wisconsin lawyer pressing bill to allow punitive damages against home resellers over claimed defects [Wisconsin State Journal] More: Dad29.
- Longer than her will? NY Times posts ten-page jury questionnaire in Brooke Astor inheritance case [“City Room”] “Supreme Court: No Constitutional Right to Peremptory Challenge” [Anne Reed]
- Georgia’s sex offender law, like Illinois’s, covers persons who never committed a sex crime [Balko]
- “The lawsuits over TVA’s coal ash spill have come from all over Roane County – except the spots closest to home.” [Knoxville News]
- Bootleg soap: residents smuggle detergents after enactment of Spokane phosphate ban [AP/Yahoo]
- UK: Elderly Hindu man in religious-accommodation bid for approval of open-air funeral pyre [Telegraph]
- No DUI, no one hurt, but harsh consequences anyway when Connecticut 18 year old is caught buying six-pack of beer [Fountain]
- Only one or two not covered previously at this site [“12 Most Ridiculous Lawsuits”, Oddee]
NPR on CPSIA: “Public Concern, Not Science, Prompts Plastics Ban”
Major story by Jon Hamilton on yesterday’s NPR “Morning Edition”: “A new federal ban on chemical compounds used in rubber duckies and other toys isn’t necessary, say the government scientists who studied the problem.” “Now they tell us,” writes Carter Wood. More from Jonathan Adler @ Volokh and commenters.
Although most coverage of the CPSIA debacle (this site’s included) has focused on the lead rules, the phthalates ban (phthalates are an ingredient often used to make plastic soft and bendable) is also extraordinarily burdensome, for a number of reasons: 1) as readers may recall, a successful lawsuit by the Natural Resources Defense Council and others forced the last-minute retroactive banning of already-existing playthings and child care items, costing business billions in inventory and other losses; 2) vast numbers of vintage dolls, board games and other existing playthings are noncompliant, which means they cannot legally be resold even at garage sales, let alone thrift or consignment shops, and are marked for landfills instead; 3) obligatory lab testing to prove the non-presence of phthalates in newly made items is even more expensive than testing to prove the non-presence of lead. The phthalate ban is also an important contributor to the burden of the law on the apparel industry (the ingredient has often been used in screen printing on t-shirts and similar items) and books (“book-plus” items with play value often have plastic components). AmendTheCPSIA.com has reprinted a letter from Robert Dawson of Good Times Inc., an amusement maker.
Earlier coverage: Feb. 6 (NRDC and allies win court case on retroactivity); Feb. 7 (various points, including Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s vow that his office will “take whatever steps are necessary [emphasis added] to ensure this phthalate ban is enforced”); Feb. 12 (what ingredients in playthings are going to replace phthalates, and are those ingredients going to be more safe or less?); Mar. 4 (vintage dolls); Mar. 11 (California Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein were particularly identified with pushing the phthalates ban to enactment).
P.S. Environmentalists disputing the NPR coverage: Jennifer & Jeremiah @ ZRecommends, Jennifer Taggart (The Smart Mama) in NPR comments. And Sacramento attorney Anthony Caso has a backgrounder for the Washington Legal Foundation (PDF) with more about the CPSC, the NRDC, and maneuvering on phthalates.