• 19 JAN 17
    • 0

    Susan Foster on Conflict of Interest in the Berkeley’s “right to know”

    From the blog of Dariusz Leszczynski, Between a Rock and A Hard Place

    Excerpt

    This is the next in a series of the Guest Blogs on BRHP. The opinions expressed in it are of Susan Foster herself (photo). Publication of these opinions in BRHP does not imply that BRHP automatically agrees with or endorses these opinions. Publication of this, and other Guest Blogs, is an attempt to start an open debate and free exchange of opinions on RF and health.

    WILL A JUDGE’S FAILURE TO RECUSE

    SILENCE BERKELEY’S “RIGHT TO KNOW”?

    The long battle over cell phone consumer labels, with a hidden twist of legal super heroes and questions about a Ninth Circuit Court judge’s failure to recuse herself.

    A battle over free speech in Berkeley, California has pitted the city of Berkeley against the mighty telecommunications trade group, CTIA – The Wireless Association. Berkeley stands on the First Amendment argument they have a right to inform consumers of certain precautions the FCC already requires in the back of cell phone user’s manuals.

    A verdict is expected shortly from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and proponents of Berkeley’s Right to Know consumer notices are growing increasingly concerned about Judge Michelle T. Friedland’s circuitous connection to the CTIA. Supporters of the Right to Know ordinance worry the judge’s husband, Dan Kelly, has links to four members of the CTIA that could jeopardize Berkeley’s fight for the right to speak freely.
    SNIP

    Read the full article here

    ********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

    Leave a reply →

Photostream