A primer on the Faith Fellowship v. San Leandro lawsuit
Posted: April 1, 2011 Filed under: City Hall, Faith Fellowship v. SL case, Legal | Tags: Deborah J. Fox, Faith Fellowship, Gary Mortara, Jayne Williams, John Jermanis, Meyers Nave, RLUIPA, San Leandro 5 CommentsThis posting (and this blog) has moved. You can now find it at: http://sanleandrotalk.voxpublica.org/2011/04/01/a-primer-on-the-san-leandro-vs-faith-fellowship-church-lawsuit/
San Leandro Talk 
Marga, clear, concise and coherent. Well done.
You did not address the reversal legacy of the Ninth Court of Appeals, which is hardly distinguished. Your speculation regarding the en banc hearing is sound and likely.
My assumption is that you will address the costs, conflicts, community concerns and counsel in your upcoming articles.
The City and Citizens of San Leandro are well served by your efforts to explain and castigate the perfidy of the lawyers in service to the City Counsel.
This entire debacle should become issue numero uno for the voters of San Leandro in the next elections. We will not be served until this course of city action and planning is cancelled and actions repudiated. I fear that counsel is hopeful that this action will continue to climb the ladder of judicial review.
Thomas, yes I will discuss the issues you bring up in future posts.
But the issue of the high reversal rate of the Ninth Circuit is a red herring in this case. I know the city attorney has been making that argument to city council members, but what does it really mean? For one, while the Supreme Court reverses 9th circuit decisions at a higher rate than those from other sources, the rate is not /that/ much higher. About 84-90% of 9th circuit cases are reversed vs. about 76% of /all/ cases. The fact is the Supreme Court most often chooses to hear cases where they think the lower courts got it wrong.
But in practical terms what does it mean for us? Even in a bad year for the 9th circuit, the SC may reverse 15 cases out of of the over 6,000 the 9th circuit hears. That about a .2% reversal rate. I wouldn’t say those are particularly good odds for the city.
And one of the more usual reasons given for the higher reversal rate of 9th circuit decisions is that the 9th circuit is more /liberal/ than the Supreme Court. Can someone seriously argue that our current Supreme Court is more likely to side with the City than the 9th circuit? Really?
Great job Marga! I think the creation of the “Assembly Use Overlay District” definitely hurt their cause. When will we know if there will be a re-hearing?
Marga, perhaps I am moving ahead of your narrative and for that I apologize. Faith Fellowshihp won. The City of San Leandro lost. Now San Leandro’s counsel is continuing their billing and expense, pouring more money after bad. San Leandro was wrong in their suit. It is time for the city to drop their appeal and save the money. The appeal serves no one. That the city council was unanimous, by most reports, in their support of the appeal is what is really wrong.
Voters should cease to support the city council. They are not representing us well. The new city manager should drop this action on the city’s part as soon as th ey are appointed.
[…] the Appellate level and San Leandro may be willing to take the gamble that it won’t. It would not be the first time that the city took a risky legal position for no good […]