Thursday, February 24, 2011

The Supreme Court - Part 2

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  
These are the words of the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution.  The reason that Bond vs United States was before the Supreme Court was to decide whether  the Federal government had the right to indict Carol Bond for a violation of the Federal statue called “Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction”.  As Bond’s attorney Paul Clement stated, “If Chemical Ali is in your district, this is your statute.”  Clement’s claim was that Bond should have been charged with an ordinary state felony that would have carried a shorter sentence than the six years that Bond received.  The other constitutional question was whether Bond has standing to challenge the government on a 10th Amendment question; or does the amendment only delineate federal vs state powers. 
The visitors in the peanut gallery sat on long, high backed wooden benches that resembled church pews.  Stone faced security guards with suits and earpieces who looked like Secret Service agents, wandered throughout the crowd of 250 and made me wary of taking anything out of my pockets.  Everyone paid very close attention.  After all, how many opportunities do most of us have to watch a Supreme Court case?  But another reason was that all cell phones and PDAs had to be left outside.  No electronic media in this courtroom; strictly old school. 
After watching the attorneys get grilled by the justices, I have great respect for any lawyer who presents a case before the Supreme Court.  Eight of the nine judges were very engaged in the proceedings and asked pointed, challenging questions of the lawyers for both sides.  Obscure cases from decades ago were quoted by both judges and attorneys.  Clarence Thomas lived up to his reputation and said nothing during either case.  Samuel Alito started a funny exchange when he asked whether the type of chemical mattered in the case.  So began a discussion of whether vinegar could be considered a chemical weapon since by the letter of the law, any substance that could kill an animal was included and vinegar could kill a goldfish if it was added to the fishbowl.  I don’t remember the lawyer’s response, but he talked himself out of the trap. 
Supreme Court cases are not decided right after the oral arguments.  The justices take what they’ve learned during questioning and add it to the briefs that each side files in advance.  Deliberations, voting, and the writing of majority and dissenting opinions follow some time later.  After a little over an hour of debate, Chief Justice Roberts ended the session with the statement, “Case is submitted”.   So we left the courtroom having to wait to find out the verdicts. 
The decision in the Bond case may have ramifications on a possible future challenge to the provision in the new Federal health care bill that requires people to buy health insurance.  That too is a question about federal vs state authority and several “interested parties” such as the conservative Eagle Forum, the libertarian Cato Institute, and the Attorneys General from six states who are suing the government over the health care law have asked the court to broadly consider the question of whether Bond, an individual, has the right to challenge the government.  Who knew that when Carol Bond’s husband cheated on her, he would start a chain of events that would eventually end up in the Supreme Court with national political adversaries, both liberal and conservative, anxiously watching.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

The Supreme Court - Part 1

The public viewing area of the US Supreme Court has a capacity of about 250.  Some of the seats are available to the general public on a first come, first served basis.  The opportunity to witness a live court session was why I found myself standing on ice outside the great white edifice for two hours on a frigid February morning.  At 8 AM there were only about 20 people in line so things looked great.  But then those with “tickets” showed up.  Tickets are given out to the first 100 people who show up, so those that arrived earlier were automatically ahead of me on line. Many other people with tickets bypassed the line.  Suddenly, the odds of making it in got longer.
Two cases were being heard today.  The second, United States vs Tinklenberg, which involved an argument about the length of time for a “speedy” trial, was far less interesting than the first.  Bond vs United States was the case that most of the crowd knew about and had come to see.  Carol Anne Bond had been convicted of attempting to poison her husband’s lover with a mixture of deadly chemicals.  Her guilt was not in question here; she had confessed and had been convicted in Federal court in 2008.  The issues before the Supreme Court justices were whether the Federal government had overstepped its constitutional bounds by trying her under a statute intended for chemical terrorist attacks, and whether an individual has the right to challenge the government for infringing on a state’s right. 
My colleague Mike and I got lucky on this day and we were two of the last people who made it into the viewing gallery to see the first case.  The frozen, sore feet and the four hours of annual leave were all worth it as we made our way through multiple security checkpoints and were finally escorted into the greatest courtroom in the land. 
The courtroom is truly impressive with towering marble columns on the sides and heavy red drapes between the columns and the windows.  A wide sculpture in relief faced the audience way above the justices heads, and just below the ornate, coffered ceiling.  The nine justices sat behind a long wood bench with Chief Justice Roberts in the center.  The Associate Justices were seated according to seniority with Justices Scalia and Kennedy flanking the Chief.  The next pair was Justices Thomas and Ginsberg, with Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito next.  The two newest members of the court, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan occupied the “cheap” seats at either end of the bench. 
I can only imagine how many hours, days, weeks, or months must go into an attorney’s preparation to argue a case before the Supreme Court.  The case took a little over an hour and the lawyers for each side presented a short summary of their claim, and then fielded questions from the justices.  Many of the questions involved fine legal points that I could not understand, but some were clear even to the non-legal mind. 
This story is going to be too long for one blog so I’m going to let the narrative to this point be part 1.  Tune in later for the conclusion of my morning at the Supreme Court.

Monday, February 21, 2011

Snakes and Trains

Just when you think you’ve seen it all, the Metro provides another unique experience.  Entering a train car that was lightly populated the other night, I noticed that the man sitting across the aisle from me had his hands full.  In one hand was his PDA which he was using to make a call.  In the other he held a baby Boa Constrictor.  Now live animals (like seeing eye dogs) are permitted in the Metro system, so the man was probably not breaking any rule, but a snake!  Really!  The little snake was alive as his movements proved, and his owner paid no attention to me or anyone else around him as the snake moved around in his hand.

A young couple got on the train at the next stop and stood near the door instead of taking a seat.  As I watched, they continued their platform conversation while not paying full attention to their surroundings.  As their eyes eventually saw the snake, the double take look of surprise was priceless. They then looked at me as if to say “Is that what I think it is?”  I smiled back and when we left the train, and the snake thankfully, at the next station, we shared a laugh at a unique Metro experience that I hope is not repeated.

Sunday, February 13, 2011

On Comet, On Cupid


Comet Tempel 1 will get a return visit from a NASA spacecraft on Valentine’s Day when the Stardust-NeXT probe whizzes by with its high speed camera and other instruments.  This encounter will occur about 180 million miles away from Earth with the space probe traveling at 24,000 mph.  The closest approach distance will be a scant 124 miles. Tempel 1 was struck, literally, by another NASA probe during the Deep Impact mission in 2005, and the deliberate crash created a crater in the comet.  Tomorrow’s encounter is a unique opportunity to observe the man-made damage from 6 years ago as well as to see how the comet has changed during that time.   
Comets are continuously changing objects that orbit the Sun.  They spew dust, ice, carbon dioxide, and who knows what other constituents as they travel through space, leaving signature trails behind.  They are thought to be remnants of the origin of the solar system so their study can hopefully offer clues as to how the solar system came to be. 
Tomorrow’s visit culminates a bonus mission for the Stardust probe.  In 2004, the probe flew by another comet (Wild 2), snapping pictures as well as gathering samples of the comet dust.  The “dust collector” was jettisoned from the spacecraft and successfully returned to Earth in 2006 – a complete mission success.  However, since Stardust still had sufficient fuel reserves, and was functioning properly, NASA decided to send it on another mission, the return to Tempel 1.  The additional cost for the new mission was only 10% of the original mission cost.  Recycling just makes sense.  This will be the last hurrah for Stardust though; it won’t have enough fuel for any more adventures, but it will be retired as a great success story. 
In this time of austerity, it is good to know that NASA is finding creative ways of accomplishing science objectives with less.  Last year’s visit to Comet Hartley 2 by the EPOXI spacecraft was another example of utilizing an asset beyond its primary mission.  EPOXI is a new name given to the Deep Impact “mother ship” that flew by and watched the collision with Tempel 1 in 2005.  Following that success, EPOXI was re-programmed to seek out Hartley 2 and the successful rendezvous occurred on November 3, 2010.
Learning more about the solar system provides incrementally more information in the quest to answer the “big question” about the universe’s Big Bang singularity.  See the entry two blogs ago for more.  It is truly exciting to witness ancient objects up close and personal and to gather valuable data.  As NASA Associate Administrator for Science Ed Weiler said at the press conference following the download of images from the Hartley 2 encounter, “This is real.  It is not a video game.  No human being has ever seen this comet before.”  Congratulations to two old, but capable spacecraft and to the teams that made these bonus missions possible. 

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Super Bowl Thoughts

After more than 5 glorious months, the American football season officially concludes today, Super Bowl Sunday.  The NFL really has the right balance between the regular season and the playoffs with 12 of 32 teams qualifying for post season play.  Today’s matchup between the Green Bay Packers and the Pittsburgh Steelers is a classic contest between two of the NFL’s most successful teams.  Each team is defined by a strong work ethic and a blue collar mentality, has a well respected head coach, and a top notch quarterback. 
Big Ben Roethlisberger has already led the Steelers to two championships and if Pittsburgh wins today, it will be hard to not consider Ben as one of the league’s elite QBs.  Aaron Rodgers of Green Bay has a compelling story.  He was the guy at the 2005 draft whose stock fell and was the last player left in the waiting room as ESPN chronicled his anxiety.  Of course being picked by Green Bay and sitting behind Brett Favre for several years prepared him well for his opportunity to start three seasons ago.  Rodgers is the hottest quarterback in football right now and his post season play has been outstanding.  Does anyone now think the Packers made the wrong decision three years ago when they refused to take Brett Favre back from his first retirement change of heart? 
The Packers learned from the San Francisco 49ers who made a similar decision in 1993 when they traded Joe Montana to the Kansas City Chiefs and handed the ball to Steve Young.  Like Favre, Montana stayed too long past his prime and ended his career awkwardly with another team.  Young rewarded the 49ers with a Super Bowl victory following the 1994 season.  I’m rooting for Rodgers to do the same tonight.   
One improvement that the NFL can make for next year is to cancel the Pro Bowl.  I watched about 10 minutes of this farce of an all star game last weekend and the teams may have well as been playing touch football.  I really can’t blame the players from being contact averse after the long season, but a game with the lack of intensity as the Pro Bowl should not be played.  As long as I’m dispensing advice, I hope the talk of an 18 game regular season ends.  The Super Bowl is now played in February not January like it was traditionally, and the 16 game season is long enough.  Unlike the NBA and the NHL which have meaningless regular seasons, the NFL has a great format right now and doesn’t need to fix what isn’t broken. 
Enjoy the Super Bowl tonight.  I’m predicting a 24-20 win for the Packers.

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Hubble and the Big Bang

Well the good old Hubble telescope did it again.  Astronomers using images from Hubble have discovered the oldest object in the universe (at least the oldest so far).  The remote galaxy was born 13.2 billion years ago, about 500 million years after the Big Bang (BB) that started it all.  Will we discover something older than this in the future?  Probably.  Especially when NASA launches the James Webb Space Telescope sometime later this decade.  JW’s 6.5 meter diameter mirror dwarfs Hubble’s (2.4 meter) and will expand our visual possibilities.  Maybe the accepted age of the universe will be proven wrong. 
So what does this all mean?  How does one deal with a finite number like 13.7(10^9) as the age of everything?  If BB started the formation of all matter, what was there before?  As discomforting as the concept of infinity can be, a finite age for the universe is equally troubling.  There’s a lot of good science behind the 13.7 billion year number.  It is a mathematical singularity that is calculated from astronomical observation data and is derived from the expanding universe theory.  If reading that sentence tires you, it might be better to consider an alternative Big Bang Theory.
Can a believer in God accept this science?  Certainly the scientific community has more than its share of atheists, but there are plenty of believers in this group as well.  Georges Lemaitre, one of the originators of the Big Bang theory was also a priest.  Francis Collins, the former director of the Human Genome project, makes a wonderful case for the coexistence of science and faith in his book, The Language of God. 
The more questions that are answered by science, the more are posed.  BB can explain how stars, planets, moons, comets, and asteroids were created, but it can’t explain what existed a moment before the singularity.  Nor can it answer why.  Faith can fill that void.  If one can accept a premise that God might use a natural physical process to create the universe and subsequently, to create humans, then there is no reason why a believer cannot accept scientific discovery as truth.  It’s good to keep searching for answers, but we’ll never understand everything.  Discovering a galaxy whose light traveled for 13.2 billion years to reach us, gives us a perspective of how small we are in relation to everything else around us.  Surely a power greater than we can imagine was responsible for it all.