The Supreme Court will take up a case that will decide whether police have the right to inspect hotel records and if they need a court-approved warrant to obtain them. Also, the City of Oakland has approved a law allowing landlords to evict suspected sex workers. Then, zombies or demon possessions? What's your favorite horror film subgenre?
Does the Fourth Amendment protect hotels from providing guest lists to police?
The Supreme Court is in the process of filling its docket for the coming judicial session, and one of those cases is Los Angeles v. Patel.
The twin matters at the heart of this case are whether police have the right to inspect hotel records, and if so, whether they need a court-approved warrant before they can obtain the records. The Fourth Amendment is part of the Court’s legal justification for an expectation of privacy, and hotels are using it to sue over a version of privacy that protects their commercial interests.
If the hotels win the suit, hotel patrons will also gain privacy rights as their identifications remain anonymous. If the city wins, police will continue obtaining hotel records to address crimes from prostitution to gambling to domestic terrorism.
In addition, the Supreme Court could make a broader ruling relating to “facial challenges” to the Fourth Amendment, which could widen or narrow legal interpretations that courts use for applying the law. Another outcome could be that the law giving police authority to seize hotel records remains intact but that it is limited through the warrant process. In any case, the contours of the Fourth Amendment and privacy will continue to be shaped through Los Angeles v. Patel.
Do hotels have the right to protect records of their guests? Where is the line between public safety and privacy? How do you think the Supreme Court will lay the law?
Guests:
Alan Butler, Senior Counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center
Richard Blass, a criminal defense attorney at the law firm, Richard F. Blass & Associates in Chicago. He is a retired Deputy Police Chief and is general counsel to a police union representing over 100 officers and chiefs
Oakland reserves right to evict suspected prostitutes
A little over a decade ago, the city of Oakland launched the Nuisance Eviction Ordinance--a law that gave the city the right to pursue eviction proceedings on renters based on drug or weapon charges. The new legislation was modeled after a pilot program adopted seven years prior by Los Angeles, which allowed the City Attorney to evict for arrests and illegal weapon possession. This past Wednesday the Oakland City Council unanimously approved a series of new laws proposed by City Attorney Barbara Parker, including one giving her--as well as landlords--the right to swiftly evict suspected sex workers.
While the reasoning behind the new ordinance may seem well-founded, critics worry that the new law--much like similar laws passed before it--neglects due process, lacks transparency and oversight and carries with it few protections for parties who have been wrongly evicted. Kriston Capps, who broke the story for CityLab, writes, “The bill does not describe the burden of proof the city needs to meet in order to apprise a landlord that a tenant has ‘engaged’ in an illegal activity. Nor does the bill stipulate whether this evidence (presuming some is required) is to be shared with the tenant.”
In other words, the suspected sex worker may not even be accused of practicing his or her trade on the property--merely the suspicion of keeping earnings on the property could be grounds for eviction. Wednesday evening’s vote also saw an expansion to the definition of “nuisance,” so that it now also includes gambling, prostitution and solicitation, leaving the door wide open for evictions based on weak or even entirely circumstantial evidence.
Though most of the pilot program originally adopted by Los Angeles in 1997 has now become state law, some fear that the Oakland City Attorney has expanded her powers for a slightly less honorable intention: gentrification. Strengthened by the recent passing of AB 2310, evictions could threaten tenants who have been charged with a past crime but later had charges dismissed or were proven innocent. In an interview with CityLab, supervising attorney at the East Bay Community Law Center Marc Janowitz told Kriston Capps, “Let’s face it, we’re talking about lower-income tenants who are most vulnerable, who have least access to legal services [...] By the city getting involved, it can only exacerbate an already very difficult situation for this population [...] I would be very surprised if the ordinance had any noticeable effect on diminishing the conduct at which it’s directed.”
Are you a renter? How would you feel if you could be evicted without due process? Could these laws have been enacted with the hope of pushing out lower-income tenants? If you happen to be a landlord, do these expanded state laws make you feel better about the ability to evict a problem tenant?
Guests:
Kriston Capps, Staff Writer with The Atlantic’s sister publication CityLab. He broke the story.
Richard Illgen, Supervising Deputy City Attorney of Oakland
Tim Iglesias, Professor of Law at the University of San Francisco School of Law (Specializing in fair housing)
Holidays hike up airfares
As the holidays and travel season arrive, airlines have decided to raise airfare. While many industry analysts expected the increases as commensurate with higher flight frequency during the period extending into the new year, others are looking at the rate hikes in the context of record airline profits.
The airlines posit that they are spending profits on extended service, new planes, and profits for shareholders. But for frequent fliers who note that they are getting smaller seats, questions abound about why prices continue to increase. After the recent merger of US Airways and American Airlines, competition (and, thus, competitive pricing) is down as 80% of the country's airfare is controlled by four airlines. What do you think of rising airfare?
Guests:
Charlie Leocha, Head of Travelers United (formerly Consumer Travel Alliance)
Rick Seaney, Co-Founder and CEO of farecompare.com
Filmweek: 'John Wick', 'Citizenfour', 'Camp X-Ray' and more
Larry Mantle and KPCC film critics Tim cogshell, Andy Klein, and Claudia Puig review this week’s releases, including “John Wick,” “Citizenfour,” “Camp X-Ray” and more. TGI-Filmweek!
"John Wick":
"CitizenFour":
"Camp X-Ray":
Guests:
Andy Klein, film critic for KPCC and L.A. Times Community Paper Chain
Tim Cogshell, film critic for KPCC and Alt Film Guide
Halloween lurks: Celebrate and hate the best and worst horror subgenres
Zombie flicks versus slasher films, monsters versus demons. No, it's not a sequel to “Cabin in the Woods,” it's a battle of horror subgenres! This week sees the release of a supernatural thriller. "Ouija" is of a kind with Steven Spielberg's "Poltergeist" and Japanese hit "The Grudge." If having the dead in your face doesn't give you goosebumps, there is the suggested fright of a classic such as "The Haunting." The queen of possession films is William Friedkin's "The Exorcist."
That demon category includes "The Omen" and recent addition "The Conjuring." Its prequel out this month, "Annabelle" gives nod to creepy-doll fantasies such as "Puppet Master" and the unloveable Chucky. Slasher filmmakers have given us some of the most successful film franchises of all time such as “Halloween” AKA “Friday the 13th,” “Scream” and A Nightmare on Elm Street.” Torture porn surged in popularity during the last decade with "Saw" and Hostel." Some viewers’ loyalties lie with specific filmmakers such as Alfred Hitchcock, George Romero and Dario Argento.
What type of horror movie is in your queue? And which do you shun? And why? Why did “found footage” became a successful subgenre and worn trope? What other eras have seen surges in subgenres?
Guests:
Tim Cogshell, film critic for KPCC and Alt Film Guide
Andy Klein, film critic for KPCC and L.A. Times Community Paper Chain
Claudia Puig, film critic for KPCC and USA today