StopUMTS Logo
how to get rid of moles 
Zoeken
   
Voorlichting
21/09/17EHS en toch een smartphon
01/09/17WiFi vrije scholen (kaart
Artikelen
25/09/175G: Geschenk of infras
20/09/17IoT 5
20/09/17Harmonische vervorming
20/09/17Vitamin B17: The Greatest
19/09/17Burn-out (toename)
19/09/17Schildklierkanker, toenam
Berichten Nederland
28/09/17Nieuw boek: DE DRAADLOZE
21/09/17GGD Utrecht: een nieuw ge
20/09/17Ruimte in de ether voor 5
20/09/17De Impact-Academy en onze
18/09/17Vereniging tegen de Kwakz
Berichten België
01/07/17Verdubbeling burn-out in
26/06/17Voorstel van resolutie vo
Berichten Internationaal
21/09/17USA: Monterey County Proc
20/09/17USA: nieuwe 5G ellende: D
19/09/17USA: De jongeren van nu g
19/09/17USA: 5G opponents launch
Ervaringen | Appellen/oproepen
24/09/17Lichaamspanning en ele
18/09/17WiFi 2,4 GHz en 5 GHz; ee
18/09/17''Why I Don't Have a Mobi
Onderzoeken
20/09/17National Toxicology Progr
08/09/17Anxiety-like behavioural
07/09/17The mere presence of your
Veel gestelde vragen
13/05/17Vakantie? Witte zo
10/07/16Zeven veel gestelde vrage
Juridische informatie
19/09/17USA situatie: WOZ waarded
10/09/17Rechter: Staat moet lucht
31/08/17InPower Movement: Early r
Oproepen
29/11/17Raadsmarkt ZENDMASTEN &
11/11/17Cursus ‘Straling meten
29/09/17EHS regionale contactdage
Folders
10/06/17Brochures, folders, websi
29/04/16USA: Meer dan 50 tips voo
Briefwisselingen | Archief: 2008, 2005
10/07/17Brief naar de gemeente C.
14/06/17Mail naar 'De Monitor' na
Illustraties
 Algemeen
 Fotoalbum zendmasten
 Wetenschappelijke illustraties
Judicial Conflict of Interest a Concern in Berkeley ‘Cell Phone Right to Know’ Case    
Ga naar overzicht berichten in: Juridische Informatie

Judicial Conflict of Interest a Concern in Berkeley ‘Cell Phone Right to Know’ Case
donderdag, 29 september 2016 - Dossier: Juridische informatie


Bron: ehtrust.org/judicial-conflict-interest-concern-berkeley-cell-phone-right-know-case-pending-ninth-circuit-court-appeals/
27 sept. 2016

Judicial Conflict of Interest a Concern in Berkeley ‘Cell Phone Right to Know’ Case Pending in Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals


BERKELEY, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)--A possible conflict of interest in the family background of one of three judges in a court case in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals related to Berkeley, CA’s ‘Cell Phone Right to Know’ ordinance is an urgent concern.

According to Ellen Marks of the California Brain Tumor Association, “Judge Michelle Friedland’s possible links to the wireless industry should have been disclosed in a case relating to wireless risks, and the judge recused, given the potential for lack of impartiality in matters related to the wireless industry.”

In a current appeal by CTIA in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, a 3-judge panel heard from lawyers for CTIA and the City of Berkeley on September 13, 2016, and a judicial decision is pending. (CTIA-The Wireless Association v. City of Berkeley et al., case number 16-15141)

Lloyd Morgan, Senior Research Fellow at Environmental Health Trust and citizen of the City of Berkeley, who attended the recent hearing, says, “We were perplexed about Judge Friedland’s consistent support of the testimony of the attorney for the CTIA-The Wireless Industry Association, Theodore Olson of Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher. After witnessing her body language at the hearing, numerous parties researched the Judge’s associations and discovered potential conflicts of interest that need to be brought to the Court’s attention.”

The Berkeley ordinance (No. 7,404-N.S.) in question was unanimously approved by the Berkeley City Council May 12, 2015. It sustained an appeal by the CTIA on September 21, 2015 (http://bit.ly/CTIABerkeleyruling09212015), paving the way for implementation of the approved notices in retailers on March 21, 2016. The notices now required at the point of sale caution that use of cell phones close to the body in certain circumstances may exceed the federal guidelines for exposure to RF radiation, language already contained in cell phone manuals.

Concern about Judge Friedland’s possible conflicts of interest are based on:
•Judge Friedland’s husband, Daniel Kelly, is currently a Senior DSP Engineer with Tarana Wireless, Inc. in San Jose, CA (https://www.taranawireless.com/), which designs equipment needed for the coming 5G rollout. He was earlier employed at other technology companies, including Cisco Systems, a member of CTIA, where he was a “wireless engineer.”
•Dr. Judd Uddenfeldt, past CTO of Ericsson and Sony Mobile, recently joined the Board of Directors of Tarana Wireless where Judge Friedland’s husband is employed.
•AT&T is a major investor in Tarana, and AT&T is a member of CTIA.
•It is possible Judge Friedland’s husband may have been granted stock options in Tarana Wireless, as is common in technology growth companies.
•When Judge Friedland was nominated for judge she had recommendation letters from Cisco, Facebook, Google and Edison.

Max Anderson of the Berkeley City Council says, “It is appalling to learn that a judge in this case may have possible wireless industry conflicts of interest. It is especially important this be investigated given Judge Friedland’s husband is a key employee of a firm linked to several major players in the trillion dollar wireless sector.”

Media should contact Molly C. Dwyer, Clerk of Court at 415-355-8800 to request comment on the possible effects of these conflicts on Judge Friedland’s apparent bias during the hearing September 13, 2016 and on her vote.

A log of developments on the Berkeley ‘Cell Phone Right to Know’ ordinance can be viewed here: www.saferemr.com/2014/11/berkeley-cell-phone-right-to-know.html

The City of Berkeley is being represented pro bono by Lawrence Lessig, Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Harvard Law School. Formerly, Lessig was a Professor at Stanford Law School, where he founded the school’s Center for Internet and Society, and has been named one of Scientific American’s Top 50 Visionaries.

www.lessig.org/about/. The CTIA Wireless Industry Association is represented by Theodore Olson, of Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher.

Contacts

California Brain Tumor Association
Ellen Marks, 925-285-5437
elliekmarks@gmail.com

EHT maintains a webpage dedicated to this Ordinance at ehtrust.org/policy/the-berkeley-cell-phone-right-to-know-ordinance/ .


Ga terug naar het hoofdmenu
Afdrukken | Vragen | RSS | Disclaimer