The Legal Forum welcomes letters to the editor at tramstack@gmail.com, which will be published here.
Senate Told that Near Misses Were Frequent
By Reagan National Airplanes and Helicopters
A recent Senate hearing is adding to the evidence being used in lawsuits following the Jan. 29 collision over Reagan National Airport between an Army helicopter and a commercial airplane that killed 67 people.
Federal Aviation Administration officials acknowledged that there had been thousands of near misses between Army helicopters and commercial aircraft at the airport before the collision.
A Senate subcommittee held the hearing on the heels of a new National Transportation Safety Board report indicating the number of near misses was much higher than previously assumed.
During the Jan. 29 collision, an American Airlines regional jet slammed into an Army Black Hawk helicopter that was flying higher than its authorized altitude.
False instrument readings on the helicopter and the inability of equipment on both aircraft to send warnings to each other are suspected of contributing to the mid-air collision.
Between October 2021 and December 2024, there were more than 15,000 close proximity events between commercial airplanes and helicopters at Reagan National Airport, according to the National Transportation Safety Board. Close calls mean the lateral separation between the aircraft was less than one nautical mile and vertical separation was less than 400 feet.
"Alarm bells about potential collisions have been ringing for years," said Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a member of the Senate Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Aviation, Space and Innovation.
The assessment of an obvious mistake was shared by Acting Federal Aviation Administration Administrator Chirs Rocheleau, who said, “Clearly something was missed.”
Much of the hearing focused on the Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast, or ADS-B, transmission system that aircraft commonly use to broadcast their positions, directions, speed and other flight data.
Supreme Court Rejects Children’s Lawsuit
Seeking Injunction Against Climate Change
The U.S. Supreme Court last week declined to revive a lawsuit on behalf of children who said U.S. energy policies that exacerbate climate change are damaging their futures.
They said unrestrained climate change jeopardized their life, liberty, personal security and health.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had dismissed their lawsuit, saying no federal agency or official could resolve their complaint even if climate policy is flawed. As a result, they lacked standing to sue.
Four other courts ruled in favor of plaintiffs in similar lawsuits.
All of them blamed the U.S. government for encouraging fossil fuel extraction and consumption despite knowing the fuels contribute to global warming.
Continue Reading
Latest News
Congressional Republicans Seek Legislation
To Limit Judges’ Nationwide Injunctions
The U.S. House plans to vote soon on a bill that would limit the authority of federal courts to issue nationwide injunctions against Trump administration policy actions.
The bill introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., is another sign of the growing conflict between President Donald Trump and federal courts. It was scheduled for a vote this week but delayed by last-minute amendments.
Federal judges have issued about 40 nationwide injunctions against the Trump administration since Jan. 20. They have sought to halt mass firings of federal employees, prevent elimination of environmental regulations and create procedural requirements before deportations.
The injunctions were responses to President Donald Trump’s executive orders.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., suggested last week that Congress should consider getting rid of some federal courts or at least restricting their ability to rule on issues.
Power the Civil Rights Work of Our Time
Each day members of our community are experiencing wage theft, the effects of gentrification, discriminatory policing, collateral consequences, marginalization in schools, and barriers to public accommodations.
We fight alongside people facing the effects of gentrification like Amira Moore. Our work empowers the people and communities who need it most, “We can do more than we think. There’s a path to equity, we just have to step to it.” –Ms. Moore
For more than 50 years, the Washington Lawyers’ Committee has been on the frontlines of the fight for civil rights in our community. We deploy the best legal talent, we tackle the tough cases, we fight, and we win.
Our work is as important today as it has ever been. Through your support, you can play a role in creating justice for thousands of marginalized members of our community. Together, we will dismantle injustice and pursue lasting change.
Join us! Donate & subscribe: https://www.washlaw.org/support-us
Volunteer with us: https://www.washlaw.org/get-involved/
For more information, contact Gregg Kelley at Gregg_Kelley@washlaw.org
About Us
The Legal Forum is a nonprofit news service for the Washington area's legal community that also offers attorney job listings as well as amicus briefs and grant information for charitable organizations. If you have questions, please Contact Us
Letters to the Editor
D.C. in Brief
U.S. Attorney’s Plan to Protect Police
Draws Warnings About Rights Violations
The interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia said last week he no longer plans to turn over potentially discrediting information about police officers to judges or defense attorneys before the officers testify at criminal trials.
The announcement is raising questions about whether it could violate defendants’ legal rights to a fair trial.
“It’s going to interfere with the Constitution really,” said a Washington attorney who handles public defender cases. He asked not to be named.
It also creates possibilities that prosecuting attorneys could be penalized or disbarred by judges or the D.C. Bar’s Board on Professional Responsibility for failing to follow proper court procedures.
“They could,” the attorney said. “I think it’s going to lead to a lot more litigation.”
The announcement from interim U.S. Attorney Ed Martin refers to “Lewis Lists.”
Lewis Lists are records of troublesome or untruthful behavior by police officers that would tend to undercut their credibility when they testify at trials. It is derived from the 1979 District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruling in Lewis v. United States.
The court said that the due process clause of the Constitution requires prosecutors to give the defense attorneys and judges any significant evidence they hold that suggests a defendant is not guilty, including information showing misconduct by police.
Defense attorneys sometimes use Lewis List information to challenge the credibility of officers who accuse defendants of crimes. The information also can interfere with officers’ opportunities for promotions or pay raises.
The legal term for the information is exculpatory evidence. The Lewis Lists are held by U.S. attorneys’ offices.
Trump’s Directive Against Law Firms
Creates Concern of War with Lawyers
A new presidential memorandum is raising questions from members of the legal community about whether Donald Trump is trying to wage war with law firms that challenge his policies.
The memo tells the Justice and Homeland Security Departments to “seek sanctions against attorneys and law firms who engage in frivolous, unreasonable and vexatious litigation against the United States” or federal agencies.
Trump issued the memo one day after the major law firm of Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison said it was compelled to reach a settlement with the president’s administration or risk being driven out of business.
The firm was known for its pro bono work on civil rights cases that sometimes included suing the government. In addition, one of its attorneys helped New York’s attorney general investigate Trump’s alleged financial improprieties.
Ben Wizner, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer, said Trump’s directive could "chill and intimidate" attorneys who challenge the president.
Continue Reading
Legal Briefs
We Could Use Your Help
Thousands of DC residents need a lawyer, but can’t afford one. They could be illegally evicted from their homes, lose custody of their children, experience domestic violence, and more, all because they lack legal representation.
You could make a difference. By making a donation to the Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia, you will provide free, high-quality, zealous legal representation to low-income DC residents.
Your support could prevent homelessness, domestic violence, hunger, or family separation. In fact, if just 10 people who see this ad give $28 to Legal Aid, it will be enough to staff an experienced attorney at the courthouse for a day.
That way, DC residents like Keith King (pictured above) can get the legal representation they need to win their cases. As Mr. King put it, if it wasn’t for his Legal Aid lawyer, “I would have been homeless again.”
Here is the link to the Legal Aid website for donations: https://www.legalaiddc.org/donate-to-legal-aid/
For more information, contact Rob Pergament at Legal Aid at rpergament@legalaiddc.org