One thing that has not been conveyed in our pictures to date is just how close the Supreme Court of the United States is to the Library of Congress.  Christine’s historic bird’s eye view post provides an overhead shot of the area.  This week’s Pic of the Week shows the back of the Supreme Court Building with the dome of the Jefferson Building in the background.

We also work with some of the librarians at the Supreme Court (who occasionally send us cupcakes!).  Clare just interviewed Judy Gaskell, the former Librarian of the Supreme Court who is currently volunteering here at the Law Library of Congress.  Judy previously presented to Law Library staff for one of our Power Lunches.

We occasionally have Supreme Court-related events, such as the Wickersham Awards Ceremony with retired Justice John Paul Stevens and our Constitution Day event with Dahlia Lithwick who spoke on the topic of “The Supreme Court and Free Speech.”

You can’t quite read it all, but across the back of the Supreme Court, it says, “Justice the Guardian of Liberty.”

If you are researching the Supreme Court, the Law Library Reading Room is a Supreme Court Depository Library (there are about 10 around the country).   Outside of the Supreme Court Library, we have the most comprehensive collection of the Supreme Court Records and Briefs, dating back to 1832.

It would be wonderful if this post were about all kinds of laws drafted by the Ministry of Magic.  It’s not.  I’m sorry.  While England did at one point have laws regarding witchcraft on the books, those days are long gone.  Instead, in what can only be considered to be the highlight of my social calendar this year, on a recent  Saturday night I was at home watching Creating the World of Harry Potter, a show that describes the making of JK Rowling’s Harry Potter books into a blockbuster movie series.  (For atmospheric Harry Potter music to play in the background whilst reading, click here).

During the show, Chris Columbus, director of the first two installments, spoke about some of the constraints he encountered during filming.  He specifically mentioned the difficulty of working with child actors.  Not that they are difficult to work with generally (or perhaps just a touch?), but that the laws in Britain, where the majority of filming occurred, meant that the child actors could only perform for four hours each day.   He said that, combined with the inexperience of the actors, led to the first film having the feel of a documentary as separate cameras were put on each of the young actors, in order to maximize the time that the production crew had.  In some scenes, the footage was then edited to switch back and forth between the actors to allow the use of the best takes for the final release.

So back to the law.  The use of child actors in performances is regulated by the Children and Young Persons Act 1963 and the Children (Performances) Regulations 1968.  The 1963 Act requires that a license must be obtained for a child (in this Act, generally, under the age of sixteen) for any performance that is recorded to be used in a broadcast or a film for public exhibition.  Taking part as a performer in any rehearsal or preparation before the recording of a performance also brings the child under the licensing requirements.

Licenses are obtained from the local authority where the child lives and the production company must apply for the license at least twenty one days before the first performance.  The child’s parents must complete a part of the application, to provide their consent.  Additional documentation required may include a medical certificate, as well as permission from the head teacher of the school to permit the child’s absence.

The law in this area is a little convoluted, and at times contradictory, and a good example of something that would be a good candidate to be re-written in plain English.  For example, the local authority may only grant a license if they are satisfied that:

proper provision has been made to secure [the child's] health and kind treatment and that, having regard to such provision (if any) as has been or will be made therefor, his education will not suffer; but if they are so satisfied, in the case of an application duly made for a licence under this section which they have power to grant, they shall not refuse to grant the licence.

So … the local authority may grant a license if they are satisfied that the child’s education will be satisfactorily taken care of, and that adequate provisions have been made for the child’s health and welfare.  To further protect the child’s welfare, a matron must be appointed to care for the child when the child is not with their parent or teacher.

The requirement to obtain a license does not arise if the child is not reimbursed for the performance, or if money is paid solely to defray any expenses incurred, provided the child has not been part of a performance for more than three days, or the performance was given under arrangements made by a school, or other body approved by the Secretary of State or local authority.

There are further restrictions if the child is below the age of fourteen.  In these cases, a license may only be granted if accompanied by a declaration stating that the role may only be played with a child of the age in question; the role is for dancing in a ballet; or the role is mainly musical in a performance that is also mainly musical, or consisting only of opera or ballet.

When granted, the license must specify any time the child will be absent from school for the purposes of the role in the application.  To ensure the child’s educational needs are met, licenses will not be granted unless the child receives education for three hours each day they would otherwise be in school.  If taught by a private tutor, the local authority must approve both the location at which the schooling will be undertaken, and the materials taught.

Further restrictions on the time that the actors may be on set are provided for in the regulations.  These provide that children over the age of nine years old may only be at the place of performance or rehearsal for four hours, which must be between the hours of seven in the morning to seven at night.   Children over the age of thirteen may be at the place of performance or rehearsal for up to twelve hours if filming is for one day; up to ten hours if the filming is for two days; and up to eight hours if the filming is over three days.

There are restrictions on how many days each year children may be in performances.  Local authorities are prohibited from granting licenses to children between the ages of thirteen and sixteen if they have taken part in other performances for more than seventy nine days in the previous twelve months.  For those under the age of thirteen, the number of days is reduced to thirty nine days.

Any earnings of a child granted a license under this Act may be subject to a condition stipulated in a license requiring them to be “… dealt with in a manner approved by the licensing authority.”   While I have seen nothing in relation to the salaries of the main actors (other than they made a lot of money from the films), there was a dispute over the earnings of some of the extras in the Harry Potter movies.  The headmaster of one of the schools that the children attended determined that they performed their roles as part of “work experience” and therefore any monies owed to the extras was to be paid into a school fund.  Child extras who attended other schools received the money that formed their pay.  As a result of this decision, the local authorities in the area came together to form a policy to apply to any child extras that would be used during filming.

The government has discussed removing much of the red tape that surrounds the use of child actors, although production companies and parents are navigating these complex and often contradictory laws and regulations, as there are reportedly over 45,000 licenses issued per year.

This weeks’ interview is with Judith Gaskell, former Librarian of the Supreme Court of the United States.  Judy is currently volunteering at the Law Library and is working in the office next door to mine.  I couldn’t resist popping over and asking  her to do an interview for our blog.  She kindly and graciously accepted. 

Please describe your background

I was a confirmed Midwesterner until I moved to Washington, DC in 2003.  My father was an Episcopal priest who in 1974 became the ninth Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Milwaukee.  Over the years our family lived in Minnesota, Illinois and Wisconsin.  After I graduated from college I lived in Chicago and Northwest Indiana.  I still miss Lake Michigan.

 What is your academic/professional history?

I started as a math major at Carleton College, but switched to English Literature in my sophomore year.  After graduation I worked a variety of jobs including assistant manager of a bookstore, full-time substitute grade school teacher in the Chicago Public School System, and dictionary editor.  My career path became more focused in August of 1970 when I got the position of Circulation Desk Assistant at the University of Chicago Law Library.  I was the only one who applied.  I started in the Graduate Library School in 1971 and finished my thesis on the Depository Library Act in April of 1975.  From mid 1974 until the end of 1977, I worked as the first librarian at the firm that was named Sonnenschein Carlin Nath and Rosenthal (now SNR Denton.)

Not having had enough school yet, I began the evening law program at DePaul College of Law in September of 1975.  In 1978 I went back to the University of Chicago as Documents Librarian and worked there for most of the rest of law school.  After graduating from law school in 1980, I went back again to the University of Chicago as the Head of Public Services. I left there for the third and final time in 1983 to become the Director of the DePaul University Law Library.  I stayed at DePaul for 20 years developing management and budgeting skills and continuing to be active in the American Association of Law Libraries and the Chicago Association of Law Libraries.  I also served for six years on the Chicago Library System board (two years as President.)

My life changed in 2003 when I was appointed to be the Librarian of the Supreme Court of the United States.  I served there until I retired at the end of September of 2011.  Working there was one of the most rewarding and interesting experiences in my life.  I had worked before with outstanding staff, students and faculty; but serving the Court is unique.  Everyone who works there focuses on the primary mission of assisting the Justices in fulfilling their constitutional responsibility by providing them with the best support possible and, because of that, the collegial atmosphere is extraordinary.

How would you describe your job to other people?

My time at the Court was one of transition and change.  The Infrastructure Modernization Project began when I arrived and was finally winding up when I retired.  Much of my job was to plan for and expedite staff and collection moves during the work, while maintaining the high level of service the Court expected.  I would start out each day with a rough idea of what needed to be accomplished and work from there.  Managing a wide variety of tasks, from monitoring the budget to giving VIP tours, required a great deal of flexibility and adaptability.  Every day was different and interesting.

Why did you want to work at the Supreme Court?

After twenty years at the DePaul Law Library I was looking for a new challenge and opportunity.  In my new position I was able to use all of my previous experience, especially my expertise gained from overseeing several renovations of existing library space.  All of this background knowledge helped make those eight years of management and infrastructure modernization fly by.

Why did you decide to work at the Law Library of Congress?

When the opportunity to volunteer at the Law Library of Congress was offered to me, I was quick to accept.  After working in law libraries for over forty years, I wanted to be able to keep up with the latest developments, do more research and work on special projects of use to the Law Library and the profession of law librarianship, such as the AALL Federal Inventory.

What is the most interesting fact you have learned about the Supreme Court Library?

Previous Librarians of the Court had written about its wonderful book collection, which includes a number of rare and unique volumes, but I found that its multi-talented and dedicated staff members were the true heart and soul of the Library.

What is the most interesting fact you have learned about the Law Library and/or the Library of Congress?

I continue to be impressed with the number and variety of initiatives throughout the entire Library of Congress and more specifically with the amount of work and outreach accomplished by the relatively small staff of the Law Library.  There is all this in addition to the largest collection of legal materials in the world.

What is something most of your co-workers do not know about you?

Plants are my passion.  I have even been described as a plant fanatic.  I volunteer at the U. S. Botanic Garden and maintain one tiny garden in DC and another in Milwaukee.  I am also a life trustee of the Shirley Heinze Land Trust in Northwest Indiana, which manages over 1,100 acres of natural land including several state dedicated nature preserves.

This is a monthly series where we reveal the top ten Global Legal Monitor (GLM) articles with the most views.  By posting a list of the top ten most viewed GLM articles every month (as we do with top ten most viewed blog posts), our hope is to provide Law Library fans who do not have sufficient time to read all the articles published in the GLM a quick way to catch up.

Are we succeeding in that endeavor?  You tell us.

Below is a list of the top ten most viewed GLM articles for January in the order of their popularity:

Globe outside the Law Library Reading Room

1. Belarus: Browsing Foreign Websites a Misdemeanor
2. Japan: Child Pornography Law Amendment Discussed
3. South Korea: Permanent Dual Nationality Allowed after 60 Years
4. Hong Kong: Minimum Wage Law Takes Effect
5. Turkey: New Minimum Wage
6. United States: New Jersey Supreme Court Revises Test for Admissibility of Eyewitness Identifications
7. Denmark: Retirement Age Raised
8. Lithuania: Dual Citizenship Law Vetoed
9. United States: Supreme Court Rules that U.S. Apology for Overthrowing Hawaiian Monarchy Does Not Affect Hawaii Public Lands
10. France: Law on Immigration, Integration and Nationality

Interestingly, seven of the ten articles in this list were also among the top ten articles with the most views in December.  Even more interesting is the fact that six of these articles are in the top ten most viewed articles list for a third month running (or put differently, since the start of this series).

This leaves only three articles that have fought their way into the top ten list this month (I say good for them).

One of these articles discusses a binding opinion of the Constitutional Council of France in which it found most provisions of a recent law dealing with immigration, integration and nationality constitutional.  The Law is said to contain “several provisions aimed at protecting the rights of illegal immigrants employed in France on the one hand … and at fighting illegal employment on the other.” 

Another describes a 2009 case in which the United States Supreme Court decided that a 1993 Congressional resolution apologizing for the United States’ part in unseating the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893 has no bearing on the State of Hawaii’s right to sell public lands.

The third is on a recent law amending the Code of Administrative Violations and the Procedural Code of Belarus.

As we have grown accustomed to saying here at the Law Library of Congress, the Global Legal Monitor can be accessed by visiting the Law Library website, signing-up for email alerts or RSS feeds.  If you’re on Twitter, you can access GLM articles through tweets via @lawlibcongress and tweets from Law library staff.

In Custodia Legis had a terrific January!  We had the most page views ever in a month for the blog.  We have now posted over 400 times (have you read them all?).

The month was led by a trio of posts.  Last year’s post on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day tops the list.  People were also enthusiastic to learn about the new Congressional Record App.  Rounding out the top three was the post announcing our new Law Librarian of Congress, David Mao.  Not a bad top three.

I’ve had a couple of people mention how they like the retrospective posts, which is always great to hear.  I hope they provide a nice recap and gateway to our blog (for those of you might not have read all the posts).  These retrospective posts have made the top ten list for the last four months.

Before taking a look back at January 2012, the top three from January 2011 were:

1. Greetings from the Law Librarian of Congress
2. John Peter Zenger – Pic of the Week
3. THOMAS is Now on Science.gov

Currently, the top posts for last month:
1. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
2. Now There’s a Congressional Record App for That
3. Meet the New Law Librarian of Congress, David Mao
4. “Bills To Be Considered on the House Floor” Repository
5. Black’s Law Dictionary, 1st Edition – Pic of the Week
6. Happy Seventeenth Birthday THOMAS!
7. Celebrating the New Year with a Look Back at the Old Year
8. Congressional Record: Print to Pad – Pic of the Week
9. December Retrospective
10. The History of the Mexican Constitution

Our top commented on blog post was our most viewed new post of the month, Now There’s a Congressional Record App for That.

On our Facebook page, the most liked post was Now There’s a Congressional Record App for That and was followed closely behind by Happy Seventeenth Birthday THOMAS! The most clicked through post from Facebook was also Now There’s a Congressional Record App for That.  On Twitter, it was Meet the New Law Librarian of Congress, David Mao.

This month, we interviewed Ken Sigmund and David, the new Law Librarian of Congress.  My favorite photos from January are:

The following is a guest post by Megan Lulofs, a Legal Information Analyst in the Public Services Division.

It’s almost Super Bowl Sunday, a quasi-national holiday when hundreds of millions of Americans (111 million last year) watch the NFL’s championship game. This year’s big game between the New York Giants and New England Patriots in Indianapolis, Indiana is a rematch of the 2008 Super Bowl.

Downtown Indianapolis (Photo by Adam Weber)

Thanks to full stadium sellouts all season long,  Giants and Patriots fans watching from home have been able to follow their respective teams on television through all 16 regular season games and every playoff game to reach this point.

But, what happens if your team doesn’t sell out every game? What happens if your team only sells out one game per season? Ask Cincinnati Bengals fans. The over 30 year old Federal Communications Commission sports blackout rules state that if a team has not sold all tickets for an event 72 hours prior to game time, the game cannot be aired on local broadcast television stations. In Cincinnati, that means only watching the Bengals once a year.

This year, fans have had enough. A petition has been filed with the Media Bureau of the FCC to lift local blackout rules and allow fans everywhere to watch their hometown teams on TV, regardless of ticket sales. In a statement, the FCC welcomed the petition “in light of marketplace changes.” Looking at the price of professional sports tickets (up, up, up) compared with household incomes since the subprime mortgage crisis and following economic turmoil (down, down, down), “marketplace changes” might seem like an understatement. Back in Ohio, Bengals season ticket plans will start at $40 per game in 2012. Multiply by 8 home games, and consider the median household income in Cincinnati at $33,681 (average from 2006-2010), and it’s not hard to see the appeal of staying home and watching the game on TV–provided it’s not blacked out.

We’ll wait and see if any changes are made to the local blackout rules for next season. In the meantime, fret not about this Sunday, football fans. Every Super Bowl since the first in 1967 has sold out. Kick back, enjoy the game, take in the halftime show and celebrate if your team wins!

First there was the Congressional Record iPad app, now there is a new home to watch committee hearings of the U.S. House of Representatives:  THOMAS.  2012 has been busy!  Just like with the iPad app, this was an initiative of the House leadership under the guidance of the Committee on House Administration.

When I previously posted on Where to Watch Congress Online, I  hoped one day I would be able to include THOMAS.

In the same Current Activity box in the top right of the THOMAS homepage where we added (app) after Congressional Record Latest Daily Digest, there is now a link for House Committee Video.  There is a list of committees to select from.  On a committee page, either the live stream will load for playing or you will see the message “No live streams are currently available.”  Previous hearings are available to view below that.

The House committee hearings can also be viewed through a variety of mobile devices.  I’ve seen the videos work on an Android phone, iPhone, and iPad.

The new House Committee Live Streams page on THOMAS

Previous House Committee on Foreign Affairs recording

We also plan to highlight live hearings through the @THOMASdotgov Twitter account.  For those who don’t use Twitter, the tweets from the account are displayed on the THOMAS homepage and will link directly to the live hearing.

It has been great to continue to improve THOMAS.

This is an interview with Rong Xiang, currently an intern in the Global Legal Research Center of the Law Library of Congress.  I hope you enjoy her interview as much as I did. 

Describe your background.

I was born and raised by a loving family in Shenyang, the largest city in northeast China and famous for its thriving heavy industry.  While I am the only child in my family I am not the only “kid” — my parents have raised two lovely twin cats, Yuan and Lu, whom they spoiled instead of me.  Lu has a 24/7 appetite for anything edible except greens, while for Yuan nothing in the world deserves a second taste.

What is your academic/professional history?

After earning my LL.B (Bachelor of Laws) from Nanjing University, I worked for the China Legal Aid Foundation, a  nonprofit organization approved by the State Council, for two years, mainly providing free legal assistance to people who could not afford legal counsel in both criminal and civil litigation.  It was my first taste of a nonprofit organization and criminal defense work constituted the most exciting part of it.  I then joined a domestic law firm specializing in general business practice and litigation.  After working there for about a year and half, I took a position as Senior Legal Specialist in Neusoft Corporation, a leading Chinese software company where I worked mainly on issues dealing with international business divisions.  I left there to come to the United States to continue my education in December 2010.

I attended the American University Washington College of Law and graduated recently from the International Business Law LL.M program, my second LL.M.  I earned my first LL.M from the City University of Hong Kong, and as part of that degree program I spent five months in the United States in 2008 as an exchange student.

How would you describe your job to other people?

I am responsible for doing legal research and responding to legal inquiries from various patrons including the United States Congress, the Judiciary, and executive agencies relating to mainland China, as well as Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore.  I also help in collection development by making recommendations for the acquisition of various primary and secondary legal sources.  To be honest, I am still learning the ropes here at the Law Library of Congress!

Why did you want to work at the Law Library of Congress?

Working at the Law Library of Congress matches perfectly with my focus on legislative reform and legal education.  It gives me a precious opportunity to do legal research from a comparative perspective, which will deepen my understanding of the panoramic view of China’s legal system.  In addition, it will broaden my perspective on how legislation could be shaped to improve execution of the law, enhance public welfare, and promote social justice.  These are crucial elements in working towards legislative reform and improving legal education in China.  I also enjoy the dynamic work atmosphere in the Law Library of Congress, which incorporates both a diverse culture and teamwork.

What is the most interesting fact you have learned about the Law Library of Congress?

While searching for a source to use for one of my assignments, I recently went to the stacks for the first time, an amazing place filled with historical collections that I had heard a lot about but never seen before.  For a while, I got lost listening to the “sound of history” as I carefully turned over those fragile pages from old material.  It must be among the most reverent moments that I have ever experienced, not only because communicating with the old intelligent generations through books is always fascinating, but also because, through these sources, I learned more about the development of contemporary Chinese legal notions and culture, as well as how many miles of exploration we have to cover before making one inch of progress.

What’s something most of your co-workers do not know about you?

My hometown, Shenyang, fosters countless skillful skaters and skating fans with its fancy icy winter.  Unfortunately, I cannot skate to save my life.  My favorite sport is cycling and on the 2005 Chinese New Year I rode 181 km in 9 hours in Guangxi as a new year gift to myself.  That ride remains my personal record. Movies, books, traveling, concerts and karaoke are all my keys to relaxation.  My personal motto is Everything Grows in Love.

Unpaid wage claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act can support immigrant-worker organizing campaigns. Legal services organizations should prioritize wage-theft litigation with worker centers, as clients see better case results and extend the reach of the litigation to broader change. Advocates must beware of discovery tactics and retaliation aimed at stifling immigrant clients’ participation in employment cases.

Copies of this article are available for individual purchase online for $15 apiece.

Related Articles

• Rebecca Smith, Cynthia Mark, & Anita Sinha, Protecting the Labor and Employment Rights of Immigrant Workers (Sept.-Oct. 2004)
• Cynthia Mark & Evonne Yang, The Power-One Campaign: Immigrant Worker Empowerment Through Law and Organizing (July-Aug. 2002)
• Marielena Hincapié, Opportunities for New Alliances to Protect the Rights of Undocumented Immigrant Workers (Jan.-Feb. 2001)
• Rick McHugh, Recognizing Wage and Hour Issues on Behalf of Low-Income Workers (Sept.-Oct. 2001)
• David T. Hutt, Ensuring Fair Wages? Subminimum Wages for Individuals with Disabilities Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (May-June 2011)
• Naomi Zauderer, Supporting Low-Income Workers: An Organizer’s Perspective (Jan.-Feb. 2001)