Delta reportedly offering $30,000 USD to each passenger on that flight. That was rather quick.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Thursday, February 20, 2025 - 08:10 am: Edit

It's cheaper to pay out now than to be in court. You can't WIN a case for less than $100k.

When I ran the Mall of Georgia "Owner Controlled Insurance Program" for the construction phase I just paid out any reasonable claim (I had the office do so, to be clear). No BS about float, no games about how long we were allowed to take.

So we never got sued. Owner made MILLIONS in profit. I got a $30k bonus.

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Thursday, February 20, 2025 - 03:38 pm: Edit

They will be paying out though. All of those passengers are about to become millionaires. Everyone else will be paying more to fly Delta.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Friday, February 21, 2025 - 10:51 am: Edit

Actually, no. You have to prove ACTUAL DAMAGES to win in court. So if you are not actually injured it is going to be very difficult to win a suit.

I am sure the Airline will ask the court to "make a class" of the uninjured passengers to get them into a big aggregated class action lawsuit. THEN it is actually worth it to fight it out in court.

Delta can make the reasonable claim that they made every effort to compensate the passengers and that the suit(s) by the uninjured ones is just a money grab. Those cases tend to go poorly for the plaintiffs in court. By making a generous offer fast they just strengthen their hand for later.

By Nick Samaras (Koogie) on Friday, February 21, 2025 - 01:44 pm: Edit

You don't need physical injuries. How about life long PTSD and never wanting to fly again after having your life flash before your eyes as you thought you were about to die? Life long nightmares and anxiety? Not hard to prove at all.

"Your honor, I would like to enter into evidence an upside down burnt out plane on runway missing wings and passengers taking pictures of themselves strapped upside down to their seats".

Delta giving out cheques right now is nothing more than a public relations ploy. They will be paying out tens of millions down the road, and they will not fight it.

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Friday, February 21, 2025 - 02:16 pm: Edit

Delta may not be on the hook, once we have an investigation.

Is there a manufacturing defect, that needs just the right set of conditions to manifest?

Were parts purchased from a reputably parts house, that turned out to be counterfeit?

Something else?

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Saturday, February 22, 2025 - 11:00 am: Edit

"Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, the plaintiffs presented poictures of the claimants taking selfies! Is that the action of a traumatized person?..."

By Paul Howard (Raven) on Saturday, February 22, 2025 - 03:11 pm: Edit

I have to agree - it's a smart move by Delta.

Nick raises some good points - PTSD etc - but I am sure the Defence Lawyer will counter with 'how did you get to court today.... and then state the various safety levels of Driving or walking in comparison to flying....'.

If Delta did 'nothing wrong' and it was an accident - not sure what the Prosecution could try?
.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Saturday, February 22, 2025 - 09:36 pm: Edit

If I had been in the plane I would not think I am owed a million dollars for 30 seconds of stark screaming terror and a few bumps as I opened my seatbelt and fell a few feet. On the other hand, if money is to be passed around, I'll take whatever the others are getting.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 01:25 am: Edit

There is a thing in US immigration law called "temporary protected status" which means "your home country is so screwed up by [war, civil war, natural disaster, corrupt government, collapsed economy, UFO abductions] that it would be a bad humanitarian thing to send you home. Such refugees are then given "temporary protected status" which means "you don't have to go home for a specific amount of time". It has been almost a tradition in the US that every time one of these temporary things expires the president extends it for some other period.

There are 500,000 Haitians in the US, most of which have been here for a decade or more (from one of those hurricane things). They were due to run out of TP status and be sent home on 3 August 2025. President Biden extended that by 18 months. The Trump administration has vacated the Biden extension, meaning they have to leave in five months or so. Any found in the US after that time are subject to deportation as illegal aliens.

Dumping that many people into the teetering economy of Haiti is going to be ... volcanic ... or something. The Trump Administration has been ending TPS for several groups and plans to end all extensions although they might review that status in a few cases where war is ongoing.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 01:29 am: Edit

California governor Gavin Newsome has requested $40 billion in fire aid from Washington, effectively agreeing to Trump's conditions, one of which would be a voter ID law that would stop the current practice of allowing illegal aliens to vote. (Another is to re-route northern water into southern reservoirs.) Newsome said he would not ask for the aid unless all conditions were removed, but they were not removed and he finally got desperate enough to request it saying he knows it comes with conditions. Now, Governor Newsome may have a different idea than Trump has about just what conditions he accepted and to what extent; we shall see.

Trump has laid off 4200 employees of the US Agency for International Development.

President-probono Musk has ordered all Federal employees to send an email listing five things they accomplished last week. Failure to comply is to be considered a resignation.

May you live in interesting times.

GATOR ALERT!

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 07:52 am: Edit

"the current practice of allowing illegal aliens to vote?"

Is this a California law or just practice? (PRACTICE)

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 08:48 am: Edit

May 21, 2024.
New York Times.
San Francisco allows undocumented migrants to vote.
article is detailed and explicit.

There are other places that allow non citizens to vote.

How many examples do you require?

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 09:38 am: Edit

By way of clarification: the "allow undocumented migrants to vote" thing in San Francisco and other municipalities is specifically for, and limited to, municipal elections; non-citizens remain invalid to take part in either state or federal elections.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 11:40 am: Edit

Jessica, Mike Grafton did not specify voting in Federal Elections.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 01:21 pm: Edit

I'm aware of that, Jeff. I'm also aware, however, that it's easy to miss exactly what is meant in this regard; thus my note of clarification.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 01:48 pm: Edit

David A Leib, Associated Press had an article in September 2024 that stated that a review of Texas voter rolls showed 6,500 non citizens were removed from the voter rolls due apparently to non citizen status, of which 1,930 were referred to law enforce for investigation.

I suspect that there are other states that have conducted such investigations as well.

Haven’t seen any nationwide numbers of prosecutions of illegal voting by noncitizens.

One has to wonder why a noncitizen would choose to register to vote, given the possible penalty if they get caught voting in a federal election.

By A David Merritt (Adm) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 02:56 pm: Edit

On San Francisco allowing non-citizens to vote in local elections.

It's worth noting that this was largely done, due to the high dollar workers in in Silicon Valley wanted a say in local government. Blocking these votes may adversely affect the big tech companies that currently support President Trump.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 03:28 pm: Edit

Jeff: the Texas Tribune has a follow-up article (16 Oct 2024) to that AP report, noting that the secretary of state’s office identified 581 people, not 6500, as noncitizens, according to a report it gave Gov. Greg Abbott. Additionally, after attempting to contact more than 70 people removed from the rolls, the news organizations investigating the situation found at least nine U.S. citizens in three Texas counties who were incorrectly labeled as noncitizens or removed from the rolls because they did not respond to letters about their citizenship.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 04:36 pm: Edit

Actually, several states say they don't allow illegals to vote in Federal elections but in practice do allow it while denying it. In one famous case discussed on this BBS, the municipality insisted they did not allow it but it turned out that "not allowing it" was "trusting illegals to know they should not" and not checking to see if they actually did, which thousands of them actually did. That was a while ago (during 45 I think) but the discussion was quite detailed and even Snopes (trying hard to disprove it) actually proved it was happening.

By Kosta Michalopoulos (Kosmic) on Monday, February 24, 2025 - 08:29 pm: Edit

A good portion of the 500,000 Haitians in the U.S. that may be forced to leave could end up in Canada, specifically in and around Montreal, Quebec. There is a long standing Haitian community there, the province is predominantly French speaking, and Canada still recognizes that Haitians have a legitimate fear of returning home, hence qualify for refugee status. At least for now. Who knows how Montreal, Quebec and Canada can cope with the sudden influx of half a million people.

By Mike Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Tuesday, February 25, 2025 - 08:02 am: Edit

I think it is time for a NATIONAL ID, that is real ID compliant, for voting. It can combine your picture, biometrics, fingerprint, drivers license, voting status, concealed carry status, organ donor...

Good for voting, flying, cashing checks, buying a beer, whatever.

And this darn thing should be free, otherwise it is just a kind of poll tax. You get one every 10 years.

ALSO, I should have been more clear; under federalism, states and local elections are under their control so they can decide who gets to vote. Personally, I'd let everyone that paid income tax the previous year vote locally... Non citizens are absolutely banned from voting federally.

I do have to say, that I haven't seen many ACTUAL cases of illegal voting being prosecuted. Other than insiders gaming the system...

By Eddie E Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Tuesday, February 25, 2025 - 07:04 pm: Edit

Mike try this site, it has election convictions by state. The Heritage Foundation website, Click on explore issues, then click on election integrity. It will bring up a map, click a state and click on the cases you are interested in.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Tuesday, February 25, 2025 - 08:34 pm: Edit

Deleted; misread Eddie's comment.

By Jessica Orsini (Jessica_Orsini) on Tuesday, February 25, 2025 - 08:39 pm: Edit

Mike: for various reasons, a national ID is anathema to various factions. Heck, when Congress implemented the Real ID Act twenty years back, over half the states passed resolutions opposing it. Here in Missouri, the state legislature passed a law outright banning it; we were dragged kicking and screaming into accepting it a decade later. And that was for something that was still well short of a true national ID card.