America as we know it was built largely upon and because of our rail industry, and today it remains…
CFIF on X CFIF on YouTube
So-Called "Railway Safety Act" Constitutes a Political Handout to Big Labor That Does Nothing to Improve Safety At All

America as we know it was built largely upon and because of our rail industry, and today it remains a pillar of our economy.

Unfortunately, a destructive proposal before Congress misleadingly named the "Railway Safety Act" (RSA), part of broader surface transportation reauthorization, threatens great harm to our railroads.

Simply put, the bill has nothing to do with improving safety, but has a lot to do with advancing the political agenda of Big Labor.  At a moment when inflation burdens American families and fragile supply chains remain vulnerable to disruption, the last thing our economy or rail sector need is another costly federal mandate imposed upon one of the nation’s most important transportation sectors.

As an initial matter, as noted by The Wall Street Journal, the…[more]

May 20, 2026 • 04:28 PM
Home Jester's Courtroom A Class Action Lawsuit Sours
A Class Action Lawsuit Sours Print
Thursday, January 24 2008

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the dismissal of a class action lawsuit which sought, among other things, to require sellers of milk to put labels on their containers warning consumers that some may experience adverse symptoms if they drink milk and are lactose intolerant.

According to court documents, the class of plaintiffs, defined as consisting of individuals who consumed milk before becoming aware that they were lactose intolerant, suggested two specific warnings. The first stated, "Warning - If you experience diarrhea or stomach cramps after consuming milk, you may be lactose intolerant. Check with your physician." The second proposed, "Warning - Lactose intolerant individuals may experience bloating, diarrhea, or other gastrointestinal discomfort from consuming milk. Check with your physician."

In affirming the lower court's dismissal, the appellate court concurred that the manufacturers had no duty to warn because the health consequences of being lactose intolerant are well known. "We hold as a matter of law that a reasonable consumer today would be well aware that milk may adversely affect some people," the court concluded, adding that "the risk that milk will cause temporary gas and stomach discomfort to lactose-intolerant individuals who do not yet know of their condition cannot support a failure-to-warn tort claim under D.C. tort law."

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, author of the court's opinion, cautioned that "a bout of gas or indigestion does not justify a race to the courthouse. Indeed, were the rule otherwise, a variety of food manufacturers as well as stadiums, bars, restaurants, convenience stores, and hot dog stands throughout the country would be liable to millions of would-be plaintiffs every day. Plaintiffs' novel claim falls short of what D.C. law requires."

—Source: Law.com

Notable Quote   
 
"Half of America is watching LA count its votes with a sense of deja vu: The spectacle of a candidate who is leading on election night, suddenly falling behind when mail-in ballots are counted, is what caused many to regard the 2020 election as fraudulent.There was no proof of fraud then, just as there is no proof in LA; but the process does not inspire confidence. The fact that we are being told --…[more]
 
 
— Joel Pollak, Opinion Editor at the California Post
 
Liberty Poll   

The United Nations is reportedly nearing bankruptcy, due to numerous factors. Should the U.S. spend heavily to save it, or should it sink or swim based on the support of others?