The month of April has been a pivotally important one for anyone following the continuing developments concerning the ongoing aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. On the 17th, the New York Times reported on the story of Dr. Ivor van Heerden, a leading hurricane expert and deputy director of the Louisiana State University Hurricane Center who has been an outspoken critic of the US Army Corps of Engineers levee system ever since the storm hit back in 2005. According to the Times, LSU officials met with Dr. van Heerden on April 9th to tell him “that his contract would not be renewed after 2010, and that he would lose his title as deputy director of the school’s hurricane center. The move, he was told, was not related to his performance or to budget issues, but no other reason for the firing would be provided.”

Needless to say, the decision made by LSU administrators not to renew van Heerden’s contract has been a controversial one. Not only have some groups, such as Levees.org protested the move as a potential threat to the free speech rights of Dr. van Heerden and other critics of the performance of the levees constructed by the Army Corps of Engineers, the decision has also been viewed as a thinly veiled yet damaging attempt to discredit Dr. van Heerden just days before a groundbreaking civil suit filed by homeowners against the Corps began in federal court in New Orleans.

Filed under the name Robinson v. US and the US Army Corps of Engineers, the suit alleges that the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, a 76 mile long navigation canal built by the Corps in 1968 “was flawed in its design, construction and operation, and that those flaws intensified the flood damage to the eastern parts of New Orleans and St. Bernard Parish.” According to a New York Times article written by John Schwartz and published on April 20th, the trial is expected to last about a month. During this time, attorneys for the plaintiffs will attempt to prove that the MR-GO, locally referred to as Mister Go, has served as a “hurricane highway” and that “the channel killed the protective wetlands and cypress swamps to the east of the city by allowing the intrusion of salt water from the gulf” which in turn brought about an increased risk of flooding due to the destruction of these natural wetlands.

Despite LSU’s decision to discredit a prominent, not to mention valuable hurricane researcher such as Dr. van Heerden and a recent decision of the Corps of Engineers to close MR-GO by filling it with 434,000 tons of rock, the US Government has continually argued that the canal played an insignificant role in causing the devastation wrought by Katrina. If successful in this initial suit, however, the small handful of plaintiffs could pave the way for class action involving more than 400,000 claims that could potentially cost the Government an estimated 10 to 100 billion dollars in damages.