US v. Lupton, 09-2710, concerned a challenge to a conviction of defendant for corrupt solicitation, wire fraud, and making false statements to government officials for seeking kickbacks in connection with a sale and leaseback of a government owned building.  In affirming, the court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding expert testimony.  Also, a rational factfinder could readily conclude that defendant had authority to act on behalf of the state and was thus an “agent” as defined in 18 U.S.C. section 666(d)(1), and that the proposed transaction was not a bona fide transaction.  The court rejected defendant’s challenges to his wire fraud conviction, and held that the district court did not err in finding that defendant knowingly and willfully made the statements in the course of a matter within the jurisdiction of the U.S. and that the statements were false and material.

 

Badger Catholic, Inc. v. Walsh, 09-1102, involved a Catholic student group’s 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit against University of Wisconsin for refusing to reimburse any of the group’s expenses.  In affirming the district court’s declaratory judgment in favor of plaintiff in concluding that reimbursing the expenses of religious speakers, through a program equally available to secular speakers, does not violate the Establishment Clause, and that, having established a public forum, the University must not exclude speakers who want to use the forum for worship, the court held that, underwriting a religious speaker’s costs, as part of a neutral program justified by the program’s secular benefits, does not violate the Establishment Clause even if the religious speaker uses some of the money for prayer or sectarian. instruction.

Related Resources:

  • Full text of US v. Lupton, 09-2710
  • Full text of Lin v. Holder, 09-3090
  • Full text of Badger Catholic, Inc. v. Walsh, 09-1102

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Civil Rights

Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court

Criminal

Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records

Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules