Posts

Amid the many protests occurring across the United States, one common question people are asking is if they can be fired for attending a protest. While the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does protect protesters from governmental retaliation, in many states private employers have the right to terminate your employment at-will, depending on the circumstances. Right to Protest Explained The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law… [abridging] the right of the people to peaceably assemble....

Netflix capitulated, and agreed to put captions on all of its online videos by 2014. CNN? They fought, and tried to have a similar lawsuit, brought by the Greater Los Angeles Agency on Deafness (GLAAD) dismissed under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, which provides a mechanism for tossing lawsuits at an early stage if they target conduct in furtherance of free speech rights. CNN lost in the lower courts, based on dicta that stated that closed captioning is a mechanical transcription that does not implicate content and the First Amendment....

In an appeal from the district court’s denial of a prospective intervenor’s motion to intervene in a water rights dispute, the order is vacated with instructions to dismiss the motion where a proposed intervenor could not establish standing, and thus federal court jurisdiction over its motion to intervene, by “piggybacking” on the standing of an existing party to a lawsuit over which the district court had retained jurisdiction but within which there was no current, active dispute among the parties....

Marijuana businesses have been on a legal tightrope for some time, especially in states like Washington. It was the first state in the country to legalize cannabis, leading half of America to follow.But federal law has always banned the drug, and so a marijuana dispensary was having trouble in federal court there. In Garvin v. Cook Investments NW, SPNWY, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had to decide whether the struggling business could invoke federal bankruptcy protection....

Californians have walked down gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, but the courts are drawing a line. In the latest round, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an order blocking a voter-approved ban on the high-capacity magazines. It puts part of Proposition 63 on hold pending a trial in Duncan v. Becerra. For gun owners, it was bad enough when California outlawed the sale of the devices in 2000....

In Hooks v. Sheets, No. 08-4549, the Sixth Circuit faced a challenge to the district court’s imposition of the same sentence, following a remand for resentencing in light of State v. Foster, 845 N.E.2d 470 (Ohio 2006). Because defendant was always subject to consecutive rather than concurrent sentences in the discretion of the trial court, his resentencing under Foster did not raise ex post facto or due process concerns, and as such, defendant’s sentence is affirmed....

The Sixth Circuit is progressing with cases related to same sex marriage, as it consolidated appeals for all cases pending in that circuit. Meanwhile, the court has heard appeals related to Detroit’s bankruptcy, and a habeas case resting on elementary tenets of criminal procedure. Let’s take a look at the most recent happenings in the Sixth Circuit. Detroit Bankruptcy Challenges Syncora Capital Assurance, Inc., a creditor of the city of Detroit, sought “to stop the city from using its casino tax revenue rather than preserve the funds potentially to pay back creditors including Syncora,” reports The Wall Street Journal....

A recent ruling from a conservative panel of judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is making big headlines over what it could mean for Planned Parenthood and other health care providers that counsel pregnant women. The Ninth Circuit panel issued a stay pending appeal to the injunctions ordered by the district courts preventing a recent code amendment from taking effect. That code section, in short, would prevent federally funded family planning services from referring pregnant women to abortion providers....

Illinois political corruption is in the news again. This week, in a brief filed before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, former East Chicago Mayor George Pabey argued that he deserved a new trial. In his brief, he also argued that he deserved a new sentence of a maximum of one year. Pabey was sentenced to five years in prison for using city employees and city money for the renovations of his house....

In US v. Jarvis, No. 09-2199, the court of appeals affirmed defendant’s sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm and possession of stolen firearms, holding that the district court adequately explained why partially consecutive sentences were reasonable, and it did not abuse its discretion in sentencing defendant as it did. As the court wrote: “Michael Jarvis appeals the 175-month sentence imposed upon him following his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm and possession of stolen firearms, in violation of 18 U....

When does a permissible partisan gerrymander become an impermissible racial gerrymander? The U.S. Supreme Court dealt with that question in oral arguments today in Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama. According to the petitioners, in 2012, the Alabama legislature redrew state legislative districts in an attempt to dilute statewide black voting power by “packing” black voters into existing majority-black districts. Alabama contended that the 2012 gerrymandering didn’t alter the racial composition of the districts; that is, they already contained a majority-black electorate....

If you’re a regular reader of this blog, you know that we’ve been impatiently awaiting oral arguments and, ultimately, a decision in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer. The case is one of the most interesting of the term, both for its factual background (kindergartens! recycled tires!) and its constitutional questions (the extent to which churches may be denied access to otherwise generally available public programs). After a long delay, the case is finally set for oral arguments this upcoming Wednesday....

Every year we like to cheer new cultural darlings while we watch others fall. The delight we take in the difficulties of others is called schadenfreude, or joy of pain, a word taken from German but increasingly popular in English. Social scientists say it is a necessary emotion, per the New York Times. And somehow, when it comes to celebrities the joy of pain seems okay. So on that note, let us look at five celebrity scandals – care of ABC – that make the rest of us grateful for our relatively quiet lives....

In a recently filed federal lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois court, the mother of Jordan Hankins, the Northwestern University basketball player that took her own life in early 2017, alleges that Jordan’s sorority’s hazing motivated her suicide. The case seeks to hold the sorority, and several individuals, liable for Jordan’s death. It is alleged that she told members of her sorority that the hazing was triggering her PTSD and causing her to have suicidal thoughts....

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits, among other things, employment discrimination based on religion. That’s great, but what about volunteers? Sister Michael Marie and Sister Mary Cabrini, two Catholic nuns, were Red Cross volunteers in Chillicothe, Ohio. They were never employees, but they believe the positive reviews they received over the years should have entitled them to “promotions” that would have altered their roles and responsibilities. They never received those promotions – because, they alleged, the Executive Director of the local chapter of the Red Cross was biased against them because they were “traditional” Catholics....

The Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. “Obamacare,” is heading back to the U.S. Supreme Court for a third time. One more trip to the Court and the ACA gets a free Scaliawich from the court cafeteria (though admittedly it’s just olives, pickles, onions, and week-old capicola on a very sourdough roll). The Court has granted cert. to King v. Burwell, a case from the Fourth Circuit dealing with the federal tax subsidies offered in states that didn’t set up their own insurance exchanges....

Private businesses and universities have been battling tooth and nail to prevent the health care mandates in the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) from forcing the private entities to provide a certain minimum level of health insurance coverage. Luckily for them, the mandate’s compliance deadline has been pushed back to 2015, giving companies more time to settle their affairs, or simply more time to allow this issue of the mandate and free exercise of religion to reach the Supreme Court....

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected a disparate 2010 settlement in a class action lawsuit involving Volkswagen sunroofs. The settlement would have provided some hefty fees for the class action lawyers involved in the case, Forbes reports. On the flip side of the settlement, the majority of car owners would not get a penny. Attorneys were getting a huge cut of the settlement– $9.2 million in fees, to be exact....

Defendant’s conviction for making and subscribing a false document when he provided a false Social Security number on at least 965 W-2Gs that were provided to him each time he won at least $1,200 at various Detroit-area casinos is affirmed where: 1) because defendant never claimed a good-faith belief that his true Social Security number was not legally required of him, Cheek v. US did not require that the district court give an instruction on good-faith belief; 2) defendant’s contention that district court erred by not instructing the jury on the definition of willfulness is without merit; and 3) the record is not sufficiently developed to warrant resolution of defendant’s ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal....

In US v. Landeros Lopez, No. 09-8056, the court affirmed defendant’s conviction for conspiracy to traffic in methamphetamine on the ground that, when read in combination with the prosecutor’s statements and the plea colloquy, a presentence report provided a sufficient factual basis for the court to accept defendant’s plea. However, the court vacated defendant’s sentence on the ground that, by definitively announcing defendant’s sentence before providing him with an opportunity to speak on his own behalf, the district court prematurely adjudged his sentence....