Spring forward.
To delete this message, click the X at top right.

General Law and Lawsuits

Post Reply
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9853
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

General Law and Lawsuits

#1

Post by AndyinPA »

https://lawandcrime.com/first-amendment ... amendment/
A judge in Los Angeles on Wednesday tossed a lawsuit filed by former representative Katie Hill (D) over a series of nude and compromising photographs published by a British tabloid.

According to the Los Angeles County Superior Court, the Daily Mail was protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution when they chose to ran those racy and controversial images in October 2019–which ultimately led to the rising star resigning from office in disgrace amidst an ethics probe into her relationship with a staffer.

Judge Yolanda Orozco ruled in the publication’s favor after they successfully raised an anti-strategic lawsuit against public participation (anti-SLAPP) defense based on a California law which prohibits lawsuits designed to chill free speech.

“Courts employ a two-step process to evaluate anti-SLAPP motions” Orozco noted. “To invoke the protections of the statute, the defendant must first show that the challenged lawsuit arises from protected activity, such as an act in furtherance of the right of petition or free speech. From this fact, courts ‘presume the purpose of the action was to chill the defendant’s exercise of First Amendment rights. It is then up to the plaintiff to rebut the presumption by showing a reasonable probability of success on the merits.’”
(Maybe someone more versed in the law than I can suggest a better title. This is the second or third time I've had a hard time finding an existing thread to place something about the law in.)
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
User avatar
MN-Skeptic
Posts: 2999
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:03 pm
Location: Twin Cities

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#2

Post by MN-Skeptic »

Mike tweeted about this case -

User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9853
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#3

Post by AndyinPA »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technolo ... app-store/
Apple is set to take the stand Monday in a landmark trial that could alter the business model of the country’s most valuable company and serve as a catalyst for new antitrust laws.

Apple is being sued by Epic, the maker of the popular video game Fortnite, for allegedly using its control of its mobile operating system to stymie competition. Apple kicked Fortnite off the App Store last year after the video game maker offered an alternative payment option to its customers, bypassing the mandatory 30 percent commission charged by Apple.

Up for debate is how Apple allows apps to function on iPhones. The only way to install software on Apple’s mobile operating system, called iOS, is through the company’s App Store. Developers who make software for iOS must follow Apple’s rules and use its payment system, which charges a commission on every sale.

The trial will determine whether Apple’s control over iOS is a monopoly, and whether Apple can use that control to force developers to use the App Store and its payment system. One possible outcome in the case is a very different smartphone landscape, in which the powerful computers in everyone’s pockets operate more like desktop computers, where any kind of software is allowed to exist.

“Frankly, for Epic, it’s been a case of very good timing, because pretty much everybody around the world is looking at this problem,” said Herb Hovenkamp, an antitrust professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. “The DOJ I’m sure is paying close attention to this.”
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
User avatar
AndyinPA
Posts: 9853
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh
Verified:

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#4

Post by AndyinPA »

https://apnews.com/article/durst-trial- ... d8cb862194
LOS ANGELES (AP) — It took nearly 15 years for police to arrest New York real estate heir Robert Durst in the killing of his best friend and another five to bring him to trial. After just two days of testimony, jurors were sent home when the coronavirus closed courthouses.

On Monday, more than 14 months later, the jury is returning to Los Angeles County Superior Court to see if they can complete their assignment. If so, it could be a first for the U.S. legal system.

The length of the stoppage is unprecedented and it’s the highest-profile U.S. case postponed because of the pandemic, Durst’s lawyers say. They have repeatedly — and unsuccessfully — sought a mistrial because they argued the delay harmed his chance of a fair trial.

Durst, 78, has pleaded not guilty to murdering his friend Susan Berman, who was shot in the back of the head in her Los Angeles home in December 2000. Prosecutors say he silenced Berman before she could tell police she helped him cover up the killing of his wife, Kathie, in New York in 1982.
"Choose your leaders with wisdom and forethought. To be led by a coward is to be controlled by all that the coward fears… To be led by a liar is to ask to be told lies." -Octavia E. Butler
Uninformed
Posts: 2095
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:13 pm
Location: England

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#5

Post by Uninformed »



:smoking:
If you can't lie to yourself, who can you lie to?
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5384
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#6

Post by bob »

Uninformed wrote: Wed May 26, 2021 6:25 pm
:smoking:
"For completeness," Bob Kohn's Twitter account is full of bad legal takes. Mike D. used to regularly rake Kohn over the coals. So Mike's tweet also is a shocked-not-shocked take on Kohn's ineffectual trolling.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:07 pm
Location: Rescue Pets Land
Occupation: 21st Century Suffragist
Verified: ✅🐴🐎🦄🌻5000 posts and counting

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#7

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2021/06/26/cou ... -shooting/
Court Tosses Lawsuits Against Store In Texas Church Shooting

The Texas Supreme Court says survivors and relatives of those killed in a 2017 mass killing at a church can’t sue a sporting goods chain for selling the gunman the rifle used in the attack.

The court on Friday threw out four lawsuits against Academy Sports and Outdoors that alleged a San Antonio-area store negligently sold the gun to Devin Kelley in 2016.

The Supreme Court agreed with Academy, and ruled the petitions were prohibited by the U.S. Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The act protects retailers from lawsuits arising from criminal acts by third parties.

The lawsuits said that Kelley provided store clerks with a Colorado ID, and the U.S. Gun Control Act required Academy to comply with Colorado gun laws before approving the purchase. Colorado, however, prohibits the sale of magazines holding more than 14 rounds, while Academy sold Kelley a rifle that came packaged with a 30-round magazine.

But the court said the sale was legal because the federal law applies only to the sale of firearms, not components.

Shooting survivors and relatives have also sued the U.S. Air Force, which failed to report a domestic violence conviction that would have prohibited Kelley from purchasing a firearm.

Kelley had been found guilty of assaulting his wife and stepson and was dishonorably discharged from the service in 2012, but Air Force officials failed to report the conviction to the FBI background check system despite a requirement to do so
"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14351
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#8

Post by RTH10260 »

Patagoniagirl
Posts: 980
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:11 am

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#9

Post by Patagoniagirl »

Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
User avatar
bill_g
Posts: 5339
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:52 pm
Location: Portland OR
Occupation: Retired (kind of)
Verified: ✅ Checked Republic ✓ ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#10

Post by bill_g »

Patagoniagirl wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 11:23 am
Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
Patagoniagirl
Posts: 980
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:11 am

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#11

Post by Patagoniagirl »

I dont know how I was able to do the hidden before. Cant seem to find how again.

The plaintiff is my son. She is a co-plaintiff as the mother of his son. She will recover as the mother of his son. I am only asking if I, as my son's mother, primary caretaker, both physically and financially, have a right to participate in the suit.
Patagoniagirl
Posts: 980
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:11 am

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#12

Post by Patagoniagirl »

You know what? It was a fleeting thought. I'm just moving on. Finally.
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:07 pm
Location: Rescue Pets Land
Occupation: 21st Century Suffragist
Verified: ✅🐴🐎🦄🌻5000 posts and counting

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#13

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireS ... e-78765236
Tree DNA helps convict Washington timber thief after fire
A federal jury has convicted a timber thief who authorities said started a large forest fire on Washington state's Olympic Peninsula


TACOMA, Wash. -- A federal jury has convicted a timber thief who authorities said started a large forest fire in Washington state, a case that prosecutors said marked the first time tree DNA had been introduced in a federal trial.

The jury deliberated for about seven hours before convicting Justin Andrew Wilke, 39, on Thursday of conspiracy, theft of public property, depredation of public property, and trafficking and attempted trafficking in unlawfully harvested timber, the U.S. Attorney's Office for Western Washington said in a news release.

The wood he sold to a mill in the city of Tumwater had been harvested from private property with a valid permit, Wilke said. But a research geneticist for the U.S. Forest Service, Richard Cronn, testified that the wood he sold genetically matched the remains of three poached trees.

Wilke and others conducted an illegal logging operation in the Elk Lake area of the Olympic National Forest, near Hood Canal, between April and August 2018, according to records filed in the case. He poached maple trees prized as wood for musical instruments and brought them to lumber mills.
"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
User avatar
filly
Posts: 1724
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:02 am

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#14

Post by filly »

Monroe-area family loses appeal in lawsuit over priest’s funeral remarks on suicide
Associated Press


Temperance – A priest who criticized a teenager’s suicide during his funeral is protected by the religion clauses of the First Amendment, the Michigan Court of Appeals said.

The court affirmed a decision by a Monroe County judge who had dismissed a lawsuit by the mother of Maison Hullibarger.

The 18-year-old, who was an athlete and honors student in the Monroe area, died in 2018. Mourners were shocked when the Rev. Don LaCuesta gave a critical sermon. He said suicide was a “secular crime” and a “sin against God with dire eternal consequences.”


Linda Hullibarger sued the priest and the Detroit Archdiocese, alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy and other claims. She said LaCuesta had reneged on an agreement to celebrate her son’s life.

“Father LaCuesta’s conduct was protected by the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine,” the appeals court said in a 3-0 decision Thursday. “As such, we cannot pass judgment on the content of his sermon. Consequently, all of plaintiff’s claims necessarily fail.”

After the funeral, the archdiocese said it regretted that an “unbearable situation was made even more difficult” by LaCuesta’s remarks at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church in Temperance.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/ ... 117439360/

I attended a funeral for one of my youngest son's friends. He was killed in broad daylight when he drove his truck at a high speed into the back of a larger service truck on the highway. He was 20 years old. The preacher who conducted the service ranted on about how "the devil did this" throughout the funeral. I was horrified. I guess this is the risk you take when you turn the funeral over to a clergy person.
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5596
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#15

Post by northland10 »

Too be fair, I uave been to many many many funerals run by clergy folk and their homilies have been wonderfully pastoral and comforting. Yes, there are some jerks in collars out there who only like playing the pompous pastor, but many manu more are caring and pastoral.

Oh, and the hymns are determined by the pastor/priest working with th family (I am not usual involved in the planning of hymns because I am working a different jobs during the day and the planning is often done quickly).

Of course, I have considered how mine should go because I am a liturgist so tend to be pushing about liturgies. I haven't decided if I will let the priest do there own sermons lot if I will write it for them. :mrgreen:
101010 :towel:
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:07 pm
Location: Rescue Pets Land
Occupation: 21st Century Suffragist
Verified: ✅🐴🐎🦄🌻5000 posts and counting

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#16

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles ... an-proceed
Alaska Supreme Court Says Recall Campaign to Oust Governor Can Proceed

The campaign to recall Governor Mike Dunleavy, who has about 17 months left in his term, is legal and may proceed, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled.

Whether Dunleavy's detractors have made their case that his alleged shortcomings - that he is incompetent and corrupt - justify his removal from office is up to the voters, the court said.

“The people asked to sign petitions must decide whether the allegations are serious enough to warrant a recall election; each voter in the voting booth must decide whether the allegations are serious enough to warrant removal from office,” the opinion said.

Dunleavy, a former teacher, school administrator and legislator representing Wasilla, was elected governor in 2018, positioning himself as a political acolyte of then-U.S. President Donald Trump. His tenure has been rocky as Alaska struggled with financial difficulties and its dependence on dwindling oil revenues.
"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
User avatar
KickahaOta
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 9:17 pm

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#17

Post by KickahaOta »

If I read this opinion from the First Circuit correctly, then whoever filed a certain notice of appeal is having some regrets about their life choices.

To give my uneducated summary, which I'd love for someone educated to look at and correct:
  • An investment banking firm sets itself up as two companies in a way that's calculated to reduce its costs while staying just on the right side of the Securities Act.
  • The firm signs on to find a buyer of and handle the sale of an LLC.
  • The engagement apparently winds up going poorly, and the LLC pulls out of the deal.
  • The firm sues the LLC to recover the fees it claims are owed under the agreement covering the engagement.
  • The district court rules: Under the factual circumstances of this case, the LLC was allowed to withdraw from the engagement, and doesn't owe the damages or attorney's fees that the firm claims it does.
  • The firm appeals. In 20/20 hindsight, not a good move.
  • The First Circuit rules, in a precedential opinion: Most of the factual circumstances of this case don't matter. The way the firm used its two-company structure to dodge the requirements of the Exchange Act simply doesn't work. The firm acted as an unregistered broker-dealer under circumstances where it wasn't legally allowed to. And under the Exchange Act, that means that the whole agreement is voidable. You lose.
  • And even though the ruling only discusses the issues in the context of this particular agreement, the logic of the opinion would certainly seem to suggest that many of this firm's other agreements may be voidable too.
  • And if so, then even though the precedent only covers the First Circuit (which isn't exactly full of financial powerhouses), there are presumably a number of attorneys for the firm's clients in other circuits who are looking at this opinion with extreme interest right about now.
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:07 pm
Location: Rescue Pets Land
Occupation: 21st Century Suffragist
Verified: ✅🐴🐎🦄🌻5000 posts and counting

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#18

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

https://variety.com/2021/music/news/bob ... 235031593/
Bob Dylan Prevails in Lawsuit Filed by Estate of ‘Desire’ Co-Writer Jacques Levy

Judge Barry Ostrager of the Supreme Court of New York agreed with Dylan and UMG’s lawyers that the agreement drafted between Dylan and Levy in 1975 made it clear that he was not a participant in ownership of the material, and that his profit participation would consist of a share of songwriting royalties.

The court noted that Levy’s estate has continued to receive royalties from the co-written songs, before and after Dylan’s catalog sale, set at 35%, with no ownership conferred.

Wrote Ostrager in his 18-page decision: “Upon review of the 1975 Agreement and the competing arguments, the Court finds the Agreement is clear and unambiguous on its face when read as a whole. For the reasons explained here, the Court determines that the plain meaning of the 1975 Agreement is that the Dylan Defendants owned all copyrights to the Compositions, as well as the absolute right to sell the Compositions and all associated rights, subject only to plaintiffs’ right to receive the compensation specified in the 1975 Agreement, which does not include any portion of the proceeds from Dylan’s sale of his own rights to the Universal Defendants.”

Ostrager quoted from the ’75 agreement, which describes Levy as an “employee-for-hire” as a lyricist — noting that the word “employee” was used for Levy “approximately 84 times” in the contract.

"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14351
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#19

Post by RTH10260 »

Police Are Telling ShotSpotter to Alter Evidence From Gunshot-Detecting AI
Prosecutors in Chicago are being forced to withdraw evidence generated by the technology, which led to the police killing of 13-year-old Adam Toledo earlier this year.

By Todd Feathers
July 26, 2021, 3:00pm

On May 31 last year, 25-year-old Safarain Herring was shot in the head and dropped off at St. Bernard Hospital in Chicago by a man named Michael Williams. He died two days later.

Chicago police eventually arrested the 64-year-old Williams and charged him with murder (Williams maintains that Herring was hit in a drive-by shooting). A key piece of evidence in the case is video surveillance footage showing Williams’ car stopped on the 6300 block of South Stony Island Avenue at 11:46 p.m.—the time and location where police say they know Herring was shot.

How did they know that’s where the shooting happened? Police said ShotSpotter, a surveillance system that uses hidden microphone sensors to detect the sound and location of gunshots, generated an alert for that time and place.

Except that’s not entirely true, according to recent court filings.

That night, 19 ShotSpotter sensors detected a percussive sound at 11:46 p.m. and determined the location to be 5700 South Lake Shore Drive—a mile away from the site where prosecutors say Williams committed the murder, according to a motion filed by Williams’ public defender. The company’s algorithms initially classified the sound as a firework. That weekend had seen widespread protests in Chicago in response to George Floyd’s murder, and some of those protesting lit fireworks.

But after the 11:46 p.m. alert came in, a ShotSpotter analyst manually overrode the algorithms and “reclassified” the sound as a gunshot. Then, months later and after “post-processing,” another ShotSpotter analyst changed the alert’s coordinates to a location on South Stony Island Drive near where Williams’ car was seen on camera.

“Through this human-involved method, the ShotSpotter output in this case was dramatically transformed from data that did not support criminal charges of any kind to data that now forms the centerpiece of the prosecution’s murder case against Mr. Williams,” the public defender wrote in the motion.

The document is what’s known as a Frye motion—a request for a judge to examine and rule on whether a particular forensic method is scientifically valid enough to be entered as evidence. Rather than defend ShotSpotter’s technology and its employees' actions in a Frye hearing, the prosecutors withdrew all ShotSpotter evidence against Williams.




https://www.vice.com/en/article/qj8xbq/ ... tecting-ai
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14351
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#20

Post by RTH10260 »

Zoom reaches $85 million settlement over user privacy and hacker ‘Zoombombing’
PUBLISHED SUN, AUG 1 20216:28 PM EDT
Reuters

KEY POINTS
  • Zoom agreed to pay $85 million and bolster its security practices to settle a lawsuit claiming it violated users’ privacy rights.
    The suit claimed the company shared personal data with Facebook, Google and LinkedIn, and let hackers disrupt Zoom meetings in a practice called “Zoombombing.”
    Subscribers in the proposed class action would be eligible for 15% refunds on their core subscriptions or $25, whichever is larger, while others could receive up to $15.
Zoom Video Communications agreed to pay $85 million and bolster its security practices to settle a lawsuit claiming it violated users’ privacy rights by sharing personal data with Facebook, Google and LinkedIn, and letting hackers disrupt Zoom meetings in a practice called “Zoombombing.”

A preliminary settlement filed on Saturday afternoon requires approval by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California.

Subscribers in the proposed class action would be eligible for 15% refunds on their core subscriptions or $25, whichever is larger, while others could receive up to $15.

Zoom agreed to security measures including alerting users when meeting hosts or other participants use third-party apps in meetings, and to provide specialized training to employees on privacy and data handling.

The San Jose-based company denied wrongdoing in agreeing to settle.

In a statement on Sunday, Zoom said: “The privacy and security of our users are top priorities for Zoom, and we take seriously the trust our users place in us.”

Saturday’s settlement came after Koh on March 11 let the plaintiffs pursue some contract-based claims.



https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/01/zoom-re ... mbing.html
User avatar
MN-Skeptic
Posts: 2999
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:03 pm
Location: Twin Cities

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#21

Post by MN-Skeptic »

For lack of a better spot, I'll put this here --

From Law & Crime

OAN Must Cover Rachel Maddow’s $250,000 Legal Bill Following MSNBC Host’s Court of Appeals Victory Over Right-Wing Channel
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow‘s remark that the “most obsequiously pro-Trump right wing news outlet in America really literally is paid Russian propaganda” did not defame One America Network, and the right-wing network’s lawsuit violated a statute meant to deter abuse of the court system, a federal appellate court unanimously ruled on Tuesday.

“Maddow’s statement is well within the bounds of what qualifies as protected speech under the First Amendment,” U.S. Circuit Judge Milan Smith, Jr., a George W. Bush appointee, wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel. “No reasonable viewer could conclude that Maddow implied an assertion of objective fact.”

Delivering a resounding defeat for the pro-Trump network, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s decision to permanently strike the complaint under California’s anti-SLAPP law, a statute designed to punish those who abuse the courts to suppress free speech. The Republican-dominated panel also included George H. W. Bush-appointed U.S. District Judge Eduardo Robreno, sitting by designation, and U.S. Circuit Judge John B. Owens, a Barack Obama appointee.

The appellate court’s ruling affirms all aspects of another by U.S. District Judge Cynthia Bashant from May 2020.

“Maddow does not keep her political views a secret, and therefore, audiences could expect her to use subjective language that comports with her political opinions,” Bashant wrote last year while dismissing a complaint filed by OAN’s parent company Herring Networks a year earlier.

“Thus, Maddow’s show is different than a typical news segment where anchors inform viewers about the daily news,” the judge continued. “The point of Maddow’s show is for her to provide the news but also to offer her opinions as to that news.”
More at the Link
User avatar
noblepa
Posts: 2403
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Retired IT Nerd

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#22

Post by noblepa »

MN-Skeptic wrote: Tue Aug 17, 2021 2:31 pm For lack of a better spot, I'll put this here --

From Law & Crime

OAN Must Cover Rachel Maddow’s $250,000 Legal Bill Following MSNBC Host’s Court of Appeals Victory Over Right-Wing Channel
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow‘s remark that the “most obsequiously pro-Trump right wing news outlet in America really literally is paid Russian propaganda” did not defame One America Network, and the right-wing network’s lawsuit violated a statute meant to deter abuse of the court system, a federal appellate court unanimously ruled on Tuesday.

“Maddow’s statement is well within the bounds of what qualifies as protected speech under the First Amendment,” U.S. Circuit Judge Milan Smith, Jr., a George W. Bush appointee, wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel. “No reasonable viewer could conclude that Maddow implied an assertion of objective fact.”

Delivering a resounding defeat for the pro-Trump network, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s decision to permanently strike the complaint under California’s anti-SLAPP law, a statute designed to punish those who abuse the courts to suppress free speech. The Republican-dominated panel also included George H. W. Bush-appointed U.S. District Judge Eduardo Robreno, sitting by designation, and U.S. Circuit Judge John B. Owens, a Barack Obama appointee.

The appellate court’s ruling affirms all aspects of another by U.S. District Judge Cynthia Bashant from May 2020.

“Maddow does not keep her political views a secret, and therefore, audiences could expect her to use subjective language that comports with her political opinions,” Bashant wrote last year while dismissing a complaint filed by OAN’s parent company Herring Networks a year earlier.

“Thus, Maddow’s show is different than a typical news segment where anchors inform viewers about the daily news,” the judge continued. “The point of Maddow’s show is for her to provide the news but also to offer her opinions as to that news.”
More at the Link
I remember that report. Didn't she show evidence that at least one of their regular contributors was on the payroll of Russia Today?
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17654
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#23

Post by raison de arizona »


Opinion: https://webshare.law.ucla.edu/CILP/Neva ... -Lopez.pdf

I'll have to read it later, but I've seen a number of Tweeters claiming it is earth shattering, so... :confuzzled: They say this is the main law used to prosecute undocumented immigrants. Will dig in later.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5384
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#24

Post by bob »

raison de arizona wrote: Wed Aug 18, 2021 5:15 pm I'll have to read it later, but I've seen a number of Tweeters claiming it is earth shattering
It has the potential to be important; it presently isn't. The judge (also the chief judge for D.Nev.) granted a motion to dismiss in a criminal case. So the ruling (for now) has no precedential impact (beyond the named defendant).

And the judge acknowledged other judges in other districts have rejected this argument.

The federal government will surely appeal. And appeal again if the 9th affirms this ruling. (The 9th's affirming this ruling would be the BFD, as it would become the law for the Western United States.)
They say this is the main law used to prosecute undocumented immigrants.
This is (mostly) true: It is an attack on 8 U.S.C. sec. 1326, which criminalizes unauthorized re-entry. Unauthorized "mere" entry is different.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:07 pm
Location: Rescue Pets Land
Occupation: 21st Century Suffragist
Verified: ✅🐴🐎🦄🌻5000 posts and counting

Re: General Law and Lawsuits

#25

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/8 ... ibly-worse
The conservative Supreme Court majority is issuing some of its most extreme rulings in the shadows

Steve Vladeck, the Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law, notes "the past few years have seen a dramatic uptick in summary orders in which the justices have changed the status quo, including by allowing controversial Trump administration policies blocked by lower courts to go into effect while the government appealed, lifting lower-court rulings that had halted scheduled executions, or directly enjoining state policies for the duration of an appeal when lower courts had refused to do so." The fact that the shadow docket exists isn't new; the problem is the "extent to which the justices are using it more and more often to issue significant rulings that change the rights and responsibilities of millions of Americans, all without the daylight […] that comes with plenary review."

That's backed up by the analysis Reuters completed, which looked at emergency applications to the court from mid-2020 through mid-2021. That analysis "found that the court repeatedly favored not just religious groups—another example of the expansive view it has taken in recent years toward religious rights—but also former President Donald Trump's administration, while denying almost 100 applications by other private individuals or groups." This would be what conservatives would normally call an "activist court." But since the court is acting in their favor, they'll certainly not apply that label in this case.

There were 150 emergency applications to the court in the time period, and 29 were granted. That led (among other things) to the execution of 13 death row inmates at the behest of the Trump Justice Department, and the lifting of pandemic restrictions on behalf of religious entities. But private petitioners that weren't churches had no requests granted—not one. That included immigrants and asylum-seekers and 33 individuals who represented themselves, without a lawyer's help.

This activist use of the shadow docket has created a "serious legitimacy problem" for the court, David Gans, civil rights director at the Constitutional Accountability Center argues. "The biggest losers are the American people. By engaging in rushed decision-making and issuing rulings with little to no reasoning available to the public, the Supreme Court is acting without the sustained consideration, reflection, transparency and accountability Americans expect from the Supreme Court," Gans added.

"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
Post Reply

Return to “Law and Lawsuits”