|
|
|
Kansas Supreme Court receptive to protecting abortion rights
Court News |
2017/03/17 15:59
|
Kansas’ highest court appeared receptive Thursday to declaring for the first time that the state constitution recognizes abortion rights, with a majority of the justices skeptical of the state’s argument against the idea as it defended a ban on a common second-trimester procedure.
The state Supreme Court heard arguments in a lawsuit filed by Kansas City-area father-daughter physicians against a 2015 first-in-the-nation law that has become a model for abortion opponents in other states. The key issue is whether the Kansas Constitution protects abortion rights independently of the U.S. Constitution, which would allow state courts to invalidate restrictions that have been upheld by the federal courts.
Abortion opponents fear that such a decision by state courts could block new laws — or invalidate existing ones — even if President Donald Trump’s appointments result in a more conservative U.S. Supreme Court. Janet Crepps, an attorney for the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing the doctors, argued that it’s important for Kansas residents to know what rights their constitution protects.
“The federal constitutional protection seems to ebb and flow with the political tide,” Crepps said.
Abortion-rights supporters contend broad language in the state constitution’s Bill of Rights protects a woman’s right to obtain an abortion. The Bill of Rights says residents have “natural rights” including “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and that “free governments” were created for their “equal protection and benefit.”
The state argues there’s no evidence that when the constitution was written in 1859, its drafters contemplated the issue in a legal environment in which abortion generally was illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alleged jewel thief arrested after missing court hearing
Court News |
2017/03/13 23:00
|
A noted jewel thief who discussed her six-decade criminal career in a documentary has been arrested after authorities said she failed to appear in court.
The DeKalb County Sheriff's Office says 86-year-old Doris Marie Payne Monday was arrested at her Atlanta home. She was taken to the DeKalb County Jail.
It was not immediately clear whether she has an attorney who could speak for her.
Payne was sought after missing an arraignment March 6 in an alleged 2016 jewelry theft at Perimeter Mall, about 13 miles north of downtown Atlanta.
A judge deemed her too ill to stand trial Feb. 21 in the 2015 theft of a pair of designer earrings from a Saks Fifth Avenue.
Payne, her family and friends discuss her life in the 2013 documentary "The Life and Crimes of Doris Payne."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Airport shooting suspect in court on mental health issues
Court News |
2017/03/12 00:05
|
An Alaska man charged in a Florida airport shooting rampage is due in court for a hearing on his mental health problems.
Attorneys for 26-year-old Esteban Santiago of Anchorage, Alaska, say he's been diagnosed with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder, but they say he is competent to stand trial. The hearing Wednesday will delve into that.
Santiago is accused in the Jan. 6 shooting that killed five and wounded six at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport.
Santiago's lawyers say he is taking an anti-psychotic drug and can communicate clearly, understand legal issues and is cooperative with jail staff. They say he is not disoriented or delusional.
Santiago previously told the FBI he acted under government mind control, then claimed inspiration by the Islamic State extremist group. Trial is scheduled for Oct. 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Immigration courts: record number of cases, many problems
Court News |
2017/03/06 16:19
|
Everyone was in place for the hearing in Atlanta immigration court: the Guinean man hoping to stay in the U.S., his attorney, a prosecutor, a translator and the judge. But because of some missing paperwork, it was all for nothing.
When the government attorney said he hadn't received the case file, Judge J. Dan Pelletier rescheduled the proceeding. Everybody would have to come back another day.
The sudden delay was just one example of the inefficiency witnessed by an Associated Press writer who observed hearings over two days in one of the nation's busiest immigration courts. And that case is one of more than half a million weighing down court dockets across the country as President Donald Trump steps up enforcement of immigration laws.
Even before Trump became president, the nation's immigration courts were burdened with a record number of pending cases, a shortage of judges and frequent bureaucratic breakdowns. Cases involving immigrants not in custody commonly take two years to resolve and sometimes as many as five.
The backlog and insufficient resources are problems stretching back at least a decade, said San Francisco Immigration Judge Dana Marks, speaking as the president of the National Association of Immigration Judges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florida Legislature at "Open War" with State Supreme Court
Court News |
2017/03/02 08:46
|
The Republican-dominated Legislature's tense relationship with the state Supreme Court is hanging over this year's legislative session as lawmakers take up two bills to deal with the aftermath of court rulings that Republicans don't like.
One of them is a fix to the state's death penalty rules and the other a revision of the "stand your ground" law to better protect defendants claiming self-defense.
It's no surprise that two other bills are seen as a shot back at the court - a proposal to limit justices' terms to 12 years and a bill that would require them to file reports to the governor and Legislature on the timeliness of their decisions.
House Speaker Richard Corcoran says one of his highest priorities is to "reign in" the Supreme Court.
Former Supreme Court Justice James Perry said the Legislature is at "open war" with the judiciary, but he said the Legislature can't control the court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US appeals court upholds Maryland assault weapons ban
Court News |
2017/02/24 08:17
|
Maryland's ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons and its 10-round limit on gun magazines were upheld Tuesday by a federal appeals court in a decision that met with a strongly worded dissent.
In a 10-4 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., said the guns banned under Maryland's law aren't protected by the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.
Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, who led the push for the law in 2013 as a state senator, said it's "unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment."
"It's a very strong opinion, and it has national significance, both because it's en-banc and for the strength of its decision," Frosh said, noting that all of the court's judges participated.
Judge William Traxler issued a dissent. By concluding the Second Amendment doesn't even apply, Traxler wrote, the majority "has gone to greater lengths than any other court to eviscerate the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms." He also wrote that the court did not apply a strict enough review on the constitutionality of the law. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trial court election changes considered by North Carolina House
Court News |
2017/02/21 16:17
|
Some Republicans are set on returning all North Carolina state judicial elections to being officially partisan races again.
A law quickly approved in December during a special election directed statewide races for Supreme Court and Court of Appeals to become partisan starting in 2018. Now the state House scheduled floor debate Wednesday on legislation extending that to local Superior Court and District Court seats next year, too.
Having partisan races means candidates run in party primaries to reach the general election. Unaffiliated candidates could still run but would have to collect signatures to qualify.
Judicial races shifted to nonpartisan elections starting in the mid-1990s in part as an effort to distance judicial candidates from politics. But Republicans today say party labels help give voters some information about the candidates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Headline Legal News for You to Reach America's Best Legal Professionals. The latest legal news and information - Law Firm, Lawyer and Legal Professional news in the Media. |
|
|
