|
|
|
Court rejects appeal from 3 GOP House members over $500 mask fines
Attorney News |
2024/02/21 22:45
|
The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected appeals from three Republican U.S. House members who challenged fines for not wearing face coverings on the House floor in 2021.
The justices did not comment on leaving in place $500 fines issued in May 2021 to U.S. Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Ralph Norman of South Carolina.
The mask requirement was part of the House’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the mandate remained in place even after the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued guidance noting that “fully vaccinated people can resume activities without wearing a mask or physically distancing.”
The lawmakers showed up on the House floor without masks, even posing for a selfie. The requirement was lifted in June 2021.
Lower courts had refused to disturb the fines, ruling that courts lack the power to review the mask policy.
Lawyers for House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican, had urged the court to reject the appeal from fellow Republican representatives, though they noted that Johnson and every other member of the Republican leadership voted against the mask policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ex-Illinois lawmaker abruptly pleads guilty to fraud and money laundering
Attorney News |
2024/02/17 21:43
|
Former Illinois lawmaker and gubernatorial candidate William “Sam” McCann abruptly pleaded guilty on Thursday to nine felony counts of wire fraud, money laundering and tax evasion, halting his federal corruption trial over misusing up to $550,000 in campaign contributions.
McCann, who cut off negotiations over a plea deal last fall when he dismissed his court-appointed attorneys, made the reversal on the third day of a bench trial before U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Lawless. His latest lawyer, Jason Vincent, of Springfield, asked that he be released from custody as part of the deal, but Lawless nixed the idea, telling McCann his only option was to offer a no-strings open plea.
The seven counts of wire fraud and single count of money laundering each carry a sentence of up to 20 years in federal prison. For tax evasion, it’s three. But a complex set of advisory guidelines before Lawless, who set sentencing for June 20, will likely yield a far shorter term.
“Are you pleading guilty because you are in fact guilty?” Lawless asked. The 54-year-old McCann, wearing the gray-and-black striped jumpsuit of the nearby county jail where he’s held, replied, “Yes, your honor.”
Lawless set a hearing for Friday on McCann’s release request, but it’s certain to draw opposition from the government and not just because McCann violated probation last week when he left the state to check himself into a hospital with chest pains. Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Bass told Lawless he would introduce as further evidence of McCann’s unreliability a bizarre social media video posted just this week in which McCann claims a government conspiracy involving an “ungodly pack of lies” is against him.
A state senator from 2011 to 2019, McCann formed the Conservative Party of Illinois to campaign for governor in 2018. A criminal indictment in 2021 outlined numerous schemes McCann employed to convert contributions from his campaign committees to buy vehicles, pay an overdue loan, two mortgages, credit card bills and fund a family vacation, entertainment and other purchases.
For his unsuccessful run for governor, he collected more than $3 million dollars from Local 150 of the International Union of Operating Engineers alone. Despite being questioned four times by FBI and IRS agents in summer 2018 about alleged improper spending, he tore through $340,000 in leftover campaign funds for personal expenses in the year after the election. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Republicans urge state Supreme Court to reject redistricting report’s findings
Attorney News |
2024/02/09 06:05
|
Wisconsin Republicans urged the state Supreme Court on Thursday to ignore a report from redistricting consultants that determined GOP-proposed legislative maps were unconstitutional partisan gerrymanders.
While Republicans argue that the consultants’ findings are unsound, Democrats asked the court on Thursday to adopt one of their maps that the consultants found were “nearly indistinguishable.”
The stakes are huge in battleground Wisconsin, where Republicans have held a firm grip on control of the Legislature even as Democrats have notched significant statewide wins. Four of the past six presidential elections have been decided by less than a percentage point, while Republicans have increased their majorities under the maps they first drew in 2011 to 22-10 in the Senate and 65-34 in the Assembly.
The liberal-controlled Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in December that the current Republican-drawn legislative maps were unconstitutional because not all the districts were contiguous. The court ordered the parties involved in the lawsuit to submit new maps that a pair of consultants then reviewed.
With the report and responses now in hand, the court is poised to rule within days or weeks on what the new maps should look like, unless the Republican-controlled Legislature passes maps that Democratic Gov. Tony Evers signs into law first.
Republicans are talking about passing the maps that Evers proposed, which the governor indicated on Wednesday he would sign. Evers last week vetoed maps the Legislature passed that were based on his proposal but made changes to protect Republican incumbents.
Republican Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August said Thursday there have been discussions with Senate Republicans about passing the Evers maps with no changes.
While those talks continue, the Supreme Court accepted responses Thursday from Republicans and Democrats to the consultants’ report. The court and Legislature are facing a March 15 deadline to enact new lines. That is the latest that maps can be in place in order for current filing deadlines for the fall election to be met, according to the Wisconsin Elections Commission.
Attorneys for the Legislature argued in their court filing Thursday that the consultants’ report was about finding a political remedy to redistricting, not addressing the continuity issue.
“There is no judicial power, only political will, to impose any of the Democrats’ sweeping redraws as a judicial remedy,” the Legislature argued.
The Legislature also hints at an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, saying that moving millions of voters from one legislative district to another as the Democratic map proposals would do “raises serious federal constitutional questions.”
The conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty made a similar argument, saying adopting the reasoning of the consultants in rejecting it and the Legislature’s maps “would be an egregious due process violation.”
Republicans have also argued that liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz should not have heard the case, given that she called the current Republican maps “rigged” and “unfair” during the campaign and accepted about $10 million in donations from Democrats. She was part of the 4-3 majority that voted to toss the Republican maps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What to know about arguments over Donald Trump's immunity claims
Attorney News |
2024/01/11 17:33
|
Appeals court judges signaled Tuesday that they will likely reject Donald Trump’s claims that he is immune from prosecution in his election interference case. The outcome seemed clear during arguments that touched on a range of political and legal considerations.
The Republican presidential primary front-runner made his first trip in months to Washington’s federal courthouse, where his lawyers sought to convince an appeals court to dismiss the case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The defense’s argument was met with outright skepticism by the three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
The judges did not say when they might rule, but the timing of their decision is crucial with a March 4 trial date looming. Trump’s lawyers, who are hoping to delay the case beyond the November presidential election, are certain to go to the U.S. Supreme Court if the D.C. court sides with special counsel Jack Smith.
Most issues in criminal cases can’t be appealed until after a trial verdict, though there are certain circumstances when a defendant can appeal immediately. Smith’s team has not challenged the appeals court’s ability to hear the immunity issue ahead of trial. But a watchdog group called American Oversight filed a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that the appeals court should dismiss Trump’s challenge because Supreme Court precedent shows that it lacks jurisdiction to consider the issue now. If the appeals court agrees that it lacks jurisdiction, it would send the case back to the trial court before even deciding the immunity issue.
Trump’s attorney, D. John Sauer, told the judges that presidential immunity is clearly an issue meant to be resolved before trial. He argued that legal precedent supports the idea that the appeals court is right to consider the immunity claim at this time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peru court orders imprisoned ex-President Fujimori's 'immediate' release
Attorney News |
2023/12/06 16:40
|
Peru’s constitutional court ordered an immediate humanitarian release Tuesday for imprisoned former President Alberto Fujimori, 85, who was serving a 25-year sentence in connection with the death squad slayings of 25 Peruvians in the 1990s.
The court ruled in favor of a 2017 pardon that had granted the former leader a release on humanitarian grounds but that later was annulled.
In a resolution seen by The Associated Press, the court told the state prisons agency to immediately release Fujimori “on the same day.”
Fujimori was sentenced in 2009 to 25 years in prison on charges of human rights abuses. He had been accused of being the mastermind behind the slayings of 25 Peruvians by a military death squad during his administration from 1990 to 2000, while the government fought the Shining Path communist rebels.
Fujimori’s 2017 pardon granted by then-President Pablo Kuczynski was annulled under pressure from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and its status was the subject of legal wrangling since then.
The constitutional court previously had ordered a lower court in the southern city of Ica to release Fujimori, but that court declined to do so, arguing in ruling last Friday that it lacked the authority. It returned the matter instead to the constitutional court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six teens in court in connection with beheading of French teacher
Attorney News |
2023/11/25 23:52
|
Six teenagers go on trial Monday in Paris for their alleged roles in the beheading of a teacher who showed caricatures of the prophet of Islam to his class, a killing that led authorities to reaffirm France’s cherished rights of expression and secularism.
Samuel Paty, a history and geography teacher, was killed on Oct. 16, 2020, near his school in a northwest Paris suburb by an 18-year-old of Chechen origin who had become radicalized. The attacker was in turn shot dead by police.
Paty’s name was disclosed on social media after a class debate on free expression during which he showed caricatures published by the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo, which triggered a newsroom massacre by extremists in January 2015.
All hearings at a Paris juvenile court are to be held behind closed doors in accordance with French law regarding minors. The defendants arrived Monday morning at the Paris court, their faces hidden behind masks and hoods, accompanied by their families. The media are not allowed to disclose their identity.
Among those going on trial, a teenage girl, who was 13 at the time, is accused of making false allegations for wrongly saying that Paty had asked Muslim students to raise their hands and leave the classroom before he showed the cartoons. She later told investigators she had lied. She was not in the classroom that day and Paty did not make such a request, the investigation has shown.
Five other students of Paty’s school, then 14 and 15, are facing charges of criminal conspiracy with the aim of preparing aggravated violence to be committed.
They are accused of having waited for Paty for several hours until he left the school and of having identified him to the killer in exchange for promises of payments of 300-350 euros ($348-$406).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge blocks 2 provisions in North Carolina’s new abortion law
Attorney News |
2023/10/04 03:38
|
A federal judge on Saturday blocked two portions of North Carolina’s new abortion law from taking effect while a lawsuit continues. But nearly all of the restrictions approved by the legislature this year, including a near-ban after 12 weeks of pregnancy, aren’t being specifically challenged and remain intact.
U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles issued an order halting enforcement of a provision to require surgical abortions that occur after 12 weeks — those for cases of rape and incest, for example — be performed only in hospitals, not abortion clinics. That limitation would have otherwise taken effect on Sunday.
And in the same preliminary injunction, Eagles extended beyond her temporary decision in June an order preventing enforcement of a rule that doctors must document the existence of a pregnancy within the uterus before prescribing a medication abortion.
Short of successful appeals by Republican legislative leaders defending the laws, the order will remain in effect until a lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood South Atlantic and a physician who performs abortions challenging the sections are resolved. The lawsuit also seeks to have clarified whether medications can be used during the second trimester to induce labor of a fetus that can’t survive outside the uterus.
The litigation doesn’t directly seek to topple the crux of the abortion law enacted in May after GOP legislators overrode Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto. North Carolina had a ban on most abortions after 20 weeks before July 1, when the law scaled it back to 12 weeks.
The law, a response to the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down Roe v. Wade, also added new exceptions for abortions through 20 weeks for cases of rape and incest and through 24 weeks for “life-limiting” fetal anomalies. A medical emergency exception also stayed in place.
On medication abortions, which bill sponsors say also are permitted through 12 weeks of pregnancy, the new law says a physician prescribing an abortion-inducing drug must first “document in the woman’s medical chart the ... intrauterine location of the pregnancy.”
Eagles wrote the plaintiffs were likely to be successful on their claim that the law is so vague as to subject abortion providers to claims that they broke the law if they can’t locate an embryo through an ultrasound because the pregnancy is so new.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
