|
|
|
Trump administration backs PLO in victims' high court appeal
Top Court Watch |
2018/03/31 14:04
|
Despite its bumpy relationship with the Palestinians, the Trump administration is siding with the Palestine Liberation Organization in urging the Supreme Court to reject an appeal from American victims of terrorist attacks in the Middle East more than a decade ago.
The victims are asking the high court to reinstate a $654 million verdict against the PLO and Palestinian Authority in connection with attacks in Israel in 2002 and 2004 that killed 33 people and wounded hundreds more.
The case was scheduled to be considered at the justices’ private conference on Thursday. A decision to reject the appeal could come as early as Monday. If the court decides to hear the case, it could say so by the middle of this month.
The federal appeals court in New York tossed out the verdict in 2016. It said U.S. courts can’t consider lawsuits against foreign-based groups over random attacks that were not aimed at the United States.
The victims sued under the Anti-Terrorism Act, signed into law in 1992. The law was passed to open U.S. courts to victims of international terrorism, spurred by the killing of American Leon Klinghoffer during a 1985 terrorist attack aboard the Achille Lauro cruise ship.
The victims argued that offices the Palestinians maintain in the nation’s capital to promote their cause in speeches and media appearances and to retain lobbyists were sufficient to allow the lawsuit in an American court. The appeals court disagreed.
In late June, the justices asked the administration to weigh in on the case, as they often do in cases with foreign policy implications. The Justice Department filed its brief eight months later, saying there was nothing in the appeals court ruling to “warrant this court’s intervention at this time.”
In unusually strong language for a Supreme Court filing, Theodore Olson, the lawyer for the victims, wrote, “The government is not being square with the court.” Olson said the administration was being cagey about its view of the law, even after the lower court cut back on its use by attack victims to try to hold groups financially liable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arizona court to hear arguments on immigrant tuition case
Top Court Watch |
2018/03/29 14:04
|
The Arizona Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether young immigrants granted deferred deportation status under a program started by former President Barack Obama are eligible for lower in-state college tuition.
The hearing is set for Monday after the justices agreed in February to consider an appeal by the Maricopa County Community Colleges District, which won an initial ruling in 2015 that was overturned in June by the state Court of Appeals.
The Court of Appeals ruling said the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program known as DACA did not confer legal status and each state can decide on optional benefits for DACA recipients.
Arizona law bars public benefits such as in-state tuition for students without legal status. Pima Community College and a teachers union support the Maricopa County district's appeal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agency: School boards, counties should stay out of court
Top Court Watch |
2018/03/26 14:06
|
School districts across North Carolina will present fall funding requests in the coming weeks, with the threat of costly and lengthy litigation if local county commissioners can't see eye-to-eye with school board members on spending.
The General Assembly's government watchdog agency told legislators Monday they should pass a law barring school districts from suing when funding disagreements can't be settled through formal mediation.
The Program Evaluation Division recommended the new law instead direct a county fund a district when mediation is exhausted through a formula based on student membership and inflation.
Some committee members hearing the agency report questioned whether it was worth changing the law since school funding impasses reached the courts just four times between 1997 and 2015. It took 21 months on average to resolve them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Randle, an enforcer on the court, is a gentle giant elsewhere
Top Court Watch |
2018/03/23 14:07
|
Nick Young and Jordan Clarkson were not scheduled to speak at Julius Randle’s wedding. It was an elegant affair, bathed in white roses to celebrate a love that began almost instantly when Randle met Kendra Shaw at a friend’s party in college.
The friend who introduced them spoke at the reception. A coach who grew to be like a brother to Randle spoke. So did some childhood friends.
Then Young and Clarkson, lubricated by wedding wine and the firm belief that the wedding guests expected their shenanigans, got an idea. They loved Randle. The people needed to hear them, they presumed. Together, they took the microphone.
Clarkson, then Randle’s teammate with the Lakers, declared he couldn’t stand Randle when they first met. Randle’s punishing style of play in high school irked Clarkson’s friends who played against him back in Texas. Just as Randle’s mother reared up to protect her sweet baby boy, Clarkson finished, saying as he got to know Randle as part of the same Lakers rookie class in 2014, he learned Randle would do anything for his friends and loved ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court overturns conviction in fatal school bathroom attack
Top Court Watch |
2018/03/02 10:47
|
Delaware's Supreme Court on Thursday overturned the conviction of a 17-year-old girl in a school bathroom attack that left a 16-year-old classmate dead.
The girl was adjudicated delinquent for criminally negligent homicide by a Family Court judge last year and sentenced to six months in a juvenile facility for the April 2016 death of Amy Joyner-Francis.
An autopsy found that Joyner-Francis, who had a rare, undetected, heart condition, died of sudden cardiac death, aggravated by physical and emotional stress from the fight at Howard High School of Technology in Wilmington. Cellphone video of the attack, which gained national attention, shows Joyner-Francis struggling to fight back and escape as she is repeatedly hit and kicked in the head while her assailant holds on to her hair.
In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court agreed with defense attorney John Deckers that no reasonable fact-finder could have found that the girl acted with criminal negligence. Even if she did, the court said, it would be unjust to blame her for Joyner-Francis' death given how unforeseeable it was that the fight would lead to a young teen dying of cardiac arrest.
The Associated Press has not published the name of the girl because she is a juvenile. The Supreme Court in its ruling referred to the defendant using the pseudonym "Tracy," while referring to Joyner-Francis as "Alcee."
The justices said a person can't be held responsible for criminally negligent homicide unless her failure to perceive the risk of death was a "gross deviation from what a reasonable person would have understood." No reasonable fact-finder could conclude that the attack, which inflicted only minor injuries on Joyner-Francis, posed a risk of death so great that her assailant was grossly deviant for not recognizing it, the court concluded.
While the Family Court judge said the girl should have realized that her attack might have deadly consequences because of the close confines of the bathroom, with its tile floor and hard fixtures, the Supreme Court said Joyner Francis' death had nothing to do with those risks, and they were too far removed from the way that she died to blame her assailant for her death.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Law Promo can construct your law firm a brand new responsive website, or help you redesign your existing site to secure your place in the internet world. Small Law Firm Web Design by Law Promo |
|
|
Recent Lawyer Blog Updates |
|
Lawyer News RSS
