Law
- Justice Alito lost two assigned majority decisions last term, and he's really mad about itwww.cnn.com Exclusive: How Samuel Alito got canceled from the Supreme Court social media majority | CNN Politics
The hardline approach Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito takes usually gets him what he wants.
The hardline approach Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito takes usually gets him what he wants.
This year it backfired.
Behind the scenes, the conservative justice sought to put a thumb on the scale for states trying to restrict how social media companies filter content. His tactics could have led to a major change in how platforms operate.
CNN has learned, however, that Alito went too far for two justices – Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson – who abandoned the precarious 5-4 majority and left Alito on the losing side.
As a result, the final 6-3 ruling led by Justice Elena Kagan backed the First Amendment rights of social media companies
It is rare that a justice tapped to write the majority opinion loses it in ensuing weeks, but sources tell CNN that it happened twice this year to Alito. He also lost the majority as he was writing the decision in the case of a Texas councilwoman who said she was arrested in retaliation for criticizing the city manager. ...
- can an elected official block my phone number?
I know there's been challenges about elected officials blocking people on social media, but I've got a local elected official who keeps claiming that he's been working on a particular safety issue for like 6 years now. attempting to follow up yet again, I got a response saying that if I continued contacting him, he was going to block my phone number.
we were discussing city business. nothing personal. florida, if it matters
- Florida "no trespassing" markings
I've got an empty lot that I need to properly mark as private property before an upcoming project, and I want to make sure my signage is legally enforceable.
from what I can read, it just says that the signs have to be 18x24, with the words no trespassing at least 2" tall, and the name of the owner or lessee clearly printed on it. but there should be more to it than that, right? I can't find a regulation for how many signs there has to be for a given size property. like I'm sure I can't just mark 10 acres with a single sign, right? when I lived up north, the law was something about you had to have a sign posted every so many feet around the entire perimeter but I can't find the Florida regulation on that.
- Trump v. US Decision Dropped
>Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.
>The President enjoys no im- munity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law.
- Justices uphold laws targeting homelessness with criminal penalties - SCOTUSblogwww.scotusblog.com Justices uphold laws targeting homelessness with criminal penalties - SCOTUSblog
This article was updated on June 28 at 5:46 p.m. The Supreme Court on Friday upheld ordinances in a southwest Oregon city that prohibit people who are homeless from using blankets, pillows, or cardboard boxes for protection from the elements while sleeping within the city limits. By a vote of 6-3
>Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch contended that the Eighth Amendment, which bans cruel and unusual punishment, “serves many important functions, but it does not authorize federal judges” to “dictate this Nation’s homelessness policy.” Instead, he suggested, such a task should fall to the American people.
>Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, in an opinion joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. She argued that the majority’s ruling “focuses almost exclusively on the needs of local government and leaves the most vulnerable in our society with an impossible choice: Either stay awake or be arrested.”
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-175_19m2.pdf
- Supreme Court strikes down Chevron, curtailing power of federal agencies - SCOTUSblogwww.scotusblog.com Supreme Court strikes down Chevron, curtailing power of federal agencies - SCOTUSblog
This article was updated on June 28 at 3:46 p.m. In a major ruling, the Supreme Court on Friday cut back sharply on the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer and ruled that courts should rely on their own interpretion of ambiguous laws. The decision will likely have far-
>In a major ruling, the Supreme Court on Friday cut back sharply on the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer and ruled that courts should rely on their own interpretion of ambiguous laws.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf
- Two oral dissents and more opinion days to come - SCOTUSblogwww.scotusblog.com Two oral dissents and more opinion days to come - SCOTUSblog
The court’s press room is still buzzing this morning over Bloomberg’s scoop yesterday on the brief but mistaken posting of the court’s disposition in Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States, about emergency abortion care. But today, the courtroom will reclaim its rightful place as the c
Considering I made the post Yesterday about the Thursday & Friday rulings, I felt obliged to share that they added another additional day of opinions (July 1st).
- List of Last 12 SCOTUS Cases of the Term to be Decided Tomorrow & Friday
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
>Issue(s): (1) Whether statutory provisions that empower the Securities and Exchange Commission to initiate and adjudicate administrative enforcement proceedings seeking civil penalties violate the Seventh Amendment; (2) whether statutory provisions that authorize the SEC to choose to enforce the securities laws through an agency adjudication instead of filing a district court action violate the nondelegation doctrine; and (3) whether Congress violated Article II by granting for-cause removal protection to administrative law judges in agencies whose heads enjoy for-cause removal protection.
Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P.
>Issue(s): Whether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a court to approve, as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, a release that extinguishes claims held by nondebtors against nondebtor third parties, without the claimants’ consent.
Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce
>Issue(s): Whether the court should overrule Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, or at least clarify that statutory silence concerning controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the statute does not constitute an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency.
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
>Issue(s): Whether the court should overrule Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, or at least clarify that statutory silence concerning controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the statute does not constitute an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency. [Sic]
Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
>Issue(s): Whether a plaintiff’s Administrative Procedure Act claim “first accrues” under 28 U.S.C. § 2401(a) when an agency issues a rule — regardless of whether that rule injures the plaintiff on that date — or when the rule first causes a plaintiff to “suffer[] legal wrong” or be “adversely affected or aggrieved.”
Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency
>Issue(s): (1) Whether the court should stay the Environmental Protection Agency’s federal emission reductions rule, the Good Neighbor Plan; and (2) whether the emissions controls imposed by the rule are reasonable regardless of the number of states subject to the rule.
>Issue(s): (1) Whether the laws’ content-moderation restrictions comply with the First Amendment; and (2) whether the laws’ individualized-explanation requirements comply with the First Amendment.
>Issue(s): Whether the First Amendment prohibits viewpoint-, content-, or speaker-based laws restricting select websites from engaging in editorial choices about whether, and how, to publish and disseminate speech — or otherwise burdening those editorial choices through onerous operational and disclosure requirements.
>Issue(s): Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit erred in construing 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c), which prohibits obstruction of congressional inquiries and investigations, to include acts unrelated to investigations and evidence.
City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson
>Issue(s): Whether the enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.
>Issue(s): Whether the Supreme Court should stay the order by the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho enjoining the enforcement of Idaho’s Defense of Life Act, which prohibits abortions unless necessary to save the life of the mother, on the ground that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act preempts it.
>Issue(s): Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.
- Court appears to dismiss Idaho's emergency abortion ban, leaving federal protection in place - SCOTUSblogwww.scotusblog.com Supreme Court appears to allow emergency abortions in Idaho - SCOTUSblog
This article was updated on June 26 at 4:08 p.m. Bloomberg News has reported that the Supreme Court briefly accidentally posted an opinion on its website that would allow emergency abortions to go forward in Idaho. The court’s Public Information Office has issued a statement that the opinion in a
- Why SPAMmers are allowed to continue?
SPAM companies like DataPacket/DataCamp, 247.ro continuing to SPAM while using IPs from RIPE, which says "RIPE NCC does not have the legal power to investigate these types of issues or take action against ISPs, other organisations or individuals. ... If you require further assistance, we suggest contacting your local law enforcement agency or seeking legal advice." I know that there are many victims of their unsolicited messages, yet why they are allowed to operate for years, law not reaching them? What one can do except submitting their IPs to:
https://www.spamcop.net
https://www.spam.org/report
https://signalants.signal-spam.fr/reportings/new
https://www.abuseipdb.com
https://cleantalk.org/blacklists
I have tried to submit to TrustPilot, but they are protecting SPAMmers.
- [Oklahoma] state Supreme Court ruling against taxpayer-funded religious public charter school
>...the state Supreme Court ruled against allowing what would have been the nation’s first taxpayer-funded, state-sponsored religious public charter school.
Linked article mostly just covers the bare bones and a comment from the state AG.
If you want more flavor here's some different coverages:
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/25/oklahoma-high-court-rejects-religious-charter-school-contract-00164843
https://apnews.com/article/public-religious-catholic-charter-school-unconstitutional-oklahoma-e4ef414605094313331a39cc645ede8a
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2024/06/25/oklahoma-state-funded-religious-charter-school-unconstitutional/74205802007/
https://okcfox.com/news/local/oklahoma-supreme-court-rules-st-isidore-charter-school-contract-unconstitutional-public-religious-funds-statewide-virtual-charter-school-board-constitution-establishment-clause-freedom-religious-practice
Direct link to the opinion:
https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/documents/news-documents/2024/june/1058190300-20240625-085757-.pdf
- Supreme Court Allows Suit Over Arrest Said to Be Politically Motivatedwww.nytimes.com Supreme Court Allows Suit Over Arrest Said to Be Politically Motivated
Sylvia Gonzalez, a Texas city councilwoman, said officials violated the First Amendment by arresting her after she criticized the city manager.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/16749379
- Supreme Court Issues a 9-0 Ruling Against Government Officials Engaging in Pressure Campaigns Against Speech
YouTube Video
Click to view this content.
- An American Immigration Council Analysis of the President’s 212(f) Proclamation and Interim Final Rule Restricting Asylumwww.americanimmigrationcouncil.org An American Immigration Council Analysis of the President’s 212(f) Proclamation and Interim Final Rule Restricting Asylum
On June 4, the Biden administration issued a presidential proclamation and an Interim Final Rule restricting access to asylum for people crossing into the United States without legal status. The Council analyzes this new Proclamation and Interim Final Rule Restricting Asylum in this factsheet.
Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20240607122602/https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/american-immigration-council-analysis-presidents-212f-proclamation-and-interim-final-rule
- Supreme Court rules for NRA in First Amendment dispute - SCOTUSblogwww.scotusblog.com Supreme Court rules for NRA in First Amendment dispute - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court on Thursday reinstated a lawsuit by the National Rifle Association, alleging that a New York official violated the group’s First Amendment rights when she urged banks and insurance companies not to do business with it in the wake of the 2018 shooting at a Florida high school. In a
>The Supreme Court on Thursday reinstated a lawsuit by the National Rifle Association, alleging that a New York official violated the group’s First Amendment rights when she urged banks and insurance companies not to do business with it in the wake of the 2018 shooting at a Florida high school. In a unanimous decision by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the justices agreed that the NRA had made out a case that Maria Vullo, then the head of New York’s Department of Financial Services, had gone too far in her efforts to get companies and banks to cut ties with the NRA, crossing over the line from efforts to persuade the companies and banks – which would be permitted – to attempts to coerce them, which are not.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-842_6kg7.pdf
- A Win for Civil Forfeiture, but the Supreme Court Is Skepticalwww.nationalreview.com A Win for Civil Forfeiture, but the Supreme Court Is Skeptical | National Review
Forfeiture may have won the day today, but law enforcement should beware that the Court might seize it in the future.
Article on the Culley v Marshall case that recently got announced by SCOTUS. The Gorsuch concurrence hints that a 5-4 majority of the court might want to reel in the practice of civil asset forfeiture.
Direct link to the concurrence [here]
>But in future cases, with the benefit of full briefing, I hope we might begin the task of assessing how well the profound changes in civil forfeiture practices we have witnessed in recent decades comport with the Constitution’s enduring guarantee that “[n]o person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
- Beware the Lawyers - Teri Kanefieldterikanefield.com Beware the Lawyers - Teri Kanefield
This blog post could have been called “Why you don’t need a lawyer to answer your questions about legal issues in the news.” Mostly it’s about former TV pundit Peter Arenella’s scathing assessment of legal punditry published in 1998 in the University of Chicago Legal Forum. His piece, written 26 yea...
- Who is the Funniest Supreme Court Justice? (2013)abcnews.go.com Who Is the Funniest Supreme Court Justice?
Who Is the Funniest Supreme Court Justice?
Found this old article thought it might be interesting for anyone else who recreationally listens to SCOTUS oral arguments.
- The Silver or the Lead: How White Collar Crime Prosecutors Get Punishedwww.thebignewsletter.com The Silver or the Lead: How White Collar Crime Prosecutors Get Punished
Corporate defense lawyers have adopted a new strategy that not even the mob considered. When facing litigation from the government, file misconduct charges against the attorneys bringing the charges.
- Bankman-Fried Urges No More Than 6.5 Years For FTX Fraud - Law360www.law360.com Bankman-Fried Urges No More Than 6.5 Years For FTX Fraud - Law360 UK
FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried asked a Manhattan federal judge late Tuesday for a sentence that releases him "promptly" after his conviction for stealing billions from customers of the now-collapsed crypto exchange, arguing that federal sentencing guidelines recommend no more than six-and-a-half year...
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/12511460
> Law360 (February 28, 2024, 1:40 AM EST) > -- FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried asked a Manhattan federal judge late Tuesday for a sentence that releases him "promptly" after his conviction for stealing billions from customers of the now-collapsed crypto exchange, arguing that federal sentencing guidelines recommend no more than six-and-a-half years in prison. > > Bankman-Fried made the request in a memorandum submitted to U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who is due to sentence the 31-year-old former crypto executive on March 28. Bankman-Fried was found guilty in November of seven counts of fraud, conspiracy and money laundering, although he maintains his innocence and has vowed to appeal. > > According to the filing, a presentence report prepared by the U.S. Probation Department calculated sentencing guidelines that call for a maximum sentence of 1,320 months, or 110 years, with the report recommending a downward variance of 10 years to bring the recommended sentence to 100 years. > > But Bankman-Fried asked the court to reject the report's "barbaric proposal," saying the advisory guidelines should put the appropriate sentence range at 63 to 78 months, or 5 years and 3 months to 6 years and 6 months. > > Considering the former CEO's "charitable works and demonstrated commitment to others, a sentence that returns Sam promptly to a productive role in society would be sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with the purposes of sentencing," the memo states. > > Bankman-Fried argues that he is a first-time, non-violent offender and that the report includes an incorrect 30-point increase to the base offense level based on the assumption that the case involved a loss of $10 billion. But the report adopted that $10 billion loss number "without a scintilla of support," the memo states. > > Tuesday's filing says that bankruptcy counsel for FTX stated last month that "customers and creditors who can prove their losses are expected to get back all of their money." > > "[T]he company was solvent at the time of the bankruptcy petition," the memo asserts. "The money was there — not lost." > > "The harm to customers, lenders, and investors is zero," the filing adds, italicizing the sentence for emphasis. > > Alternatively, the court could peg customer losses as the estimated cost of collection in the bankruptcy proceedings, according to the memo. > > At this point, the total fees incurred by advisors to the unsecured creditors committee is about $57.5 million, the memo states, which Bankman-Fried argued is a much more reasonable estimate of actual loss than the presentence report's estimate of $10 billion. > > With that in mind, there should not be a 30-point increase in the guidelines calculation for a loss amount enhancement, Bankman-Fried said. > > The memo also highlights Bankman-Fried's "selfless, altruistic" qualities and his commitment to philanthropy, attaching 29 letters of support from his brother and parents; several professors at Stanford University, where his parents work, including the interim dean of Stanford Law School; tech executives; two psychiatrists; and his former personal assistant. > > Barbara Fried, an attorney and professor emeritus at Stanford Law, wrote that anyone who tries to "understand him through the lens of 'normal' behavior and motivations is going to misunderstand" her son. She said her son has suffered with depression but has devoted his life to the happiness of others. > > For example, when he took a lucrative job as a trader at Jane Street Capital, he gave away more than half his earnings without telling his parents, according to the letter. Even in the six months he has spent in detention, she said her son is running a tutoring session to help fellow inmates prepare for GED exams. > > Fried also emphasized that her son is autistic and that she fears for his life in a typical prison environment, where his "inability to read or respond appropriately to many social cues, and his touching but naive belief in the power of facts and reason to resolve disputes, put him in extreme danger." > > "If allowed to resume his life, he would do the only thing he has ever cared about: devote the remainder of his natural life to leaving the world a better place than he found it," Fried wrote. > > Paul Brest, named the interim dean of Stanford Law last month, wrote that Bankman-Fried is a proponent of a philanthropy theory called "effective altruism," which holds that a person's life "should be devoted to doing as much good as possible." > > "Beyond his intellectual contributions, Mr. Bankman-Fried has manifested the philosophy in his own giving and life," Brest wrote, noting that he has donated millions of dollars to effective altruism causes. "Based on his behavior to date, Mr. Bankman-Fried is likely to continue to engage in philanthropy in whatever circumstances he is placed." > > The prosecution's sentencing recommendation is due March 15. > > Counsel for Bankman-Fried and a representative for the DOJ did not immediately respond to requests for comment late Tuesday. > > During a month-long trial this past fall, prosecutors said Bankman-Fried drove FTX into bankruptcy by spending $10 billion worth of customer deposits on venture investments, lavish real estate and political donations. > > Three of Bankman-Fried's top lieutenants — Caroline Ellison, Gary Wang and Nishad Singh — testified that the defendant accomplished this scheme by secretly funneling billions of dollars between FTX and his crypto hedge fund Alameda Research. > > The defense, meanwhile, said Bankman-Fried made a number of governance mistakes but did not intend to steal from FTX customers. Bankman-Fried himself made this argument from the witness stand, telling jurors that he always believed Alameda could lawfully borrow from FTX and then repay the debts. > > The jury ultimately deliberated for just over four hours before finding Bankman-Fried guilty on all counts. He has been detained at Brooklyn's Metropolitan Detention Center since August due to alleged witness tampering. > > The government is represented by Danielle R. Sassoon, Nicolas Roos, Danielle Kudla, Samuel Raymond and Thane Rehn of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and Jil Simon of the U.S. Department of Justice's Criminal Division. > > Bankman-Fried is represented by Marc L. Mukasey, Torrey K. Young, Thomas E. Thornhill, Michael F. Westfal and Stephanie Guaba of Mukasey Young LLP. > > The case is U.S. v. Bankman-Fried, case number 1:22-cr-00673, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
- What Happens, Exactly, If Trump Is Sentenced to Prison?nymag.com What Happens, Exactly, If Trump Is Sentenced to Prison?
The Secret Service doesn’t have a plan. Most inmates sleep in dorms. There’s also no Diet Coke.
- Appeals Court: FBI's Safe-Deposit Box Seizures Violated Fourth Amendmentreason.com Appeals Court: FBI's safe-deposit box seizures violated Fourth Amendment
Cases like this are exactly why the Fourth Amendment was adopted in the first place, wrote federal Judge Milan D. Smith Jr.
The FBI violated the Fourth Amendment when its agents rifled through the contents of more than 700 safe-deposit boxes in the aftermath of a March 2021 raid
- Police Union Defends Forfeiture By Saying Anyone Carrying A Bunch Of Cash Is Probably A Criminalwww.techdirt.com Police Union Defends Forfeiture By Saying Anyone Carrying A Bunch Of Cash Is Probably A Criminal
I’m always heartened to see another local news team start digging into asset forfeiture. Especially the ones that don’t sugarcoat the findings with headlines that read like they were cr…
Charlotte, North Carolina’s NBC affiliate, WCNC, tells it like it is. Although it puts quotes around a couple of phrases, it at least uses those phrases in the headline and subhead. “It is like highway robbery” says the headline. In the subhead: “policing for profit.”
- AI won’t displace human judges, but will affect judiciary, Roberts says in annual reportwww.scotusblog.com AI won’t displace human judges, but will affect judiciary, Roberts says in annual report - SCOTUSblog
In his annual report, Chief Justice John Roberts on Sunday addressed the future of artificial intelligence in the judiciary. Roberts predicted that “human judges will be around for a while,” but he also suggested that “judicial work—particularly at the trial level—will be significantly affected by A
- Supreme court declines to expedite decision on Trump’s immunity claim in 2020 election casewww.theguardian.com Supreme court declines to expedite decision on Trump’s immunity claim in 2020 election case
Decision gives Trump a crucial victory as he seeks to delay as much as possible his trial, currently scheduled for next March
The US supreme court on Friday declined to decide Donald Trump’s immunity claim in his 2020 election subversion criminal case before his arguments are settled in a lower court.
The decision went against special counsel Jack Smith who on Thursday urged America’s highest court to swiftly take up the issue of whether Trump is, as the former president claims, immune from criminal prosecution on federal charges over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss.
Friday’s decision will slow down the progress of the case against Trump, which had been set to go to trial in March, creating greater tension over the overlap of an intensifying presidential election race in 2024 and Trump’s multiple criminal cases.
The former president is the front runner for the Republican nomination, as he seeks re-election, despite facing dozens of charges in four criminal cases.
- Biden pardons all offenses of simple possession/use of marijuana (even those not yet prosecuted)www.whitehouse.gov A Proclamation on Granting Pardon for the Offense of Simple Possession of Marijuana, Attempted Simple Possession of Marijuana, or Use of Marijuana | The White House
In Proclamation 10467 of October 6, 2022 (Granting Pardon for the Offense of Simple Possession of Marijuana), I exercised my authority
In Proclamation 10467 of October 6, 2022 (Granting Pardon for the Offense of Simple Possession of Marijuana), I exercised my authority under the Constitution to pardon individuals who committed or were convicted of the offense of simple possession of marijuana in violation of the Controlled Substances Act and section 48–904.01(d)(1) of the Code of the District of Columbia (D.C. Code). As I have said before, convictions for simple possession of marijuana have imposed needless barriers to employment, housing, and educational opportunities. Through this proclamation, consistent with the grant of Proclamation 10467, I am pardoning additional individuals who may continue to experience the unnecessary collateral consequences of a conviction for simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana. Therefore, acting pursuant to the grant of authority in Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution of the United States, I, Joseph R. Biden Jr., do hereby grant a full, complete, and unconditional pardon to all current United States citizens and lawful permanent residents who, on or before the date of this proclamation, committed or were convicted of the offense of simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana, regardless of whether they have been charged with or prosecuted for these offenses on or before the date of this proclamation, in violation of:
(1) section 844 of title 21, United States Code, section 846 of title 21, United States Code, and previous provisions in the United States Code that prohibited simple possession of marijuana or attempted simple possession of marijuana;
(2) section 48-904.01(d)(1) of the D.C. Code and previous provisions in the D.C. Code that prohibited simple possession of marijuana;
(3) section 48-904.09 of the D.C. Code and previous provisions in the D.C. Code that prohibited attempted simple possession of marijuana; and
(4) provisions in the Code of Federal Regulations, including as enforced under the United States Code, that prohibit only the simple possession or use of marijuana on Federal properties or installations, or in other locales, as currently or previously codified, including but not limited to 25 C.F.R. 11.452(a); 32 C.F.R. 1903.12(b)(2); 36 C.F.R. 2.35(b)(2); 36 C.F.R. 1002.35(b)(2); 36 C.F.R. 1280.16(a)(1); 36 C.F.R. 702.6(b); 41 C.F.R. 102-74.400(a); 43 C.F.R. 8365.1-4(b)(2); and 50 C.F.R. 27.82(b)(2).
My intent by this proclamation is to pardon only the offenses of simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana in violation of the Federal and D.C. laws set forth in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this proclamation, as well as the provisions in the Code of Federal Regulations consistent with paragraph (4) of this proclamation, and not any other offenses involving other controlled substances or activity beyond simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana, such as possession of marijuana with intent to distribute or driving offenses committed while under the influence of marijuana. This pardon does not apply to individuals who were non-citizens not lawfully present in the United States at the time of their offense.
Pursuant to the procedures in Proclamation 10467, the Attorney General, acting through the Pardon Attorney, shall review all properly submitted applications for certificates of pardon and shall issue such certificates of pardon to eligible applicants in due course.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-second day of December, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-eighth.
JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.
- Rudy Giuliani files for bankruptcy in Manhattanwww.nydailynews.com Rudy Giuliani files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in Manhattan
Giuliani filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy less than a week after he was socked with a $148 million damage award for defaming two Atlanta election workers.
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in Manhattan on Thursday, less than a week after he was socked with a $148 million damage award for defaming two Atlanta election workers.
Giuliani listed debts as high as $500 million and about $10 million in assets in bankruptcy papers filed in Manhattan federal court. Last week’s mammoth judgment came after a Washington, D.C., jury determined his campaign of lies against Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss provoked a deluge of vicious and life-altering threats.
The suit is one of many criminal and civil cases facing the former mayor and Trump lawyer as he drowns in legal bills, some of which he’s acting as his own lawyer. This summer, he put his $6.5 million townhouse on the Upper East Side on the market.
Giuliani did not immediately respond to a request seeking comment.
- Colorado Supreme Court justices face a flood of threats after disqualifying Trump from the ballotwww.nbcnews.com Colorado Supreme Court justices face a flood of threats after disqualifying Trump from the ballot
The latest round of threats fits a familiar pattern: Trump faces a legal setback, and officials face threats.
- Colorado Supreme Court disqualifies Trump from ballotwww.cpr.org Colorado Supreme Court disqualifies Trump from state's 2024 primary ballot
Justices find the Disqualification Clause does apply to the presidency, but their ruling is almost certain to be appealed.
In a landmark decision, the Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that former president Donald Trump is disqualified from appearing on the state’s primary ballot next year.
The Justices’ 4-3 ruling concludes that Trump engaged in an insurrection with his words and actions around the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol and therefore cannot hold the nation’s highest office again.
“We are also cognizant that we travel in uncharted territory,” wrote Colorado’s Supreme Court in its unsigned 213-page decision.
This is the first time a state’s high court has concluded the 14th Amendment’s Civil War-era Disqualification Clause applies to both the office of the presidency and the actions of the former president. Supreme Courts in Minnesota and Michigan dismissed similar complaints.
“We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” wrote the Justices. “We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.”
In a statement, the Trump campaign called the ruling "a completely flawed decision" and said it would swiftly file an appeal to the United States Supreme Court.
- In 2000, Clarence Thomas was deep in debt, complained about not having enough money, and talked about resigning from the Supreme Court. Then the lavish gifts began to flow.www.propublica.org Clarence Thomas’ Private Complaints About Money Sparked Fears He Would Resign
Interviews and newly unearthed documents reveal that Thomas, facing financial strain, privately pushed for a higher salary and to allow Supreme Court justices to take speaking fees.
[A]round 2000, chatter that Thomas was dissatisfied about money circulated through conservative legal circles and on Capitol Hill, according to interviews with prominent attorneys, former members of Congress and Thomas’ friends. “It was clear he was unhappy with his financial situation and his salary,” one friend said.
...
During his second decade on the court, Thomas’ financial situation appears to have markedly improved. In 2003, he received the first payments of a $1.5 million advance for his memoir, a record-breaking sum for justices at the time. Ginni Thomas, who had been a congressional staffer, was by then working at the Heritage Foundation and was paid a salary in the low six figures.
Thomas also received dozens of expensive gifts throughout the 2000s, sometimes coming from people he’d met only shortly before. Thomas met Earl Dixon, the owner of a Florida pest control company, while getting his RV serviced outside Tampa in 2001, according to the Thomas biography “Supreme Discomfort.” The next year, Dixon gave Thomas $5,000 to put toward his grandnephew’s tuition. Thomas reported the payment in his annual disclosure filing.
Larger gifts went undisclosed. Crow paid for two years of private high school, which tuition rates indicate would’ve cost roughly $100,000. In 2008, another wealthy friend forgave “a substantial amount, or even all” of the principal on the loan Thomas had used to buy the quarter-million dollar RV, according to a recent Senate inquiry prompted by The New York Times’ reporting. Much of the Thomases’ leisure time was also paid for by a small set of billionaire businessmen, who brought the justice and his family on free vacations around the world. (Thomas has said he did not need to disclose the gifts of travel and his lawyer has disputed the Senate findings about the RV.)
By 2019, the justices’ pay hadn’t changed beyond keeping up with inflation. But Thomas’ views had apparently transformed from two decades before. That June, during a public appearance, Thomas was asked about salaries at the court. “Oh goodness, I think it’s plenty,” Thomas responded. “My wife and I are doing fine. We don’t live extravagantly, but we are fine.”
A few weeks later, Thomas boarded Crow’s private jet to head to Indonesia. He and his wife were off on vacation, an island cruise on Crow’s 162-foot yacht.
- New York’s Rich Condo Buyers Risk Losing Secrecy Cloak of LLCsnews.bloomberglaw.com New York’s Rich Condo Buyers Risk Losing Secrecy Cloak of LLCs
Manhattan’s billionaire condo buyers would lose the ability to keep their identities secret in real estate deals if a measure before Governor Kathy Hochul becomes law.
Manhattan’s billionaire condo buyers would lose the ability to keep their identities secret in real estate deals if a measure before Governor Kathy Hochul becomes law.
Limited liability companies have been listed in public records as the buyers of countless New York luxury apartments — almost all of the deals legitimate. But it’s also well-documented that the secrecy of LLCs makes them useful in concealing financial crimes. By the end of next week, Hochul must sign or veto a bill that would create a public database of shell companies, unmasking their rich, famous and sometimes criminal owners.
Advocates argue the measure would root out so-called bad actors who hide behind LLCs to launder money — such as financier Jho Low, whose penthouse at Manhattan’s Time Warner Center was seized in a US government corruption probe. But opponents say it’s a violation of owners’ privacy, and an unnecessary move that would duplicate a similar federal law taking effect on Jan. 1.
- The Fifth Circuit Will Soon Be the New NLRBonlabor.org The Fifth Circuit Will Soon Be the New NLRB ✦ OnLabor
Andrew Strom on the Fifth Circuit's continued disregard for the NLRB's rulings.
- You Can Now Film in NYPD Precincts, Thanks to This YouTuberhellgatenyc.com You Can Now Film in NYPD Precincts, Thanks to This YouTuber - Hell Gate
SeanPaul Reyes won a temporary injunction in federal court last Thursday. The very next day, he was livestreaming in the 75th Precinct with a copy of the court order in his hand.
- Trump Is Going Through the Motions to Dismiss until He Resumes the Presidencywww.emptywheel.net Trump Is Going Through the Motions to Dismiss until He Resumes the Presidency - emptywheel
There are big gaps in the Motions to Dismiss that Trump submitted this week. They may suggest where his lawyers think his defense is weakest.
- Trump’s Lawyers Should Be Laughed Out of Courtwww.thenation.com Trump’s Lawyers Should Be Laughed Out of Court
The latest attempt by the former president’s legal team to get his election subversion case dismissed is a case study in desperate legal maneuvering.
- We Don’t Talk About Leonard: The Man Behind the Right’s Supreme Court Supermajoritywww.propublica.org We Don’t Talk About Leonard: The Man Behind the Right’s Supreme Court Supermajority
The inside story of how Leonard Leo built a machine that remade the American legal system — and what he plans to do next.
- NAL Question about superseding indictments.
I am a bit of a law junkie, but not a lawyer by any means. With the Bob Menendez superseding indictment today an old question came up. I feel like I should know this but...
Does a superseding indictment have to be a more "serious" charge? (Sorry for the terminology) this may be a bad example but if someone had already been charged with burglary could a superseding indictment then be unlawful entry?
- A Deep Dive Into The NY Court's Ruling That Trump Is a Fraudsterwww.dailykos.com A Deep Dive Into The NY Court's Ruling That Trump Is Fraudster
After a years long investigation New York Attorney General Letitia James sued Donald Trump, various members of his family, the Trump Organization, and and various other Trump owned business organizations alleging a pervasive pattern of business fraud....
- NLRB Complaint Calls a Noncompete Agreement an Unfair Labor Practiceprospect.org NLRB Complaint Calls a Noncompete Agreement an Unfair Labor Practice
The complaint against an Ohio spa follows General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo’s memo seeking these kinds of cases.