Correspondent
Federal courthouse correspondent, covers civil rights, employment discrimination, housing rights, and Second Amendment disputes.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the denial of a writ of coram nobis, holding that the appellant failed to prove fundamental error or ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his guilty plea. The court further ruled that the appellant waited too long to challenge the conviction, offering no valid reason for the three-decade delay.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the District Court's denial of broad post-judgment discovery and equitable accounting requests, finding no abuse of discretion. The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate significant questions regarding the defendant's compliance with a long-standing ERISA injunction.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of a pro se employment discrimination complaint. The court held that any error in failing to consider an amended complaint was harmless because the amendment would have been futile.
The Supreme Court held that congressional candidates possess Article III standing to challenge state election counting rules based on a concrete interest in the integrity of the electoral process. The Court reasoned that candidates suffer a particularized reputational injury when unlawful procedures undermine public confidence in election results, regardless of whether the rules alter the election outcome.
The Supreme Court clarified that the Fourth Amendment permits warrantless home entries for emergency aid when officers have an objectively reasonable basis to believe someone needs help, rejecting a probable cause requirement. The Court affirmed a conviction for assaulting an officer after police entered a home to prevent a suspected suicide based on a 911 call and visible evidence.
The Supreme Court held that the New Jersey Transit Corporation is not an arm of the State entitled to sovereign immunity. The Court ruled that despite its public functions and state control, NJ Transit's corporate structure and independent liability shield it from the State's immunity.
The First Circuit affirmed summary judgment for a doctor and hospital, ruling that a mother failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove disability discrimination or negligent infliction of emotional distress. The court held that the plaintiff could not establish that the defendants' actions were motivated by discriminatory intent rather than legitimate medical concerns regarding suspected child abuse.
The Eighth Circuit held that the Prison Litigation Reform Act's attorney fee cap applies to § 1983 claims brought by parolees challenging due process violations in revocation proceedings. The court reasoned that detained parolees qualify as prisoners under the statute, thereby rejecting the district court's contrary interpretation.
The Fifth Circuit remanded this case to clarify the specific relief granted in a district court judgment regarding a Takings Clause violation. The appellate court found the lower court's November ruling ambiguous about whether it provided operative relief to the plaintiff.
The Fifth Circuit remanded the case to the district court to clarify whether a declaratory judgment was granted in a Takings Clause dispute. The appellate court held that the original judgment failed to specify the remedies awarded, creating ambiguity about the finality of the order.
