Correspondent
Federal courthouse correspondent, covers civil rights, employment discrimination, housing rights, and Second Amendment disputes.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the conviction of a convicted felon for possessing a firearm and ammunition. The court rejected challenges regarding jury composition, peremptory strikes, evidence sufficiency, and the constitutionality of the federal felon-in-possession statute.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a Title VII employment discrimination lawsuit filed by former employees. The court held that the American Pipe tolling rule does not extend the statute of limitations for individual claims through the pendency of an appeal.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se complaint filed by an inmate challenging the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles denial of mandatory supervision. The court held that the Board satisfied due process requirements and did not act arbitrarily in denying release.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a First Amendment challenge to Ohio license plate guidelines, ruling the claims were time-barred. The court held that repeated requests for the same plate did not restart the statute of limitations.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in a civil rights action arising from a fatal officer-involved shooting. The court held that the police officers were entitled to qualified immunity and that the plaintiffs failed to develop their municipal liability claims.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction against a threatened state prosecution, holding that while the plaintiff's speech was likely protected, he failed to demonstrate irreparable harm because the prosecution targeted past speech and state courts offered adequate defenses.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the Secretary of Homeland Security in a disability discrimination suit brought by a federal employee. The court held that the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies and could not prove he was a qualified individual with a disability under the Rehabilitation Act.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court order extending a consent decree by one hundred eighteen days due to substantial noncompliance by immigration officials. The court reversed in part the lower court's order releasing hundreds of potential class members, holding that the government's mandatory detention authority under Section twelve hundred twenty-five does not apply to noncitizens unlawfully present within the United States.
The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's denial of a preliminary injunction because the lower court applied an incorrect legal standard. The appellate court clarified that the request was for a prohibitory injunction, not a mandatory one, requiring a different burden of proof.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction sought by a plaintiff under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The panel held that the district court properly applied the legal standard and found the requested accommodation would hinder treatment and fundamentally alter the state hospital's services.
