First Amendment - Anti-SLAPP - California Constitution - grpub.net

First Amendment


Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/grpubne/public_html/rss/index.php on line 76

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/grpubne/public_html/rss/index.php on line 76
ShareIf a person attempts to commit a robbery but does not succeed, is the attempt alone a “crime of violence”? On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will delve into that question in United States v. Taylor, the latest in a string of cases asking the justices to narrow federal definitions of violent crimes. In 2003, Justin Eugene Taylor sold marijuana in Richmond, Virginia. He and an accomplice planned to steal money from Martin Silvester, a prospective buyer. After meeting Silvester in an alley, the accomplice pulled out a semiautomatic pistol and tried to take Silvester’s cash while Taylor waited nearby in a getaway car. Silvester resisted, and the accomplice fatally shot him. Taylor and the accomplice fled the scene, having failed to collect Silvester’s money. Six years later, the federal government prosecuted Taylor. He was convicted under a plea agreement and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Taylor now challenges part of that conviction and seeks a reduced…
The Week That Will Be - December 6, 2021 - Emily Dai
Event Announcements (More details on the Events Calendar) Tuesday, Dec. 7, 2021, at 8:30 a.m.: The Center for Strategic & International Affairs (CSIS) will host an event examining the Global Methane Pledge from the COP26 Conference. Nikos Tsafors, Schlesinger Chair at CSIS, will host Mark Brownstein, senior vice president of energy at the Environmental Defense Fund. Tuesday, Dec. 7, 2021, at 9:30 a.m.: The House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on National Security will hold a hearing examining the worldwide threat of al-Qaeda, the Islamic State and other foreign terrorist organizations. The committee will hear testimony from Milancy Harris, deputy assistant secretary of defense for special operations and combatting terrorism, and Christopher Landberg, acting principle deputy coordinator for counterterrorism at the State Department. Tuesday, Dec. 7, 2021, at 9:30 a.m.: The Senate Finance Subcommittee on Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Growth will hold hearings to…
["The undersigned finds that despite Mr. Caggiano's belief that his post makes an important point [criticizing] Bernie Sanders, the undersigned finds that it can be logically read to be patently offensive, discriminatory, and degrading to women."] In Duval County School Board v. Caggiano, decided Nov. 15, 2021, a Florida Division of Administrative Hearings ALJ recommended discipline—three-day suspension without pay and requirement "to complete a course in Culture Diversity"—for a high school math teacher based on two Facebook posts. The posts were on the teacher's personal page; the page mentioned the teacher's employment in the Duval County schools, like many Facebook pages mention a person's employment. The two posts that the judge said justified discipline were: (a) A repost from a Facebook entity called "Messenger of Liberty," which states: "My son is taking part in a social experiment. He has to wear a…
Vanderbilt University Law Professor to Appear on ‘Jeopardy!’: Clue: He’s an expert on First Amendment law and technology policy who will compete on television’s most popular quiz show on Dec. 6. Answer: Who is Gautam Hans, associate clinical professor of law? Hans is scheduled to appear on Jeopardy! for the...
First Amendment sign challenge fails against Village of Scarsdale - December 6, 2021 - Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
You can challenge a village or town ordinance under the First Amendment if it unduly restricts political signage or vests too much discretion in local officials in determining which signage to allow or disallow. This case fails because the sign law was clear and did not allow the locals to censor political signage.The case is Berg v. Village of Scarsdale, issued on December 3. In the district court, plaintiff actually prevailed on one of his claims, but lost the rest. In the Court of Appeals, that victory is taken away and plaintiff loses the entire case. The decision first considers whether the sign law was too vague under the First Amendment. If that were the case, plaintiff would win, as vagueness dissuades people from posting political or other noncommercial signs and also allows the local yokels to pull down signs based on an unclear statute. But this law is actually quite clear, the Court of Appeals (Pooler, Bianco and Komitee [D.J.]) says, in prohibiting signage in…
Professor Stephen Bainbridge, a leading corporate law scholar whose many publications are cited in opinions of Delaware’s Court of Chancery and Supreme Court, recently provided learned commentary about the latest guidance by the SEC on Rule 14a-8 regarding shareholder proposals. The good professor provides citations and links to other commentary that suggests that this guidance, which reverses the published positions of the SEC over the last four years, now positions the SEC as engaging in a “wholesale abandonment of any assessment of relevance of a proposal to a company’s business (as compared to relevance to society at large.).” Among other issues raised by the SEC arguably playing a new role akin to a SJW, Professor Bainbridge cites to a law review article by fellow corporate law titans who have explained why shareholders have a “First Amendment interest in not being forced to be associated with political speech that they do not support.”…

Anti-SLAPP


Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/grpubne/public_html/rss/index.php on line 76

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/grpubne/public_html/rss/index.php on line 76
Law and Media Round Up – 6 December 2021 - December 5, 2021 - INFORRM
The Duchess of Sussex has won the latest round of her privacy and copyright claim against the Mail on Sunday, with a unanimous judgment of the Court of Appeal upholding the decision of the High Court ([2021] EWCA Civ 1810). The matter now returns to the High Court for compensation to be determined. The Duchess is seeking “accounts for profits,” which would mean compensating on the basis of how much Associated Newspapers benefited from its law-breaking. The Mail on Sunday will now have to publish prominently on its front page three statements acknowledging that it infringed the Duchess’ copyright, as ordered by the court at first instance.  Associated Newspapers is said to be considering an application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. 5RB has a summary here. Brian Cathcart produced a summary of the judgement for Inforrm here and the Mail’s reaction here and here. Simon Carne questions why the Mail wants its day in court here. The Press…
"The [Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation] law allows defendants to seek a quick dismissal of the case, if they can prove the lawsuits against them have no 'substantial basis in fact and law.' In such cases, the people who brought the suit have to pay the defendant’s legal fees.... Her lawsuit says that Trump defamed her by denying her allegations that he assaulted her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s. In the filing, Trump said that Carroll’s sole purpose in filing the suit was to retaliate for truthful comments, 'maliciously inhibiting his free exercise of speech.'... Some experts said Trump’s motion ran counter to the intention of New York’s law. 'The spirit of anti-SLAPP laws are to prevent powerful people from bullying the powerless,' said Evan Mascagni of the Public Participation Project, a national group that advocates for anti-SLAPP laws. 'Was an anti-SLAPP law designed to…
Lawfare in the orphan drug space - November 19, 2021 - Rebecca Tushnet
Neurelis, Inc. v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2021 WL 5355958, D077984, D078186 (Ct. App. Nov. 17, 2021) The parties compete in developing means to administer diazepam, a drug used to treat acute repetitive seizures (ARS). “Neurelis was further along in the development process than Aquestive. Thus, according to Neurelis, Aquestive engaged in a ‘multi-year, anticompetitive campaign to derail the Food and Drug Administration’ (FDA) from approving Neurelis’s new drug.” Neurelis sued Aquestive for defamation, malicious prosecution, and violation of the UCL, triggering an anti-SLAPP motion. The superior court granted the anti-SLAPP motion as to the defamation claim but not the other two causes of action. The court of appeals splits the baby differently: at least some of the conduct giving rise to the defamation (and UCL) action was covered by the commercial speech exception to the anti-SLAPP statute. But Aquestive’s…
Columbia Global Freedom of Expression seeks to contribute to the development of an integrated and progressive jurisprudence and understanding on freedom of expression and information around the world.  It maintains an extensive database of international case law. This is its newsletter dealing with recent developments  in the field. Community Highlights and Recent News ● ONLINE EVENT SAVE THE DATE: “The Recent Case of Jineth Bedoya Lima vs. Colombia: The Emblematic Case of International Law in the Fight Against Impunity for Crimes Against Female Journalists & its Global Impact.” Join Columbia Global Freedom of Expression on Monday, November 29 from 1:00-2:00 PM (ET) for an important discussion on the case of Jineth Bedoya vs. Colombia and the recent sentencing of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Speakers include Catalina Botero-Marino, Columbia Global Freedom of Expression; Jineth Bedoya Lima,…
Anti-vaxxer RFK Jr.’s feelings were hurt when it was asserted that the audience at a rally in Germany at which he spoke, run by a group called Querdenken, weren’t just “very fine people,” but neo-Nazis. It was fairly widely reported, including the usual suspects like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. The rally and his speech were widely covered in the mainstream media, which reported that his rally was heavily attended by neo-Nazis  and that a variety of antisemitic and neo-Nazi factions  had been involved in organizing the event. Kennedy was infuriated by this coverage of the audience to whom he had become connected by speaking at the rally.  His position is that any neo-Nazis were at some other rally on the same day, and that Querdenken is a fine group unsullied by neo-Nazi or anti-Semitic ties. Our expert witness says otherwise. There was also a post about it in the left-wing Daily Kos…
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) is a type of litigation (or threat of litigation) that are used, as the name suggests, strategically by claimants against organisations and individuals – including NGOs, activists, academics, whistleblowers, and journalists – to shut down free speech. Consequently, they pose a threat to democracy, that as members of society we should all be concerned about. This threat to our public sphere is animated by the increasing number of high-profile examples of SLAPP used against journalists from across Europe. For instance, at the time of her assassination, the Maltese investigative journalist, Daphne Caruana Galizia, was facing 47 civil and criminal libel suits, filed in various jurisdictions, from Malta, to the UK and the US. And, in Poland, since the Law and Justice (PiS) party came to power in 2015, the country’s second-largest daily newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza has received over 55 legal threats as a result of…

California Constitution


Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/grpubne/public_html/rss/index.php on line 76

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/grpubne/public_html/rss/index.php on line 76
Supreme Court UPDATE - December 3, 2021 - freedom0512
The Supreme Court Should Overturn Roe v. WadeWhy No One Is Surprised Hillary Clinton’s Influence-Peddling Foundation Collapsed Documents Reveal Bill Clinton’s Trip with Ghislaine MaxwellTRIAL UPDATE: Judicial Watch Lawyers in Court Trial against California’s Gender Quotas for Corporate BoardsJudicial Watch Seeks to Depose Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot about Her Racist Interview PolicyJudicial Watch Sues on Behalf of Massachusetts Teacher Fired for Opposing Critical Race Theory   The Supreme Court Should Overturn Roe v. Wade The rule of law and our constitutional system was undermined by the Roe v. Wade decision that led to the legalization of abortion on demand.  In this regard, Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae brief in the Supreme Court in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade. Our brief in support of the constitutionality of Mississippi’s Gestational Age Act argues that states have the right under the Constitution to…
Our readers have requested that we post the full text of the California e bike law that was signed into law in October 2015 that governs the use of e bike on California roadways and some bike paths. Again please check individual vehicle code sections to insure that changes have not been made since this bill was issued in October 2015. Assembly Bill No. 1096 An act to amend Sections 406, 12804.9, 21113, 21207.5, and 24016 of, and to add Sections 312.5 and 21213 to, the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles. [ Approved by Governor  October 07, 2015. Filed with Secretary of State  October 07, 2015. ] LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 1096, Chiu. Vehicles: electric bicycles. Existing law defines a “motorized bicycle” or a “moped” as a 2-wheeled or 3-wheeled device having fully operative pedals for propulsion by human power, or having no pedals if powered solely by electrical energy, and an automatic transmission and motor, as specified. Existing…
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced a California Superior Court trial for December 1 in a taxpayer lawsuit challenging constitutionality of California’s gender quotas for corporate boards of directors (Robin Crest et al. v. Alex Padilla (No.19STCV27561)). The trial is expected to last three weeks and will take place in a Los Angeles courtroom Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court in 2019, on behalf of California taxpayers, Robin Crest, Earl De Vries and Judy De Vries.  The lawsuit challenges a 2018 law, known as Senate Bill 826, which requires every publicly held corporation headquartered in California to have at least one director “who self-identifies her gender as a woman” on its board of directors by December 31, 2019. The law also requires corporations to have up to three such persons on their boards by December 31, 2021, depending on the size of the board. Judicial Watch argues that…
Over the last several years, virtually all levels of government have increasingly recognized the critical link between building a diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace and effectively meeting the needs of the communities they serve—in particular, historically underserved and marginalized communities. At the federal level, the Biden Administration has issued several Executive Orders that recognize the need for a systemic approach to identifying and addressing policies and programs “that serve as barriers to equal opportunity.”  Most recently, in June 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14035, which in part, directs the Office of Personnel Management (in coordination with several federal commissions and executive councils and departments) to develop a federal Government-wide Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) Initiative and Strategic Plan.  The DEIA plan must identify strategies to advance equitable policies and…
This is a lawsuit against Nike and its service provider (FullStory), which provides Nike with “session replay” functionality for its website. FullStory’s software allows Nike to capture information regarding website visitors: (1) mouse clicks, (2) keystrokes, (3) payment card information, (4) IP address, (5) location, and (6) browser type and OS. On behalf of a putative class, the plaintiffs asserted privacy claims—including for wiretapping—under California law. The court dismisses FullStory, a Georgia-based corporation, for lack of personal jurisdiction. It dismisses all but one of the claims against Nike. As an initial matter, the court says that Nike’s privacy policy does not undermine plaintiff’s claims. The operative policy was not fully authenticated or property presented to the court, and the court declines to consider it. CIPA Claim: There’s a distinction between the “contents” of a communication (which trigger…
“Judicial Watch is taking a stand against this crazed critical theory that is resulting in quota requirements in the state of California.” When it comes to gender quotas, there really is no limit. Judicial Watch is now in court fighting a California state law “requiring boards of directors to have a certain number of women,” a policy which Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton states is “prohibited by the federal constitution but more specifically by the California Constitution.” As Fitton adds in the Judicial Watch Weekly Update, “the Left doesn’t care, they want to upend decades of law prohibiting discrimination to advance … their critical theory agenda.” “When you hear the Left say they’re against sex discrimination, that’s not true,” Fitton states. “They’re supporting discrimination in this law.” Fitton says the California quota “shows you the insanity” of…