“Hang up the phone and come by my office now so we can chat.” Whenever I heard those words in that familiar German-inflected low register, I knew that it was time for a quick ride down the elevator at The Museum of Television & Radio in New York, then a brisk walk from there on 52nd Street to meet Henry Kissinger a few blocks away at his Park Avenue office. Dr. Kissinger was a close friend of the museum’s founder, William S. Paley, the legendary chairman and CEO of CBS. He was an original member of its Board of Trustees, and remained involved in that capacity until his recent death at 100 years old. Kissinger was not just another name on the illustrious roster that graced our letterhead, either;  after all, he didn’t need to be there to burnish his resume. Quite surprisingly, during my tenure there, he was unusually engaged, always available to me whenever I called with a specific issue where he could open some doors or serve as a…

ShareThe Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. A short explanation of relists is available here. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor – the first woman ever appointed to the Supreme Court – died at age 93 on Dec. 1. Because of her death, the Supreme Court cancelled that day’s conference, and rescheduled all 214 of the petitions and applications distributed for that day to be considered at this week’s conference. The court has its work cut out for it: it now has 290 petitions and applications to be considered this week. The Supreme Court typically does not relist cases until the Monday (or first weekday) before that week’s conference. After this Friday, the court does not have a regular conference scheduled until Jan. 5. So if things go as expected, it will be nearly a month until you hear from me again. That’s all for now. Until next time, stay safe! Returning…

Signup to receive the Early Edition in your inbox here. A curated weekday guide to major news and developments over the past 24 hours. Here’s today’s news ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR The Israeli military (IDF) said yesterday its ground operation had its “most intense day,” as Israel’s offensive continues into all of Gaza. IDF Chief of the General Staff Lieutenant General Herzi  Halevi said it was a “third phase” that targeted what he said were Hamas strongholds in southern Gaza. Meanwhile, at a briefing, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the only way to end the war is to use “overwhelming force.” NBC News reports. Netanyahu called yesterday on the international community to “stand with Israel,” but added that “Gaza must be demilitarized, for Gaza to be demilitarized there is only one force that can take care of this demilitarization and that force is Israel’s steering army. No…

From Friday's decision by Magistrate Judge Virginia DeMarchi in Nguyen v. U.S. (N.D. Cal.): Ms. Nguyen alleges that after hearing about the Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians on October 7, 2023, she did "some research" on the internet and "learned that Israel is an apartheid government" and that "the U.S. government … has been supporting this apartheid government of Israel by sending them at least $3 billions [sic] of military aid each year." She claims that U.S. aid to Israel violates the "Preamble of the Declaration of Independence," the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986, and the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Ms. Nguyen requests "$5 trillion[ ] if a WWIII erupts; however since America is in debt of $31 trillion[ ], I'll take a letter of apology [and end of U.S. aid to Israel] or $25,000 for turning in this lawsuit…. A court may authorize the commencement of a…

[Episode 484 of the Cyberlaw Podcast] In this episode, Paul Stephan lays out the reasoning behind U.S. District Judge Donald W. Molloy's decision enjoining Montana's ban on TikTok. There are some plausible reasons for such an injunction, and the court adopts them. There are also less plausible and redundant grounds for an injunction, and the court adopts those as well. Asked to predict the future course of the litigation, Paul demurs. It will all depend, he thinks, on the Supreme Court's effort to sort out social media and the first amendment in the upcoming term. In the meantime, watch for bouncing rubble in the District of Montana courthouse. (Grudging credit for the graphics goes to Bing's Image Creator, which refused to accept the prompt until I said the rubble was bouncing because of a gas explosion and not a bomb. Way to discredit trust and safety, Bing!) Jane Bambauer and Paul also help me make sense of the litigation between Meta and the FTC over…

From State v. Gardiner, decided Wednesday by the Oregon Court of Appeals (Judge Jacqueline Kamins, joined by Judges Douglas Tookey and James Egan): A woman reported that a man knocked on her door, stabbed her in the face, and ran away. Hillsboro Police Officers and medical and fire department personnel responded to that call. In order to find the assailant, the officers deployed a K-9-unit tracking dog. Defendant approached the area on foot and began filming. At one point, while defendant was present, a bicyclist rode through the area after being told to wait 30 seconds by an officer. Defendant had some interactions with officers, and each of them told him to stay clear of the "dog track." {According to officer testimony, the police dog is "trained for [tracking] fresh human odor" through footprints or air scent. Each dog track is never "exactly the same" because factors like weather temperature and wind direction affect a track. During a track,…

From Anderson v. Senthilnathan (Colo. Ct. App.), decided Sept. 28, in an opinion by Judge Katharine Lum, joined by Judges Jerry Jones and Steve Bernard: At various times in 2021, while Anderson served as an elected Director on the Board of Education for Denver Public Schools (DPS), [Defendants] BLM [Black Lives Matter 5280, a chapter of the national Black Lives Matter] and [BLM co-founder] Brown, Brooks-Fleming, and Senthilnathan published separate statements alleging that Anderson had sexually assaulted one or more people. Each of the defendants was familiar with Anderson through participation in community politics. An investigation [by ILG Legal Services] commissioned by DPS was unable to substantiate the allegations of sexual assault raised by Brooks-Fleming and by a third party who had allegedly reported her assault to BLM. The results of the investigation were released before Senthilnathan made her statements. Anderson sued for defamation and related claims, and the court…

Nevada, like California, has enacted an anti-SLAPP law that is intended to protect citizens' First Amendment rights to petition the government for redress of grievances and to free speech by limiting the chilling effect of civil actions that are based on the valid exercise of those rights in connection with an issue of public concern (SLAPP actions).  1997 Nev. Stat., ch. 387, at 1363.   To achieve this objective, Nevada's law permits a defendants to file a special motion to dismiss to obtain an early and expeditious resolution of a meritless claim for relief that is based on protected activity, as defined in NRS 41.637.  NRS 41.650 & NRS 41.660.   Application of Nevada's statute requires a court to apply a two-prong analysis.  Under the first prong, the court "[d]etermine whether the moving party (i.e., the defendant) has established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the claim[s are] based upon a good faith…

[under California's "anti-SLAPP" statute (which allows for prompt dismissal of claims brought based on certain kinds of speech).] From Doe v. Ledor, decided today by the California Court of Appeal, in an opinion by Justice Tracie Brown, joined by Justice Jon Streeter and Judge Joni Hiramoto: Plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging that his ex-girlfriend and her friends, including defendant and appellant Gina Ledor, embarked upon a "vengeful smear campaign" to harass and defame him after his senior year of high school. Pertinent to this appeal, in the summer of 2020, Gina Ledor sent emails to school officials at Dartmouth College, stating essentially that plaintiff had committed voter fraud to win an election for student body president at Berkeley High School (BHS) and providing links to what she represented to be articles and a podcast about the incident. She wrote that she was sharing the information so that Dartmouth would be "truly aware of whom you…

As we easily predicted, the Center for Countering Digital Hate filed a 12(b)(6) motion against the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. Elon sued CCDH a while back because CCDH complained about hate speech on X. Our next prediction...

On 10 November 2023, Nicklin J dismissed Associated Newspaper Ltd’s (ANL) application for summary judgement against seven claimants bringing misuse of private information proceedings against the publisher of The Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday, and the MailOnline website, Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2023] EWHC 2789 (KB). Nicklin J concluded “without difficulty” that each claimant had a real prospect of overcoming any limitation defence relied upon by the publisher. The seven claimants bringing proceedings are: Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon OBE; Elizabeth Hurley; Sir Elton John CH CBE; David Furnish; Sir Simon Hughes; Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex; and Sadie Frost Law. ANL’s restriction order application succeeded on one of the grounds advanced, namely that documents used by the claimants were subject to a Leveson Inquiry restriction order imposed in November 2012. Temporary reporting restrictions sought by ANL…

There is much discussion regarding SLAPPs in the media law world. Last week the newly formed Society of Media Lawyers wrote to the President of the Law Society asking to see the evidence on which it was relying for its general support for anti-SLAPP measurea. The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 received Royal Assent on 26 October 2023 including at sections 194 and 195 the first provisions in UK law (which are not yet in force) expressly to deal with so called “strategic litigation against public participation” (or “SLAPPs”).  There was an Inforrm post about this.  And also last week, a new book was published, “Buying Silence: How oligarchs, corporations and plutocrats use the law to gag their critics”, setting out veteran media lawyer David Hooper’s analysis of the 50-year history of “SLAPP” actions and proposals for change. Most recently, a new proposal as to how to deal with the “SLAPP…

People v. Trammel (Cal. Ct. App., Nov. 21, 2023, No. A166756) 2023 WL 8060573, at *1 Summary: Trammel challenged the trial court’s sentence of an aggregate 12-year prison term for numerous convictions arising out of his violent relationship with his former girlfriend. The Court of Appeal agreed with Trammel that the trial court erroneously failed to stay the punishment for two convictions pursuant to Penal Code section 654 and remanded the matter for a full resentencing. (People v. Trammel (June 30, 2022, A161381) 2022 WL 2353314 [nonpub. opn.]. On remand, the trial court corrected its section 654 errors, resentencing Trammel to a total prison term of 12 years, four months. In this second appeal, Trammel argues that his new sentence violates the  prohibition against double jeopardy set forth in Article I, section 13 of the California Constitution. The Court of Appeal agreed and remanded to correct this error and an  error with respect to custody credits.…

 Judge VanDyke has a point here.The question is whether the Cal Expo fairgrounds in Sacramento are a public forum sufficient to allow people to distribute First Amendment literature therein. In this particular case, the plaintiff bought a ticket to the Hmong New Year Festival, started distributing literature, got ejected, and then sued.Right or wrong, it's fairly clear that there's no right under federal law to distribute literature in a privately owned forum. Here, the fairgrounds were rented by a private party for the festival, so the federal claim doesn't succeed.But as you may know, California has the Pruneyard doctrine, which is broader than federal law and allows access to private properties (e.g., shopping malls) under California's Free Speech Clause. That's plaintiff's much better argument.The majority nonetheless rejects it, holding that, as a matter of California constitutional law, the Free Speech Clause doesn't apply to…

California's anti-SLAPP statute provides that a special motion to strike may be filed against "[a] cause of action against a person arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person’s right of petition or free speech under the United States Constitution or the California Constitution in connection with a public issue . . .".  Cal Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16 ("SLAPP" is an initialization of strategic lawsuits against public participation.)  Mary's Kitchen v. City of Orange, Cal. Ct. Appeal Case No. G061693 (Oct. 25, 2023) involved a dispute over a city's termination of a license agreement.  The license was terminated by the City Manager and was allegedly later discussed at a closed session of the city council at which anticipated litigation was discussed. When the plaintiff sued, the city filed an anti-SLAPP motion premised on the argument "no action actually took place at the council…

People v. Manzo (Cal. Ct. App., Oct. 17, 2023, No. E079991) 2023 WL 6826849, at *1  Summary:The Riverside County District Attorney appealed the trial court’s dismissal of three felony charges against Manzo due to evidence lost during the prosecution’s five-year delay in prosecuting the case after filing charges against defendant. Because there is no evidence that the loss of evidence prejudiced defendant, the Court of Appeal the order dismissing the complaint. Facts: After Manzo completed a five year prison sentence in a San Bernardino robbery case, he was arrested and arraigned on outstanding charges in Riverside County in April 2022. Manzo moved to dismiss the charges on the ground that the delay in prosecuting him violated his due process rights under article I, section 15 of the California Constitution. Manzo claimed that the delay between the filing of charges against him and his arraignment prejudiced him for several reasons, including loss of the video…

People v. Simmons (Cal. Ct. App., Oct. 12, 2023, No. 2D CRIM. B309921) 2023 WL 6631578, at *1 Summary: The Racial Justice Act (RJA) aims to eliminate racism from criminal trials in California. The Court of Appeal held that  the RJA does not violate article VI, section 13 of the California Constitution. The dissent argued  that the RJA violates article VI because section 13 states that it is the province of the court to decide whether an error results in a miscarriage of justice. Simmons appealed his conviction, by jury, of the attempted willful, premeditated, and deliberate murder of Danny Graves (Pen. Code, §§ 187, 664)1 and fleeing a pursuing peace officer’s motor vehicle while driving recklessly. (Veh. Code, § 2800.2.) The jury further found he personally used a handgun in committing the attempted murder. (§ 12022.53, subds. (b), (c).) The trial court sentenced appellant to life in prison plus a 20-year enhancement term for the firearm use…

The Daily Journal has honored Renne Public Law Group (RPLG) Partner Ryan McGinley-Stempel among its “Top 40 Under 40” for 2023, recognizing his ability to help public agencies navigate complex legal obstacles. “I’m deeply honored and humbled to be recognized by the Daily Journal along with so many talented and impressive advocates,” said Ryan. “It’s really a testament to the cutting-edge work Renne Public Law Group is doing on behalf of public agencies and the tireless work and support of my colleagues.” Certified by the State Bar of California as a Specialist in Appellate Law and the head of RPLG’s Writs & Appeals Practice, Ryan has recently helped clients obtain review from the California Supreme Court in cases involving public employment and property assessments. In addition to his work before the California Supreme Court, Ryan has represented public agencies in state and federal proceedings involving the Federal and…