NewsHere’s the domestic legal news we covered this week:
The court had previously blocked [JURIST report] two lower court rulings that mandated the redrawing of Texas’ congressional and state legislative [dockets] districts.
The inmates argue they can only be kept at Guantánamo if their individual circumstances show that they would return to the battlefield.
Judge Kelly Timothy wrote in the 46-page decision that, “[t]he court finds that English is not likely to succeed on the merits of her claims, nor is she likely to suffer irreparable harm absent the injunctive relief sought.” The decision further reasoned that removing Mulvaney through a preliminary injunction would fail to “pay particular regard for the public consequences” and potential chaos that such an action could bring to the agency and the public’s expectations for the CFPB.
English’s motion for injunction [text] claimed that President Donald Trump’s interim appointment of Mulvaney while a permanent director is nominated and approved by the Senate, violated the succession plan for agency directors established in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act [text, PDF], and the Appointments Clause [art.
Canada alleges [press release] that the challenged laws, regulations and measures are inconsistent with US obligations under the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement [text], the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement), the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1994 (GATT) [PDFs] and the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) [text].
Specifically, Canada challenges: 1) the liquidation of final anti-dumping and countervailing duties in excess of WTO-consistent rates; 2) the failure to refund cash deposits collected in excess of WTO-consistent rates; 3) retroactive provisional anti-dumping and countervailing duties following preliminary affirmative critical circumstances determinations; 4) the treatment of export controls such as export levies, export quotas, export restraints and export bans as financial contributions leading to additional improper investigations and/or countervailing duties; 5) the improper calculation of benefit in countervailing duty proceedings involving the provision of goods for less than adequate remuneration; 6) the practice of closing the evidentiary record before the preliminary determination thereby restricting interested parties from submitting factual information or other evidence, which would allow them to fully defend their interests in anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations; and 7) the inherent institutional bias present in the US International Trade Commission tie-vote provision leading to biased findings of injury or threat to injury to US industries that are inconsistent with Article X:3(a) of the GATT.
The case was brought by consolidated plaintiffs Common Cause and the League of Women Voters of North Carolina [advocacy websites], among others, who argued that the districts constitute a partisan gerrymander in violation of the First Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and Article I, Sections 2 and 4 of the Constitution.
In September the Trump administration announced plans to end [JURIST report] the DACA program, which was subsequently challenged by state attorneys general and individuals [JURIST reports].
Alsup ruled that although new applications for Dreamer status did not have to be processed, the program must continue to renew applications from those previously covered until lawsuits regarding those affected are resolved, finding that the plaintiffs’ arguments have merit.
The first suit [complaint] names BuzzFeed along with four staffers as defendants for the publication of the materials and was filed in the New York Supreme Court [official website], while the second [complaint] was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York [official website] against Fusion GPS [official website], its parent company and co-founder Glenn Simpson for compiling the allegedly fallacious information.
In both complaints, Cohen alleges that the dossier contains “blatantly false and defamatory statements” that resulted in “harm to his personal and professional reputation, current business interests, and the impairment of business opportunities.”
The New York state claim alleges that while the Buzzfeed story [text] explicitly stated that the report was unverified, they nevertheless neglected to “determine the veracity of these reports with Plaintiff himself.” In the federal suit against Fusion GPS, Cohen alleges that despite containing unverified information the defendants “recklessly placed it [the dossier] beyond their control and allowed it to fall into the hands of media devoted to breaking news on the hottest subject of the day: the Trump candidacy.”
Buzzfeed has publicly affirmed its decision to publish the material, claiming it to be clearly within the public interest and looks forward to defend its decision to do so on First Amendment freedom of press grounds.
HRW divulged findings from over a year of investigating a police practice known as “parallel construction,” in which law enforcement illegally obtain evidence and then hide the illegality through legally obtaining supporting evidence.
The court found the law violates the First Amendment [text], ruling in favor of the Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns [advocacy website], which provides prenatal services and counseling for women regarding alternatives to abortions.
