|
|
|
Fort Hood shooter's beard stops court hearing
Topics |
2012/06/09 00:15
|
A hearing to consider pre-trial motions in the murder case against an Army psychiatrist charged in the Fort Hood shooting rampage has been delayed after defendant Maj. Nidal Hasan showed up in court wearing a beard.
The trial judge, Col. Gregory Gross, said Hasan's appearance at the hearing Friday violated Army regulations and is considered a disruption to the proceedings.
Gross says the hearing will be delayed until the near future when Hasan either complies with military grooming standards or watches the hearing from outside the courtroom on a video feed. Hasan's lawyers say they'll seek an exception to the grooming rule on religious grounds.
Hasan faces the death penalty if convicted of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder in the November 2009 attack. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Powerbroker tied to Nevada Sen. Reid goes to court
Court Watch |
2012/06/09 00:15
|
A former developer and lobbyist with long ties to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Nevada's political elite turned himself in to federal authorities Thursday after being indicted on criminal charges involving federal campaign contributions.
Harvey Whittemore planned to plead not guilty later in the day before a federal magistrate in Reno, his lawyer, John Arrascada, told The Associated Press.
Whittemore, 55, was indicted by a federal grand jury Wednesday on four counts related to campaign contributions made in 2007 to an unnamed elected federal official.
Once a kingpin in state political circles, Whittemore made campaign contributions to numerous politicians including Republican Sen. Dean Heller and Democratic Rep. Shelley Berkley. But records show only Reid received donations of more than $100,000 on a single day in 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Groups sue to block Florida voter roll purge
Law Firm News |
2012/06/08 00:15
|
Several groups and individuals on Friday asked a federal court to block Florida from carrying out its purge of potentially ineligible voters from the rolls.
A Hispanic civic organization and two naturalized citizens — backed by the American Civil Liberties Union and others — filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Tampa seeking to halt the purge. Two days ago, the administration of Republican Gov. Rick Scott rejected calls by the federal government to stop the effort.
"The illegal program to purge eligible voters uses inaccurate information to remove eligible citizens from the voter rolls," said Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida. "...We now look to the courts to stop the Scott administration from assaulting democracy by denying American citizens the right to vote."
The lawsuit is likely to have little immediate impact because most local election supervisors have halted the removal of voters, citing conflicting legal opinions from the federal government and state officials.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court knocks out Job Corps drug tests
Law Center |
2012/06/07 00:15
|
A federal appeals court on Friday declared a random drug testing program for government workers at 28 U.S. Forest Service Job Corps centers unconstitutional.
The centers are home for at-risk youths from ages 16 to 24 from troubled environments. Residents are housed in remote rural locations and trained in various vocations.
In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said the small number of drug use incidents among a workforce of several thousand over many years does not establish a serious problem, much less an immediate crisis necessitating expansion of a random drug testing policy.
The government "has thus offered a solution in search of a problem," Judge Judith Rogers ruled.
Absent from the record, Rogers said, is any demonstration that government staffers using drugs influenced youths at the center to use them, in violation of the centers' Zero Tolerance Policy. She was joined by Judge Douglas Ginsburg.
Previously, the only center workers undergoing random drug testing were nurses and employees required to hold a commercial driver's license.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kan. gov. signs measure blocking Islamic law
Law Center |
2012/05/26 16:02
|
Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback has signed a law aimed at keeping the state's courts or government agencies from basing decisions on Islamic or other foreign legal codes, and a national Muslim group's spokesman said Friday that a court challenge is likely.
The new law, taking effect July 1, doesn't specifically mention Shariah law, which broadly refers to codes within the Islamic legal system. Instead, it says courts, administrative agencies or state tribunals can't base rulings on any foreign law or legal system that would not grant the parties the same rights guaranteed by state and U.S. constitutions.
"This bill should provide protection for Kansas citizens from the application of foreign laws," said Stephen Gele, spokesman for the American Public Policy Alliance, a Michigan group promoting model legislation similar to the new Kansas law. "The bill does not read, in any way, to be discriminatory against any religion."
But supporters have worried specifically about Shariah law being applied in Kansas court cases, and the alliance says on its website that it wants to protect Americans' freedoms from "infiltration" by foreign laws and legal doctrines, "especially Islamic Shariah Law."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Families cannot sue over loan discount fee
Court Watch |
2012/05/24 16:01
|
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that three families cannot sue a mortgage company for allegedly charging them a loan discount fee without giving them a lower interest rate.
The high court's decision tosses out lawsuits filed in 2008 against Quicken Loans, Inc., in Louisiana by three families who claimed they paid the fees without receiving anything in return. The Freeman family paid $980 and the Bennett family $1,100 in loan discount fees but allegedly did not get lower interest rates in return. The Smith family allegations focus partly on a loan origination fee of $5,100, which they claim was a mislabeled loan discount fee.
A federal judge threw the lawsuit out, saying the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act made the lawsuit improper. That decision, which was upheld by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, was appealed to the Supreme Court.
The law says no "person shall give and no person shall accept any portion, split, or percentage of any charge made or received for the rendering of a real estate settlement service in connection with a transaction involving a federally related mortgage loan other than for services actually performed."
The argument is over whether that law "prohibits the collection of an unearned charge by a single settlement provider, or whether it covers only transactions in which a provider shares part of a settlement-service charge with one or more other persons who did nothing to earn it," said Justice Antonia Scalia, who wrote the opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
