Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Appeals Court Decisions
New on the Bound By Oath podcast: When a SWAT team blows up an innocent person’s house, who should foot the bill for the damage? The public! Since 1872, the Supreme Court has consistently said that such damage is a taking requiring just compensation. Which was also the rule at common law. Plus, what might state constitutions have to say about the matter?
- Anti-abortion groups challenge New York labor law that prohibits them from discriminating against employees based on whether they’ve had an abortion (or any other reproductive-health decision). The groups also object to having to include information in their employee handbooks about rights/remedies under the law. Second Circuit: The groups may have an expressive-association claim, which needs more development, but the handbook claim fails.
- If you’re the sort who reads Short Circuit on the regular, you’ve probably already consumed all manner of hot- and lukewarm-takes on the Second Circuit‘s decision upholding an NYC jury’s verdict that Donald Trump defamed E. Jean Carroll.
- West Virginia parents of schoolchildren challenge the state’s vaccination requirement for students attending public, private, or parochial school, arguing that it violates the Free Exercise Clause. The district court abstains, reasoning that state courts should first analyze the law under the state’s recently enacted Equal Protection for Religion Act, which became effective the month after the suit was filed. Fourth Circuit (over a dissent): Which was error. Abstention is the exception, not the rule!
- Truck driver subject to a domestic violence restraining order is arrested for possessing a gun, in violation of federal law. He challenges the law as facially unconstitutional and wins … until the Supreme Court vacates and remands his case for reconsideration in light of Rahimi. Fifth Circuit: And his facial challenge cannot prevail. The district court should take another look at his as-applied challenge—and there are some as-applied challenges that might succeed (though we wouldn’t hold our breath in this case).
- Man convicted of murder in Mississippi state court argues several jurors were struck based on their race and the prosecution’s alternative reasons don’t add up. District court: This looks bad! Fifth Circuit: The Mississippi Supreme Court already said this argument was waived and who are we to judge a state court when it comes to federal constitutional rights? Habeas denied.
- Man convicted of manufacturing spice (the illegal kind, not melange) in Mississippi federal court appeals pro se; he’s dismissed for want of prosecution. He then files a habeas petition in district court. Meanwhile, though, he successfully moves to recall the appellate court’s mandate, gets an attorney, the Fifth Circuit (2021) affirms his conviction and SCOTUS denies him cert. Then he files another habeas petition in district court. Is that a “second or subsequent” petition? Fifth Circuit (2025): Weird facts, so no, treat it as a first petition
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
