Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Decisions
Please enjoy the latest edition of Short Circuit, a weekly feature written by a bunch of people at the Institute for Justice.
Hey, what’s new? Us? Oh, not much . . . except IJ is headed to the U.S. Supreme Court for the 13th time! On Monday afternoon, the Court granted IJ’s petition for certiorari in Martin v. United States, a case that seeks to hold the FBI accountable for sending a SWAT team to the wrong house, where they traumatized an innocent family—Trina Martin, her then-seven-year-old son Gabe, and her partner Toi Cliatt, none of whom had committed any crime. When the feds refused to pay for the harm they’d caused, Trina, Gabe, and Toi sued. But the Eleventh Circuit held their claims were barred by sovereign immunity. Now, the Supreme Court has a chance to set things right and hold the gov’t accountable. Read more here!
Also this week: A new Bound By Oath podcast! Renowned civil rights litigator Marshall Krause tells the story of Camara v. Municipal Court of the City & County of San Francisco, which he argued at the Supreme Court in 1967. And we tell the story of how the Fourth Amendment’s protections against invasions of the home became less robust when it’s a code inspector rather than a police officer knocking at the door.
- After a FOIA request goes ignored, an advocacy group sues the U.S. Park Police seeking information about, among other things, pre-lawsuit settlements. The Park Police produces documents about three claims but withholds the names of the officers involved under FOIA’s exception for “clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” D.C. Circuit: And since the Park Police hasn’t given any justification besides the idea of privacy itself, that’s a no-go. Release the names. Also, no clawbacks of other FOIA-able documents that the agency produced by accident. Also also, the last vowel in “de minimis” is still an I.
- More FOIA news. In 2021, President Biden directed federal agencies to submit to the White House “strategic plans” to “promote voter registration and voter participation.” Conservative group America First Legal FOIA-ed those plans. Sorry, holds the D.C. Circuit. The plans are exempt from disclosure under the “presidential communications privilege.”
- The phrase “sometimes a cigar is just a cigar” is often attributed to Sigmund Freud, although there’s no evidence he ever said or wrote it. We won’t begin to guess what Freud would think of the difference between a “premium cigar” and a cigarette, but—according to the D.C. Circuit—it was arbitrary and capricious for the FDA to regulate them the same way without considering the differences in use patterns and health risks.
- Two decades ago, the D.C. fire department effectively banned beards. Which was good, maybe, for ensuring an airtight seal around facemasks, but not so good for firefighters compelled to grow beards for religious reasons. Said bearded firefighters secured an injunction banning the ban under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. But, following COVID-19, the department effectively reintroduced the same ban because of a perceived need for firefighters to wear N95 masks. Civil contempt for violating the injunction? D.C. Circuit: Maybe. The district court should’ve decided despite the department’s apparent good faith. There are legitimate defenses to contempt, but caution in extraordinary circumstances isn’t one of them.
- The North Atlantic right whale is believed to have been so named because it was the “right” whale to hunt: It swims slowly and usually floats after death. Driven to near extinction by whaling, there are now estimated to be fewer than 400 North Atlantic right whales remaining, of which fewer than 100 are breeding females. To protect the whales’ migration routes, the National Marine Fisheries Service issued a final rule seasonally banning vertical buoy lines used in lobster and Jonah crab trap fishing in federal waters off the coast of Massachusetts. Lobstermen challenge the rule. First Circuit: The whales win.
- In 1676, during the reign of Charles II (“the Merry Monarch”), the colonial governor of New York entered an order, endorsed by the Unkechaug Nation, that its members may “freely whale or fish.” Is this a “treaty” that, for modern-day members of the tribe, preempts New York’s prohibition on harvesting glass eels? Second Circuit: There was no “United States” in 1676 so there cannot be any preemption. Go talk to Charles III.
- The right of public employees to speak their minds on matters of public concern is so messy even unpublished cases draw dissents. Take, for example, this Third Circuit (unpublished) matter, in which a group of Springfield Township, Penn. cops are told they can’t display “Thin Blue Line American Flags” while on the job. The majority thinks the policy fails the Pickering balancing test, while the dissent thinks that test does not require the gov’t to show “actual, specific, and already-transpired harm.”
- South Carolina death row inmate challenges his death sentence in state court as a violation of the Eighth Amendment because he claims to have intellectual disabilities. More than a year and a half later, he tries to amend his application to add a claim that he also has fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, which he argues should similarly bar his execution. The state court denies the request to amend, his intellectual disability claim fails, and he seeks habeas review in federal court. Fourth Circuit: Regardless of whether Supreme Court precedent prohibiting the execution of the intellectually disabled should be extended to people with FASD, the claim is procedurally barred.
- In 2024, the FTC issued new rules governing car dealerships, but two-thirds of this Fifth Circuit panel holds that the FTC failed to give sufficient advance notice of the rules, rejects the argument that the Dodd-Frank Act changed the notice requirements, and declines the FTC’s invitation to wait right here for just a minute while they check with their manager about a better price on that TruCoat.
- Complaint: These officers should have known the suspect they had arrested needed medical attention because she’d just been in four (4) separate car accidents over the course of several minutes. Fifth Circuit: “Should have known better” may count in grade school, but around here, the constitutional standard requires them to actually have known. (Concurrence: The standard is also “it was obvious,” but nobody made that argument here.)
- In which the Fifth Circuit holds that the Department of Transportation has the statutory authority to issue rules about airfare disclosures in general—but it can’t issue this particular rule, which requires more noticing-and-commenting.
- Federal law prohibits Federal Firearms Licensees from selling handguns to anyone under the age of 21. Does this violate the Second Amendment as applied to adults aged 18-20? Fifth Circuit: We upheld the law in 2012, but that was before the Supreme Court told us to look to history to determine the scope of the Second Amendment’s protection. And the history says 18-year-olds could keep and bear arms.
- State trial court makes a series of rulings (including striking defense witnesses for not being disclosed 20 days before trial even though the defense was still rece
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.
