Tag Archives: Court: 9th Circuit

Champion Newspapers: In Chino Valley, the fire and school boards and Chino city council have such invocations. Chino Hills dropped them on advice of its attorney and satisfied its faith by conducting meetings under the large motto above the council dais, “In God We Trust.”

LifeNews: After Judge Wake’s ruling overturning the law, Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser told LifeNews she was disappointed. “Judge Wake’s ruling thwarts the will of Arizona taxpayers to stop funding big abortion businesses such as Planned Parenthood. As a result, funds will be reduced for agencies that provide whole women’s health care. According to Planned Parenthood’s own annual report, its government subsidies have reached an all-time high, even as the number of cancer screenings and other prevention and contraceptive services they offer has dropped dramatically,” she said. “Planned Parenthood’s growing abortion toll, meanwhile, is evidence of their continued failure to show true concern for vulnerable women and girls.” . . . Attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom, which co-authored the legislation with the SBA List, have helped state Solicitor General David Cole defend the law to date.

Las Vegas Sun: David Cooper sued Clark County in U.S. District Court in 2010 after he was denied a license to run a “high-end” swingers club, dubbed Sextasy, at the Commercial Center shopping mall on Sahara Avenue near Maryland Parkway. | Cooper v. Clark County Nevada, No. 11-16900 (9th Cir. May 21, 2013)

Mailee Smith at National Review: This week the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Arizona’s law prohibiting abortion at or after 20 weeks of pregnancy – a law that was based on uncontroverted medical evidence that abortion’s risks to maternal health increase dramatically at 20 weeks gestation.

Liberty Counsel: “What we ultimately need is a Supreme Court that will understand the rule of law, and abortion has no place in this jurisprudence. It’s not a right under the Constitution. It is simply an invention of justices back in 1973,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel.

Washington Post: These Republicans want to move ahead despite recent court decisions that have struck down similar state laws. The GOP lawmakers also are taking on their own leadership, which has shown little desire to hold votes on contentious social issues.

Isaacson v. Horne, No. No. 12-16670 (9th Circuit)

Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Andrew J. Kleinfeld, and Marsha S. Berzon, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge Berzon; Concurrence by Judge Kleinfeld

Our question is whether the Constitution permits the Arizona legislature to prohibit abortion beginning at twenty weeks gestation, before the fetus is viable. We hold that it does not.

Kent Harper at Mesquite Local News: Search the U.S. Constitution until both eyes are sore and you’ll find no reference to “the separation of church and state.” What you will find is the beginning portion of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

Oregonian: You might have thought John E. Brennan’s troubles were history after a judge last year acquitted him of wrongdoing for stripping at Portland International Airport to protest what he saw as ridiculously invasive security measures.

Star Gazette: David Cortman, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, said using prayer to open public meetings is a long-standing American tradition that has been upheld by the Supreme Court. “Nonetheless, new legal attacks by people and activist groups claiming to be ‘offended’ by the way private citizens voluntarily pray have created significant confusion in the lower courts,” he said. In the Greece case, the Court of Appeals “suggested the current legal complexity may cause local and state governments to abandon the practice, which predates the founding of America.”

Democrat and Chronicle: David Cortman, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, said using prayer to open public meetings is a long-standing American tradition that has previously been upheld by the Supreme Court. “Nonetheless, new legal attacks by people and activist groups claiming to be ‘offended’ by the way private citizens voluntarily pray have created significant confusion in the lower courts,” he said. In the Greece case, the Court of Appeals “suggested the current legal complexity may cause local and state governments to abandon the practice, which predates the founding of America.”

Robert McNamara and Paul Sherman at the National Law Journal: As if the facts of these cases weren’t provocative enough, the challenges to California’s law are complicated by the fact that the plaintiffs, practicing psychologists who are licensed in California, simply engage in “talk therapy” with their patients. As a result, these cases raise an important, unresolved constitutional question: Is the kind of one-on-one counseling and advice at issue in talk therapy “free speech” protected by the First Amendment?

Christian Post: The openly gay son of a conservative Republican Congressman has stated that he benefitted from undergoing the controversial practice of reparative therapy as a teenager.

How Appealing links to the audio and several reports.

AP: A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is considering two legal challenges to the ban on “sexual orientation change efforts” that was passed by the California Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown last fall. | Liberty Counsel Press Release

Jeremy Tedesco at Speak Up Movement: Rarely can the essence of a lawsuit be captured through pictures. But in Alliance Defending Freedom’s case involving a tiny Church’s First Amendment challenge to the Town of Gilbert’s discriminatory treatment of signs advertising its religious services, a picture truly speaks a thousand words.

One News Now: The two recent appeals court rulings were in favor of prayer before town council meetings in Lancaster, California and Lakeland, Florida. Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorney Brett Harvey tells American Family News the lawsuits were filed by atheists. “They’ve got two complaints: Their first complaint is that there’s any prayer at all. But they know that that’s a tall order in light of clear Supreme Court precedent that says you can have a prayer, so they’ve modified their complaint to say, Well, you can pray, but you can’t pray in the name of Jesus,” Harvey reports.

Sacramento Bee: The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled on Tuesday that the Lancaster City Council’s invocation policy is constitutional because it allows for the opening prayer to be said by any faith or religion. | Rubin v. City of Lancaster

Alan Sears at Alliance Defending Freedom: The dangers posed more and more across America to the First Amendment protections of Christians like you – and your children – often show themselves in subtle ways. A small legal bias here, an evasion of religious freedom there, and those who would sideline people of faith gain one more crucial foothold of legal ground they can use to block the spread of the Gospel.

ULaw Today: Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Amy and Vicky, two child pornography victims, in an appeal brought by the Utah Appellate Clinic. | In re: Amy & Vicky

The Recorder: Next month, five SOCE counselors will go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, seeking to enjoin the law as an unconstitutional intrusion on the doctor-patient relationship. Although associated with conservative Christian causes, their attorneys come armed with a powerful liberal precedent: a 2002 Ninth Circuit ruling that forbade the government from cracking down on doctors for recommending medical marijuana.

NPR: A panel of the the San Francisco-based U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stood with a lower court, ruling that a ban on drivers soliciting day laborers violates the constitution’s free speech guarantee.

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys have asked the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to weigh in on a church’s lawsuit over a Phoenix suburb’s flawed sign ordinance.

San Francisco Chronicle: A state prison inmate and former inmate who practice the Wiccan religion can proceed with a lawsuit accusing California of discriminating by refusing to hire a Wiccan chaplain while paying for chaplains from more mainstream faiths, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday. | Hartman v. Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation | Hat tip: How Appealing

Cronkite News: The church’s attorney, Jeremy Tedesco, said they have 14 days to appeal for rehearing by the full circuit court, “so you’ll know in 14 days what we plan to do.” “To us it’s a very simple case of content-based discrimination,” said Tedesco, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom. “Of course we’re disappointed the court did not see it this way.”

Religion Clause Blog: 9th Circuit In 2-1 Decision Rejects Church’s Challenge To Town’s Sign Restrictions
The majority concluded that the ordinance does not violate free expression guarantees since it is not a content-based regulation . . . Judge Watford dissenting argued that the ordinance is content-based because it favors political and ideological signs over signs promoting events sponsored by non-profit organizations.

The brief: Welch v. Brown, No. 13-15023 (9th Cir. Jan. 28, 2013)

How Appealing: And in news coverage, XBIZ.com reports that “Ira Isaacs Sentenced to 4 Years in Federal Prison, Fined $10K.” According to the article, “Isaacs attorney Roger Jon Diamond indicated that his client will appeal the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.”

LA Times: The dispute is before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which is expected to decide within the next several days whether to put the law on hold before it takes effect Jan. 1.

ABA Journal: The 6th Circuit, based in Cincinnati, has had a particularly dismal record before the high court. In the seven Supreme Court terms completed since the fall of 2005, the 6th Circuit has been reversed 31 out of 38 times, for an 81.6 percent reversal rate, based on figures compiled by two Philadelphia lawyers. That leads all the federal circuits for that time period, with the 9th Circuit coming in as the second most reversed—100 out of 128 cases, or 78.1 percent.

How Appealing reports.

AZ Central: Americans for Responsible Leadership, which has also poured $11 million into two California campaigns, immediately asked for a temporary stay until 9 a.m. Monday to produce the records for the California Fair Political Practices Commission.

Doe v. Reed, No. 11-35854 ( Before: Harry Pregerson, A. Wallace Tashima, and N. Randy Smith, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge Tashima; Concurrence by Judge N.R. Smith)

Plaintiffs Protect Marriage Washington (“PMW”), John Doe #1, and John Doe #2 (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) seek to enjoin Defendants, the Secretary of State and Public Records Officer of the State of Washington, from releasing the names of people who signed petitions supporting a Washington referendum. These petitions are already widely available on the internet. We dismiss this case as moot because we cannot grant Plaintiffs effective relief.

How Appealing links to several reports and the ruling in Lair v. Bullock.

Eugene Volokh at the Volokh Conspiracy: When NFIB came down, some commentators argued that Chief Justice Roberts’ conclusion that the mandate was not authorized by the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause was mere dictum, and therefore not binding precedent for the lower courts. I criticized that view here. It’s worth noting that the Ninth Circuit just treated the Roberts’ Necessary and Proper reasoning from NFIB as if it were binding. In upholding the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act sex offfender registration requirement, they relied heavily on NFIB’s interpretation of the Necessary and Proper Clause . . .

Religion Clause Blog: In Ruiz-Diaz v. United States, (9th Circuit, Oct. 5, 2012), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected RFRA and 14th Amendment challenges to immigration rules that treat religious workers applying to adjust their immigration status to become permanent residents differently from those in various other employment-based preference categories.

AZ Star Net: A federal appeals court Tuesday spurned a request by civil rights groups for a new injunction to once again block Arizona’s 2010 immigration law.

The Republic: The courts have struck down another Montana election law as unconstitutional. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion Monday that tosses out the state’s ban on political party endorsements of nonpartisan judicial candidates. | Sanders County Republican Cent. Comm. v. Bullock

Walter Weber on Kresta in the Afternoon: The Ninth Circuit has broken new constitutional ground in its Sept. 11 decision in McCormack v. Hiedeman. According to the court, women have a constitutional right to engage in self-abortion – sort of . . . But at the heart of the McCormack decision is the question whether women have a constitutional right to self-abort. On that question, the Ninth Circuit opinion lays the groundwork for a “yes” answer, but does not quite get there.

Wall Street Journal: A federal appeals court on Wednesday narrowed a court order that prevented Idaho authorities from bringing criminal charges against pregnant women who seek abortions through procedures the state deems “unlawful” — namely by buying medications online to terminate a pregnancy. | McCormack v. Hiedeman, Nos. 11-36010, 11-36015 (9th Cir. Sept. 11, 2012)

Religion Clause Blog: Last week (Aug. 27), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Ruiz-Diaz v. United States.

David Cortman appeared on the Zeb Bell Show to discuss the litigation. | MP3 audio 13:35 mins

How Appealing reports.

91.5 KJZZ (includes audio): James Campbell of the Alliance Defending Freedom notes the appellate court ruling hinged on the inability of gays to marry in the state, which he says sets a precedent. “If it’s irrational to give that benefit to only legal spouses and not to an unmarried partner or friend, then it is also irrational to also give other benefits to a legal spouse or not to an unmarried friend or partner,” Campbell said.

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel David Cortman and Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco will be available for media interviews immediately following oral arguments Friday before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in Reed v. Town of Gilbert.

The Hill: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals told Senate Republicans late last week that it would go through with a conference in Hawaii later this month, despite GOP complaints that the conference could cost $1 million or more at a time of fiscal crisis.

The Aug. 3 letter from Chief Judge Kozinski to Senators Sessions and Grassley.

Spokesman-Review: When should a parent lose custody of a young child for refusing consent for a medical procedure? How likely must the harm to the child be for that to happen, and what if the potential harm is unlikely but dire? And should doctors and police who seize custody and perform the procedure over parents’ objections bear any liability?

Trial Insider: It appears two U.S. Senators’ criticism of spending for a Maui judicial conference in August by the the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals paid off. The court announced it was calling off its 2013 conference set for Monterey, Calif. and pushing it back to 2014. | Related post at How Appealing with a new letter to the court and additional coverage.

Lyle Denniston at SCOTUS Blog: The case illustrates a trend that is beginning to develop in lower courts dealing with issues of gay marriage: they are establishing new rights to legal equality for such couples, without taking the constitutional step of creating an explicit new right for gays and lesbians to marry.

Legal Pad: Put an Idaho law criminalizing abortions before two of the more liberal members of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and you might expect some fireworks. But Judges Harry Pregerson and Betty Fletcher were mostly quiet Monday during arguments in McCormack v. Hiedeman, 11-36010, despite vigorous arguments by advocates on both sides. | Audio of Oral Arguments

Chris Geidner: In a July 2 filing noted on the Supreme Court docket, lawyers for the governor have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse a September 2011 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that had the effect of keeping same-sex partners’ health-care benefits in place in the state.

Reuters: A majority of the San Francisco-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit refused to disrupt the December ruling of a three-judge panel, which found that the cuts violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. In a sharp dissent, Judge Carlos Bea, joined by eight others, accused the majority of trying to dictate the state’s budget by “judicial fiat.”

The lengthy letter signed by Hon. Alex Kozinski is here in pdf format.

National Journal: Grassley faulted Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., for moving to a voice vote rather than holding a planned roll call vote on Hurwitz. But Grassley’s gripe seemed to lie largely with members of his own party who agreed to the switch, particularly Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., who managed the nomination

The Hill (includes video): “All the business of the Senate is based upon trust between one senator and another,” Grassley said on the Senate floor. “When the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee isn’t notified of this action or any other senator notified of this action, it seems to me that that trust has been violated.

SCOTUS Blog reports (see charts): The Ninth Circuit continues its streak of contributing more cases to the Term than any other circuit. One third of all cases expected to be decided during OT11 originated in the Ninth Circuit. That number is both higher than any other circuit this Term (the closest competitor is the Third Circuit, which contributed 9% of all cases) . . .

The HIll: The Senate confirmed Andrew David Hurwitz for the 9th Circuit Court on Tuesday.

Legal Times: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) wants to force a vote on U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit nominee Andrew Hurwitz early next week, setting up a potential fight with some Republicans who oppose him because of his history with Roe v. Wade.

Religion Clause Blog: In a 3-page opinion in PLANS, Inc. v. Sacramento City Unified School District, (9th Cir., June 7, 2012), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a federal district court’s dismissal of an Establishment Clause challenge to two Northern California school districts that have created “Waldorf” schools.

How Appealing reports.

SCOTUS Blog: The Administration is now pressing an argument that DOMA’s denial of federal benefits for gay couples legally married in a state is unconstitutional, on the theory that it cannot withstand a challenge based on a more rigorous constitutional test: “heightened scrutiny.”

LifeNews: Republican senators received a letter today urging them to not support David Hurwitz, President Obama’s pro-abortion nominee to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

How Appealing links to the court order and a news report.

U.S. Senate website vote results.

Blog of the Legal Times: Two top Republican senators on the judiciary and budget committees are questioning the cost of the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference planned for Hawaii in August, saying “the program reads more like a vacation than a business trip to discuss the means of improving the administration of justice.”

Metropolitan News-Enterprise: Senate Democrats said yesterday that they will try to end debate Monday on the nomination of Los Angeles attorney Paul J. Watford to serve as a judge of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. On their web page, the party conference said that Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had filed a cloture petition, and that a vote likely will occur at about 5:30 p.m.

The ruling: C.O. v. Portland Public School, No. 10-35340 (9th Cir. May 14, 2012) . . .

LA Times: The Senate confirmed Jacqueline H. Nguyen of Los Angeles to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday, making her the first Asian American woman to sit on a federal appellate court

The Seattle Times reports.

Reuters: A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday ruled Arizona may require voters to show identification at the polls, a ruling likely to add fuel to the fiery debate about voting rights in a presidential election year.

How Appealing links to the ruling and reports.

How Appealing reports and links to the ruling.

HSLDA reports (includes audio).

Billings Gazette: The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will consider at least three judicial misconduct complaints that have been filed against Montana’s Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull as well as the judge’s own request for a review.

One News Now: California attorney expects opponents of traditional marriage to lose in The Golden State if the Proposition 8 case is heard by the full panel of judges on a federal appeals court.