Tag Archives: Court: 9th Circuit

Catholic News Service: “The U.S. Supreme Court has left standing a lower court ruling that will allow an Oregon man to try to hold the Vatican financially responsible for his sexual abuse by a priest, if he can persuade the court that the priest was an employee of the Vatican. By declining to take Holy See v. John Doe, the court June 28 left intact the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that said because of the way Oregon law defines employment, the Vatican is not protected under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act from potential liability for the actions of a priest who Doe, the unidentified plaintiff, said sexually abused him in the 1960s.” | Related: Charles J. Chaput: Suing the Church

ADF Attorney David J. Hacker appeared on Northwest Nights with Frank Shiers to discuss Idaho’s censorship of the Great Books in charter schools. | MP3 12:11 mins. | ADFmedia.org Nampa Classical Academy v. Goesling resource page

Mercury News: Robert Norse’s Nazi salute lasted fewer than five seconds before he was removed from the Santa Cruz City Council meeting in handcuffs. But the Santa Claus-bearded gadfly’s free speech lawsuit against the city has lasted more than six years and may be destined for the U.S. Supreme Court. On Tuesday, the 9th U.S. circuit Court of Appeals will convene a rare 11-judge panel to consider how thick-skinned and tolerant public officials need to be before they can silence and evict dissenters from meetings.

9th Circuit panel ruling: Norse v. City of Santa Cruz, 586 F. 3d 697 (2009)

ADF attorney David Hacker appeared on the Georgene Rice Show to discuss Idaho’s censorship of the Great Books in charter schools. | MP3 7:18 mins | ADF Media: ADF files appeal over Western Civilization book ban in Idaho public schools, universities

Law.com: The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-7 today to advance the nomination of Judge Robert Chatigny for the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. All but one Democrat voted for the nomination and all Republicans against it, similar to the committee’s May 13 vote on the nomination of Goodwin Liu for the 9th Circuit. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., voted ‘pass’ on Chatigny but did not explain her vote. Both nominations are likely to be drawn-out fights on the Senate floor.

Daily Journal of California: “The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, often categorized as too liberal and out of sync with the more conservative U.S. Supreme Court, faces some unusual competition this term for its crown as the most reversed circuit. Earlier this week, the justices reversed the Cincinnati, Ohio-based 6th Circuit for the seventh time in seven cases (including one summary reversal), meaning a 100 percent reversal rate for the term.” | Via How Appealing.

Courthouse News Service: “The 9th Circuit has once again asked the California Supreme Court to decide if San Diego’s practice of leasing public park land to the Boy Scouts of America interferes with religious and civil rights, given the Scouts’ policy barring atheists, agnostics and homosexuals from joining or volunteering.” | Barnes-Wallace v. Boy Scouts of America, (9th Cir., June 3, 2010) | Via Religion Clause. | Related: 9th Circuit stays Boy Scouts Case versus San Diego

Tucson Citizen: “This morning, the Supreme Court denied a request the Goldwater Institute filed two weeks ago asking for an injunction to stop the use of matching funds this year. But the Court gave the Institute permission to file the request again along with an assurance that the Institute plans to appeal the recent opinion from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that overruled the District Court and declared matching funds to be legal. A new request and a commitment to appeal the Ninth Circuit decision was filed this afternoon.”

LA Times Editorial: “The United States has a long tradition of allowing tax breaks for charitable contributions, including donations to churches and other religious organizations. But the San Francisco-based U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has concluded that a program that offers tax credits for contributions to provide scholarships for private schools breaches the wall separating church and state. It’s a tortured decision that the Supreme Court rightly has agreed to review . . . ”

Eugene Volokh writes at the Volokh Conspiracy: “I’ve long written about how workplace harassment law sometimes violates the First Amendment, so I was especially pleased to see today’s Rodriguez v. Maricopa County Community College Dist. (9th Cir.) (written by Chief Judge Kozinski, and joined by retired Justice O’Connor, sitting by designation, and Judge Sandra Ikuta) . . . ”

ADF Attorney David Hacker writing at Speak Up Movement / university (via the Christian Post’s Advancing Religious Liberty blog):

Thursday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an important college free speech decision in a case that pits a college harassment policy against a professor’s racially insensitive comments. (H/t to Professor Volokh who has thorough coverage here, here, here, and here.) . . . The Ninth Circuit . . . found that the officials deserved qualified immunity because the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not give the employees a right to be free from offensive speech on a college campus.”

“The case concerns an Arizona school choice program that has been serving low- and middle-income families for 13 years. The state grants a tax credit to individuals who donate to nonprofit entities that award scholarships for children to attend private schools — including religious schools . . . ”

“Goodwin Liu, a professor of law at the University of California Berkeley, won confirmation on a 12-7 party-line vote in the committee after weeks of delay on the vote by Senate Republicans . . . ”

Child Pornography, The First Amendment, and Mistakes of Age: An Age-Old Debate
Michael J. Ritter, 88 Tex. L. Rev. 1101 (2010)

“[T]he Ninth Circuit’s reasonable mistake of age defense fails to adequately protect the interests of children against the long-lasting physical and psychological effects of being photographed or filmed while engaging in sexually explicit acts. As a compromise between these two approaches, this Note proposes an intermediate standard that would require defendants claiming a mistake of age defense to show that they verified child subjects’ ages with government documents or officials. By establishing a clearer standard than the Ninth Circuit’s reasonableness test and by providing some defense to defendants, this intermediate standard would protect children from the harms of child pornography and quell First Amendment concerns.”

Blog of the Legal Times: “Senate Republicans continued today to express objections to federal appellate pick Goodwin Liu, delaying a committee vote on his nomination for at least another week.”

Religion Clause Blog: “In Florer v. Congregation Pidyon Shevuyim, (9th Cir., May 5, 2010), the 9th Circuit held that a Jewish organization which had contracted with the Washington Department of Corrections to provide Jewish religious services to prisoners acted under color of state law and not merely as a private party for purposes of a prisoner’s RLUIPA claim.”

LifeNews: “The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on Thursday on controversial pro-abortion appeals court nominee Goodwin Liu.”

ADF Attorney Travis C. Barham writing at speakupmovement.org/university: “Each year, the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Association (NAGAAA) sponsors the ‘Gay Softball World Series.’ But three bisexual men—represented by the National Center for Lesbian Rights—filed a discrimination suit in Seattle, Washington because their team was disqualified for having too many ‘heterosexual’ players. And what is the NAGAAA’s response? Well, it claims it is a private organization and ‘can determine its membership based on its goals.’ At one point, the players were told, ‘This is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series.’ Does this sound vaguely familiar? All of a sudden, portions of the homosexual community recognize the importance of the freedom of association, which comes as a refreshing change.”

Courthouse News Service: “A split 9th Circuit panel rejected the claims of a Muslim woman who said she suffered a ‘deeply humiliating and defiling experience’ when she was forced to remove her headscarf for security reasons at the Orange County Superior Courthouse . . . The district court dismissed Khatib’s religious freedom claim, ruling that a courthouse holding cell is not an ‘institution’ as defined by the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. The Act protects the right of institutionalized people to practice religion.” | Khatib v. County of Orange, No. 08-56423 (9th Cir. May 3, 2010)

“Eastman Victory Overturns Portion of Long Beach Campaign Finance Ordinance Which Unconstitutionally Limited Participation in Independent Expenditure Campaigns.”

San Diego Union-Tribune: “‘The majority decision recognizes we have a strong religious tradition in this country and (that) the display of religious symbols in certain circumstances doesn’t violate the Constitution,’ said [Joseph Infranco], a lawyer with the Alliance Defense Fund, which was involved in the Mojave and Mount Soledad cases.” | ADF News Release

Redlands Daily Facts: “Joseph Infranco, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, said the Supreme Court’s decision sends a strong message to the 9th Circuit court. ‘If they do not straighten this out and get it right and allow the land transfer to stand, I’d be surprised if the Supreme Court does not overturn them again and slap their hand a little harder,’ Infranco said.” | ADF News Release

Pacific Justice Institute: “Michael Newdow is asking for an en banc review by the appellate court. Unlike other circuits, in the Ninth Circuit, an en banc panel consists of eleven judges chosen at random . . . ”

Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights v. City of San Francisco: How the Ninth Circuit Abandoned Judicial Neutrality to Strike a Blow at Religion
Jonathan W. Heaton, 2010 B.Y.U. L. Rev. 101

“This Note will analyze the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Catholic League and explain how the court’s neutrality was compromised. Part II of the Note presents a summary of the facts and procedural history of the case. Part III then provides some context for the issues involved by discussing the background First Amendment Establishment Clause jurisprudence leading up to the Ninth Circuit’s decision. Part IV describes the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning and decision in Catholic League in detail, and Part V analyzes that decision to explain how the Ninth Circuit went wrong. Finally, Part VI offers a brief conclusion.”

NY Times: “When President Obama earlier this year nominated Goodwin Liu, a liberal Berkeley law professor, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, conservatives did not just criticize Mr. Liu — they also attacked the circuit court he hopes to join . . . ”

Washington Times: “President Obama is trying to pack courts with far-left judges who are hiding their fringe opinions from the public and congressional oversight. Front and center is 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals nominee Goodwin Liu . . . Mr. Liu’s stated belief in using foreign law is terribly misguided, and his defense of it was clearly dishonest. Someone with such poor judgment should not be a judge.”

AP: “A Senate hearing for federal appeals court nominee Goodwin Liu quickly erupted into partisan bickering Friday, in a likely test of President Barack Obama’s ability to win confirmation for a liberal court pick.”

Blog of the Legal Times: “A day before Goodwin Liu goes before the Senate Judiciary Committee for his confirmation hearing, senators traded barbs over whether the federal appellate nominee has provided them with enough information.”

“Yesterday a 9th Circuit panel dismissed the appeal of the latest discovery order in the Perry case. California Equality, the ACLU, and other No on 8 groups brought the appeal because they claimed that the order would compel them to disclose private campaign communications protected under the First Amendment . . . ”

Washington Post:  Senate Democrats defended Goodwin Liu’s candidacy for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday, a day after the GOP suggested his nomination might be in jeopardy because he had not provided enough information to a Senate committee.”

LifeNews: “The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee has said he has no plans to delay the hearing on the abortion advocate President Barack Obama selected for an appeals court position . . . ”

FoxNews: “Senate Republicans on Tuesday slammed one of the Obama administration’s most controversial judicial nominees for failing to initially disclose more than 100 of his speeches, publications and other background materials — an omission the Republicans called unprecedented and a possible attempt to ‘hide his most controversial work.’”

San Francisco Chronicle: “Forty-two of California’s 58 county district attorneys are opposing President Obama’s nomination of Goodwin Liu to the federal appeals court in San Francisco, saying they believe the UC Berkeley law professor is hostile to the death penalty.”

Las Vegas Sun: “The American Civil Liberties Union, on behalf of Davis and two newspapers, today asked the full U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear the case and overturn a decision by a three-judge panel of the court upholding the state’s ban on prostitution ads. ACLU lawyer Allen Lichtenstein wrote in his petition: ‘Because brothels are licensed in Nevada, commercial speech concerning them is constitutionally protected.’” | See full post for related items.

Letter to the Editor of the Canton Repository: “A recent ruling from the very liberal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco should encourage Lake Local Schools’ board to reinstate the word God in its values statement . . . Hopefully, the Lake school board will heed the request of parents and students who want God restored to their values statement. Legal associations would reportedly extend free legal assistance to Lake schools, among them the Alliance Defense Fund, an organization with an impressive record.”

Blog of the Legal Times: “U.S. District Judge Mary Murguia has sat in the District of Arizona since 2000, when she was among the last Clinton judicial nominees confirmed by the Senate.”

“Liu . . . argues that judges (usually in an ‘interstitial’ role) may legitimately invent constitutional rights to a broad range of social ‘welfare’ goods . . . ”

How Appealing quoting the Blog of the Legal Times: “The Senate Judiciary Committee has suspended a highly anticipated confirmation hearing for Goodwin Liu, nominated for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, because of a little-used rule that constrains when Senate committees may meet.”

Justice Alito dissented from the denial of certiorari in the case of Nurre v. Whitehead, No. 09-671. In Whitehead, the school music teacher allowed students to select a piece to be played for graduation. Students selected Ave Maria. The school then censored their decision, because the music is religious. The 9th Circuit upheld the censorhip. Justice Alito writes in part . . .

Leagle.com: “An attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada has decided to ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider a recent decision that restores the state’s restrictions on brothel advertising.”

Related: 9th Circuit: Nevada has right to ban brothel advertising

Public Information Office of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: “The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will offer remote viewing of en banc court proceedings scheduled for March 23-25 at the James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse here.” Hat tip: How Appealing

Washington Post: “A federal appellate court said Thursday it wouldn’t reconsider its ruling that former Attorney General John Ashcroft can be held personally responsible for misuse of the material witness statute after the Sept. 11 attacks.”

Al-Kid v. Ashcroft, No. 06-36059 (9th Cir. March 18, 2010)

Ken Blackwell writing in The American Spectator: [The 9th Circuit] ruled in favor of the Pledge. But the big news is 
not that the Ninth Circuit came to its senses and aligned itself with every other court that has addressed the issue. The big news is that
 the Ninth Circuit did so in uniquely and dramatically conservative fashion . . . Remarkably, in an opinion joined by the liberal Judge D.W. Nelson, the Ninth Circuit adopted the Becket Fund’s argument: ‘The phrase “under God” is a recognition of our Founders’ political philosophy that a power greater than the government gives the people their inalienable rights. Thus, the Pledge is an endorsement of our form of government, not of religion or any particular sect.”

Associated Press: “Goodwin Liu, 39, is an unabashed liberal legal scholar who, if confirmed, could become a force on the federal appeals court for decades. There’s talk that in time, the Rhodes Scholar, former high court clerk and current assistant dean and law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, could be the first person of Asian descent chosen for the Supreme Court.”

Religion Clause Blog: “In Alcazar v. Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop of Seattle, (9th Cir., March 16, 2010), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed under the ‘ministerial exception’ doctrine claims by two Catholic seminarians who alleged violations of Washington state’s Minimum Wage Law . . . ”

Law.com (The Recorder): “Stephen Reinhardt and Dorothy Nelson have been simpatico on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for 30 years. One former Reinhardt clerk says they have a good personal relationship. But Nelson handed Reinhardt a bitter defeat by siding with conservative Judge Carlos Bea in an opinion upholding the words ‘under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance. The ruling, handed down Thursday, is the latest episode in a case that has brought scorn on the 9th Circuit from across the country, and has highlighted Reinhardt as an unapologetic — yet increasingly solitary — iconoclast. In a 132-page dissent, Reinhardt said he doubts the constitutional protections at stake will evoke much concern in the political world. ”

Becket Fund: In a stunning reversal of its 2002 rejection of the Pledge of Allegiance, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco today ruled, in a 193-page opinion, that the words ‘one nation under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance do not violate the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. The challenge to the Pledge was brought by atheist activist Dr. Michael Newdow. The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a non-profit civil rights law firm, argued the case to the Court two years ago, along with the Department of Justice and attorneys representing a Sacramento-area school district . . . ”

9th Circuit: Teacher-led recitation of the pledge of allegiance is constitutional

“This case calls upon us to decide whether the national motto of the United States, ‘In God We Trust,’ and its inscription on the Nation’s coins and currency, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment . . . ”

“A federal appeals court has ruled that Nevada has the right to ban certain advertisements of legal brothels, saying it doesn’t violate the First Amendment of free speech . . . ”

“. . . the Pledge is constitutional.”

“How can giving taxpayers a choice evince a governmental motive to advance religion?”

United States District Court for the Northern District of California: “Broadcasting closing arguments would require Chief Judge Walker to request that these arguments be included in the Ninth Circuit’s pilot program and approval of that request by Chief Judge Kozinski. No such request has been made.”

LA Times: “Berkeley professor Goodwin Liu, son of immigrants, would be youngest judge on the appeals court. He clerked for Ruth Bader Ginsburg and worked in government offices during the Clinton administration.”

OneNewsNow: “A Christian student in the Los Angeles Community College District is carrying his free-speech case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals . . . Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) attorney David Hacker tells OneNewsNow that Lopez chose to speak about his Christian beliefs. ‘And during that speech, when he mentioned that marriage is between a man and a woman according to his Christian beliefs, the professor called him this horrible name, refused to let him finish the assignment, and told other students in the class, “If you’re offended, you can leave,”‘ Hacker explains.”

Blog of the Legal Times: “It was clear even before he was nominated that Goodwin Liu would stir up activists as few other Obama judicial nominees have. Since he was named on Feb. 24, supporters and opponents both have jumped into vigorous debate over what Liu’s jurisprudence would look like if he were confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.”

WorldNetDaily: “The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has begun reviewing a request by the Los Angeles Community College District for permission to reactivate speech restrictions . . . ‘Seventy percent of American colleges have unconstitutional speech codes,’ Hacker told WND. ‘Christians and all students should not be punished for simply expressing views on topics that are appropriate on campus.’”

CBN News: “A California college student is getting his day in court after his professor ridiculed him for speaking about Christianity in a classroom speech . . . ‘A public college shouldn’t penalize Christian students for expressing their beliefs, let alone seek to enforce policies that have already been found unconstitutional,’ said Alliance Defense Fund Litigation Staff Counsel David J. Hacker.” Article includes a video interview with ADF Attorney Jordan Lorence on CBN Newschannel’s Morning program.

ADF attorney David French appeared on the Michael Medved Show to discuss oral arguments in Lopez v. Candaele. The MP3 runs approximately 15 and a half minutes.

NBC Bay Area: “The two sides in the case — a pair of same-sex couples on one hand and the sponsors of California’s Proposition 8 on the other — filed their final briefs late Friday shortly before a midnight deadline.”

San Francisco Chronicle: “Despite a rebuff from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Bay Area’s federal judges are again proposing to allow cameras in their courtrooms, a plan that could lead to telecasting of closing arguments in a suit challenging California’s ban on same-sex marriage.” Renewed Notice Concerning Revision of Civil Local Rule 77-3

LA Times: “UC Berkeley’s Goodwin Liu will be nominated to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, The Times has learned. Though he will face opposition from conservatives, he has admirers in that camp as well.”

“Nude dancing is not necessarily a crime of ‘moral turpitude’ warranting deportation, a divided federal appeals court ruled.”

Christian Newswire: “Attorneys with Americans United for Life filed a brief in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that Arizona’s 2009 informed consent law is a constitutionally-appropriate expression of the state’s legitimate interest in safeguarding the health of women considering abortions . . . ”

“United States v. Little concludes that Internet obscenity distribution prosecutions may rely on the community standard of the place in which the material was distributed . . . ”

Seattle Times: “The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has harshly rebuked a Seattle-based federal judge for sentencing would-be millennium bomber Ahmed Ressam to 22 years in prison, a penalty the court said failed to ‘protect the public’ from the al-Qaida-trained terrorist.”

Religion Clause Blog: “In an unpublished opinion which sets out none of the relevant facts, the 9th Circuit last Friday in Lowry v. Yavapai County Board of Supervisors, (9th Cir., Jan. 22, 2010), rejected a pro se appeal in a case in which plaintiffs claimed that a zoning decision violated their free exercise rights.”

Jonathan H. Adler writing at The Volokh Conspiracy: “The Daily Journal reports that President Obama is “poised” to nominate Professor Goodwin Liu, Associate Dean at the University of California at Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Prof. Liu is an accomplished scholar with an impressive background. But I also suspect his nomination could face a chilly reception from Senate Republicans, and not simply because he is a liberal academic . . . I believe Senate Republicans are likely to oppose Prof. Liu for multiple reasons. First, Prof. Liu Chairs the Board of Directors the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy . . . Second, Prof. Liu was an outspoken critic of President Bush’s nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.”

“. . . the 9th Circuit rejected constitutional challenges to the University of California’s admissions policy that refuses to accept certain high school courses offered by Christian schools to qualify students for admission to UC . . .”

Law.com (The National Law Journal): “The fast-moving dispute over broadcast access to the federal trial on California’s ban on same-sex marriage has triggered a dustup within the leadership of the federal judiciary. Last Friday, on the eve of the San Francisco trial, top officials of the Judicial Conference of the United States sent a stern letter (pdf) to Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reminding him of Judicial Conference policy against televising trials. Kozinski wrote back on Sunday, warning that, if federal courts don’t experiment with access and technology, Congress will force the federal courts to act.”

Ed Whelan writing at National Review Online Bench Memos: “Some time on Sunday, Kozinski sent a six-page letter to Judge Anthony Scirica, chairman of the executive committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States, and to James C. Duff, secretary of that body. Kozinski’s letter responded to a January 8 letter from Scirica and Duff in which they had written ‘to bring to [his] attention … the policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States which does not allow courtroom proceedings in civil and criminal trials in district courts to be broadcast, televised, recorded or photographed for the purpose of public dissemination.’ Scirica and Duff asked Kozinski ‘to consider the Judicial Conference policy’ in deciding whether to authorize televising the anti-Proposition 8 trial.”

. . . the U.S. Judicial Conference — the policymaking arm of the federal courts — wrote to Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, reminding him that the Conference has a policy against any ‘public dissemination’ of TV . . .

Bay Area Reporter: “Defending the anti-gay measure is the Alliance Defense Fund, which represents the group that pushed to pass Prop 8, ProtectMarriage.com. In a legal twist, both Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown are not defending the state law and have, in fact, told the court that Prop 8 is unconstitutional.”

Seattle Post-Intelligencer: “Tuesday’s split ruling by a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel puts those restrictions in doubt, as two of three judges reviewing the voting rights lawsuit found that the state restrictions unfairly penalize minorities.”

Farrakhan v. Gregoire, No. 06-35669 (9th Cir. Jan. 5, 2010)

“Instead, the court concluded, the school is a private company . . . ”

Pat Trueman, special counsel for ADF, appeared on Wallbuilders Live to discuss the problem of sexting and recent obscenity rulings.

The MP3 runs just over 9 minutes.

Community Defense Counsel Abstract: 9th Circuit: National community standard must be applied in regulating Internet obscenity

Community Defense Counsel: 11th Circuit Obscenity Case Tests Community Standards on the Internet