Courts & Law

9th Circuit Court of Appeals strikes down the ‘Kochtopus’ Anti-ObamaCare Prop. 106

by

Image: Supreme Court Upholds Obama's Affordable Care ActIn 2010, Dr. Eric Novack was the front man for “The Health Care Freedom Act,” aka the Arizona Health Insurance Reform Amendment, Proposition 106. Proposition 106 was proposed to amend the Arizona Constitution by barring any rules or regulations that would force state residents to participate in a health-care system, i.e., “ObamaCare.” The proposed amendment would also ensure that individuals would have the right to pay for private health insurance. The Arizona legislature referred the measure to the ballot. Voters approved Prop. 106 in 2010.

Dr. Eric Novack was the front man of an organization called the U.S. Health Freedom Coalition, which was financed almost entirely by the “Kochtopus” organization Center to Protect Patient Right.

Read more

Arizona Court of Appeals rules on ‘dark money’ disclosures (expect an appeal)

by

dark_moneyThe Arizona Court of Appeals has held that the Committee for Justice and Fairness, financed by the Democratic Attorney Generals Association which spent about $1.5 million attacking Republican Tom Horne in the 2010 attorney general’s race, can be forced to disclose the source of their cash even if their commercials don’t specifically advocate for anyone’s election or defeat.

This case requires some background.  An Administrative Law Judge ruled that the Committee for Justice and Fairness violated state laws by not registering as a campaign committee. Its television ads urged viewers to contact Horne’s office at the Arizona Department of Education and voice their concerns, though it made no reference to his attorney general campaign or his Democratic opponent, Felecia Rotellini.

That ALJ opinion was appealed to the Maricopa County Superior Court. Superior Court Judge Crane McClennen ruled that two provisions of Arizona statutory law were unconstitutional in reversing the ALJ.

Read more

Voter ID: a solution in search of a problem, or just a means to an end?

by

VotersA cause célèbre for conservative is the idea that hoards of non-citizens or impersonators are voting at the polls, and that’s why we must have voter ID at the polls. Conspiracy theorists like John Fund have turned this fear mongering into a profitable cottage industry.

I have posted about the several media and academic studies done over the years on this subject which entirely refute the fantasy that there is in-person “voter fraud” occurring at the polls. It is virtually non-existent.

Justin Levitt, a professor at Loyola University Law School and an expert in constitutional law and the law of democracy, with a particular focus on election administration and redistricting, has the latest research. A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast:

Voter ID laws are back in the news once again, with two new opinions from the Wisconsin Supreme Court late last week dealing with the state’s ID requirement, which would allow people to vote only if they provide certain forms of government-issued ID. The Court made some minor changes to the law but otherwise upheld it. However, the ID requirement is still on hold pending a federal lawsuit.

Read more

Same-sex marriage appeals arrive at SCOTUS (‘Windsor Sequels’)

by

EqualThe nation’s longest-running federal court challenge to a state ban on same-sex marriage — now in its tenth year — reached the Supreme Court on Wednesday.  Lyle Denniston reports at SCOTUSblog.com, Oklahoma clerk appeals on same-sex marriage:

A county clerk in Oklahoma filed a petition seeking to defend that state’s ban, one day after a similar appeal was filed by Utah officials.  The Oklahoma case (Smith v. Bishop) has been docketed as 14-136. Other cases are due at the Court soon.

And in Same-sex marriage issue reaches the Court early:

Virginia officials will be submitting their own petition to the Supreme Court on Friday, Attorney General Mark R. Herring said in a filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

Read more

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals hears six same-sex marriage appeals from four states

by

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals this afternoon heard six same-sex marriage appeals from four states:

DeBoer, et al v. Snyder, et al, Case No. 14-1341 (E.D. Michigan)

Obergefell, et al v. Himes, et al., Case No. 14-3057 (S.D. Ohio) consolidated with Henry, et al. v. Himes, Case No. 14-3464 (S.D. Ohio)

Bourke, et al v. Beshear, et al, Case No. 14-5291 (W.D. Kentucky). consolidated with Love, et al. v. Beshear , Case. No. 14-5818 (W.D. Kentucky)

Tanco, et al. v. Haslam, Case No. 14-5297 (M.D. Tennessee)

The Cincinnati Enquirer reports, Gay marriage hearing ends: How will court rule?:

EqualTwo Republican-appointed judges weighing the fate of gay marriage in four states, including Ohio and Kentucky, didn’t give much away as they peppered lawyers on both sides Wednesday with hard-hitting questions.

Especially difficult to read was Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton, whose queries fell on both sides of the issue. At one point, he declared that modern-day marriage is about “love, affection and commitment” rather than procreation – poking a hole in one argument against legalizing same-sex marriage.

Then, at another, he criticized gay rights advocates for trying to bypass voters. “Changing hearts and minds happens much more effectively through the Democratic process than through the courts,” Sutton said.

[Well Judge, fundamental civil rights are not subject to a plebiscite vote. That’s what makes them fundamental rights.]

Read more