tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-96150482024-03-18T16:53:45.120-04:00Southern District of Florida BlogThe SDFLA Blog is dedicated to providing news and notes regarding federal practice in the Southern District of Florida. The New Times calls the blog "the definitive source on South Florida's federal court system." All tips on court happenings are welcome and will remain anonymous. Please email David Markus at dmarkus@markuslaw.comDavid Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.comBlogger4572125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-70247865078905062462024-03-18T08:08:00.005-04:002024-03-18T08:51:54.711-04:00Missing Justice Scalia<p> SCOTUS ruled that "and" means "or." It's pretty wild.</p><p>T<a href="https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201914650.enb.pdf">he 11th Circuit, apparently more honest and less conservative than SCOTUS, previously held that and means and</a>.</p><p>The Supreme Court case is <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/03/court-limits-safety-valve-in-federal-sentencing-law/">Pulsifer</a> and it demonstrates that today's Court is one of the most prosecution friendly in a long long time. I'm sure Scalia would have ruled for the defendant here and I bet he would have carried a majority. Instead, Justice Kagan takes the government's position that and means or, which is pretty devastating to thousands of prisoners who would have received relief under the First Step Act. </p><p>Justice Gorsuch, who is trying to take over the Scalia mantle as willing to rule for a criminal defendant if that's what the text says, wrote an incredible dissent. It's worth a read. </p><p><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/03/court-limits-safety-valve-in-federal-sentencing-law/">Here's SCOTUSblog's take</a>:</p><i>Justice Elena Kagan’s opinion for a sharply divided court in <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/pulsifer-v-united-states/">Pulsifer v. United States</a> resolves an ambiguity in the provisions added to federal sentencing law in the First Step Act of 2018, coming down firmly on the side of the government. The problem involves how to read a “safety valve” in federal criminal sentencing laws, which allows defendants to avoid the often lengthy mandatory minimum sentences scattered throughout the federal criminal code. The safety valve requires the defendant to satisfy a laundry list of each of five separate rules.<br /><br />This case involves the first of those rules, which assesses the defendant’s criminal history. Generally speaking, the point of the provision is that defendants with a serious criminal history are not eligible for the safety valve, and thus must serve the normal mandatory minimum sentence. Before the First Step Act, the criminal history provision excluded all defendants with more than one criminal history point; the First Step Act relaxed that provision, adopting the view that it made the safety valve unreasonably narrow. What the 2018 law substituted was a rule that involves three separate tests, which Kagan describes as testing for “more than 4 criminal history points,” a “3-point offense,” and a “2-point violent offense.” Treating those three tests as A, B, and C, Kagan quotes the statute’s limitation of the safety valve to a defendant who “does not have” A, B, “and” C.<br /><br />The dispute in the case turns on the meaning of the “and” between subparagraphs B and C. For its part, Kagan explains, “the Government contends that the phrase … creates a checklist with three distinct conditions. [Thus], a person fails to meet the requirement … if he has any one of the three.” In contrast, the defendant contends that the phrase ‘does not have A, B, and C’ sets out a single, amalgamated condition for relief, [which] a defendant … fails … only when he has all three of A, B, and C.” Kagan ultimately agrees with the government’s harsher view: Defendants lose the safety valve if they have A, they lose if they have B, and they lose if they have C.</i>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-86874484782376684512024-03-14T07:54:00.006-04:002024-03-14T07:54:48.816-04:00Federal Judges, including Altman and Scola, head to Israel<p> Looks like it’s an amazing trip. The Jerusalem Post covers it <a href="https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-791830">here</a>:</p><i>A delegation of 14 US federal judges arrived in Israel on Sunday for a week-long educational tour on the impact of the October 7 massacre and its challenges to the <a href="https://www.jpost.com/jerusalem-report/article-731034">Israeli legal system</a> and the laws of war.<br /><br />The delegation, facilitated with the help of the World Jewish Congress, also saw the judges visit the Supreme Court of Justice and meet with Justice Ofer Grosskopf.<br /><br />"We came to learn about how the Israeli legal system works," said Florida Southern District Court Judge Roy Altman, one of the organizers of the trip.<br /><br />The Jewish Venezuelan-born judge—the youngest federal judge appointed in the US—wanted to know how the legal system managed to address terrorism in general and post-October 7. He noted that the United States saw a lot of new security legislation introduced since the September 11 terrorist attacks, and the discourse centered around the balance of individual rights against safety concerns.<br /><br />Altman said he was interested in learning "How is Israel managing that balance?"<br /><br />***<br /><br />Florida Southern District Court Senior Judge Rober Scola said that he and the entire world were hoping for peace in the Middle East and hoped that Israelis and Palestinians would one day cease fighting over the land and achieve harmony.<br /><br />On Monday, the delegation spoke to a Palestinian activist, who Scola said impressed upon him the needs required to achieve peace. He hoped that the activist was not a lone voice in the Palestinian community but represented a broader consensus.<br /><br />Altman said that the judges were there to learn from all sides; in addition to hearing from the Palestinian activist, they also "heard from the acting American ambassador at the time of October 7, so we also heard the American perspective."<br /><br />While he hoped to see advancement toward peace, Scola said that trust and the quest for peace were going to require the return of hostages, and it had to be appreciated that it was going to take a while for Israelis to process the trauma of October 7. <br /><br />"One thing that is palpable is how devastating this attack has been to the people here," said Scola.</i><p><br /></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com15tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-59891133469860597912024-03-12T22:33:00.005-04:002024-03-12T22:33:37.682-04:00News & Notes<p>1.<span> FACDL-Miami calls for reform at the Miami SAO. Their statement is <a href="https://facdlmiami.com/uncategorized/demand-for-reform-by-state-attorney-katherine-fernandez-rundle-following-the-disqualification-of-miami-dade-county-prosecutors/">here</a>.</span></p><p><span>2. There's a new federal rule to prevent forum shopping. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/judge-selection-forum-shopping.html">The NYT story</a>:</span></p><div class="css-53u6y8"><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">When
anti-abortion activists sued the Food and Drug Administration in 2022
seeking to overturn the approval of the abortion drug mifepristone, they
filed their suit in the federal court in Amarillo, Texas, where it was
all but assured that the case would be heard by Judge Matthew J.
Kacsmaryk, <a class="css-yywogo" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/04/08/abortion-pill-ruling-judge-matthew-kacsmaryk/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="">an outspoken opponent</a> of abortion.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">Judge Kacsmaryk, the sole federal judge in Amarillo, wound up agreeing with the plaintiffs that the drug was “unsafe.” In <a class="css-yywogo" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/11/us/abortion-pill-ruling.html" title="">his ruling</a>,
he invalidated the F.D.A.’s 23-year-old approval of the drug and opened
a new front in the post-Dobbs reckoning over abortion rights.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">The suit — and the role of Judge Kacsmaryk, who handles <a class="css-yywogo" href="https://www.txnd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/orders/3-327.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="">95 percent</a>
of the Amarillo civil caseload — was one of the most striking recent
examples of “forum shopping,” where plaintiffs to try to cherry-pick
sympathetic judges.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">Now, forum shopping is about to get harder.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">The panel of federal judges who set policy for the rest of federal judiciary on Tuesday <a class="css-yywogo" href="https://www.uscourts.gov/news/2024/03/12/conference-acts-promote-random-case-assignment" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="">announced a new rule</a> intended to curb the practice in civil cases with nationwide implications, like the mifepristone suit.</p><div class="css-s99gbd StoryBodyCompanionColumn"><div class="css-53u6y8"><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">In
such cases, where plaintiffs are seeking a sweeping remedy, like a
nationwide injunction, the judge will be assigned at random from across
the district instead of defaulting to the judge or judges in a
particular courthouse.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0">3. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/sotomayor-barrett-supreme-court.html">Justices Sotomayor and Barrett discuss </a>relationships on the Court (also via the NYT):</p><div class="css-53u6y8"><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">A week after
Justice Amy Coney Barrett chastised Justice Sonia Sotomayor for choosing
“to amplify disagreement with stridency” in a <a class="css-yywogo" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="">Supreme Court decision</a>
on former President Donald J. Trump’s eligibility to hold office, the
two women appeared together on Tuesday to discuss civics and civility.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">They
gave, for the most part, a familiar account of a collegial court whose
members know how to disagree without being disagreeable.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">“We
don’t speak in a hot way at our conferences,” Justice Barrett said,
referring to the private meetings at which the justices discuss cases.
“We don’t raise our voices no matter how hot-button the case is.”</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">Justice Sotomayor, who usually gives a sunny description of relations between the justices, registered a partial dissent.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">“Occasionally someone might come close to
something that could be viewed as hurtful,” Justice Sotomayor said.
When that happens, she said, a senior colleague will sometimes call the
offending justice, suggesting an apology or other way of patching things
up.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0" style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">Similar interactions can happen
if a draft opinion is too sharp, she said. “There is dialogue around
that, an attempt to find a different expression,” she said.</p><p class="css-at9mc1 evys1bk0">4. The U.S. Marshals want more $$ to protect the Justices. <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/us-marshals-seeks-funds-to-protect-justices-homes-full-time">Via Bloomberg</a>:</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">The US Marshals Service is seeking $28 million to staff permanent
protective details for the Supreme Court justices’ homes, a task it says
is straining agency resources nationwide, according to a Justice
Department fiscal 2025 budget proposal.</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">The Marshals Service—which
provides protection for members of the federal judiciary—has been
temporarily deploying deputy US marshals from each of the country’s 94
judicial districts to handle the 24/7 security for the justices’ nine
main residences, plus one vacation home, according to <a href="https://aboutblaw.com/bc8D">budget documents</a> published Monday.</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">In
fiscal 2023, 23% of deputy US marshals supported at least one
residential protection rotation at a justice’s home lasting two to three
weeks, according to the budget document. The request says that the
service currently sends each new graduating class of deputy US marshals
“immediately” to the justices’ homes, where they work for 75 days.</p><div style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">The
around-the-clock protection began at the request of Attorney General
Merrick Garland in May 2022, after the leak of a draft opinion ahead of
the court’s overturning of the constitutional right to abortion, the
Marshals said. </div><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">The Marshal Service said that, as it deals with
other security requests tied to “high-visibility” cases, it needs
permanent staff to secure the homes. The service said that full-time
personnel is preferred, especially those with specific training who can
work toward “the best outcome if an attack or other threat event should
occur.” It also cites “the extreme level of impact to the government and
the nation if the Justices are not properly safeguarded” in making the
request.</p></div></div><aside aria-label="companion column" class="css-ew4tgv"></aside></div><span class="css-1ly73wi e1tej78p0"></span><picture class="css-1j5kxti" style="opacity: 1;"><source media="(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 3),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 3),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 3dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 288dpi)"></source><source media="(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 2dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 192dpi)"></source><source media="(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 1),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 1),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 1dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 96dpi)"></source></picture></div><p></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-50271383253107633932024-03-10T22:08:00.001-04:002024-03-10T22:08:24.624-04:00What should happen to prosecutors who commit misconduct?<p>The blog has addressed this question a bunch of times and it's time to ask it again in light of what happened before Judge Wolfson in state court. <a href="https://www.myjournalcourier.com/news/article/veteran-miami-prosecutor-quits-after-judge-s-18770612.php">Here's the AP coverage</a>, and Rumpole covers it <a href="http://justicebuilding.blogspot.com/2024/03/lying-liars.html">here</a>. </p><p>Although it is an epidemic in both systems, my sense is that prosecutorial misconduct happens less frequently in Florida state court than in federal court, mostly because Florida has depositions and more open discovery. Do you agree?</p><p>Also, when it does happen, judges are more likely to call it out in state court and there are more immediate consequences. In this case, the prosecutor resigned. And Kathy Rundle issued a statement. When does that happen in fed-land?</p><p>Much more needs to be done in both systems if there's going to be a real deterrent. <br /></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-38447423095307838292024-03-08T11:36:00.003-05:002024-03-08T11:36:53.841-05:00Your Friday moment of Zen<p> Judges are always proud of their law clerks. But imagine the pride when you hear that your two former clerks are arguing against each other in the 11th Circuit. Here's Ariel Lett and Zach Vosseler, who both clerked for Judge Gayles, after their argument before the appellate court.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi21d9WS0mtaIamyJjUhpGY3TG2YoPkg00vfOThFAQahUERQ9rMDgb-m8qTecTLL8vEwPyFYDeUSn6Beq0ZEMfhFEWiTM4cvCP8Jy6HC62itWJoAbl7wDFo1B_icFRtPF_4CiJpBZjbsKKGTQsvtne3V2gc45Pi37HQtessTzeo7mlsEXCFnTVt-g/s2856/IMG_1351.heic" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2856" data-original-width="2142" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi21d9WS0mtaIamyJjUhpGY3TG2YoPkg00vfOThFAQahUERQ9rMDgb-m8qTecTLL8vEwPyFYDeUSn6Beq0ZEMfhFEWiTM4cvCP8Jy6HC62itWJoAbl7wDFo1B_icFRtPF_4CiJpBZjbsKKGTQsvtne3V2gc45Pi37HQtessTzeo7mlsEXCFnTVt-g/w300-h400/IMG_1351.heic" width="300" /></a></div><br /><p><br /></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-79616889977317084602024-03-06T03:30:00.003-05:002024-03-06T08:49:46.643-05:00Judge Melissa Damian has been sworn in (UPDATED)<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBrjbuHVe1INXOCGAxVWuU6xAPJKSIHf0nZeqSDwmAVTOflqpl30tyALy4ogmOOzfc5lEqLns6FM0PL8jlc734i1zRdv1wGz9Wgv67hE88jlKoaptuczoPqmgX9tOSJMJQOvKEt_RqnFqNWgEZv2J2q0KWpOJe8IrGdlsRhzqqVmkyI-CKhF1buQ/s1760/damian%20swearing%20in.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="990" data-original-width="1760" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBrjbuHVe1INXOCGAxVWuU6xAPJKSIHf0nZeqSDwmAVTOflqpl30tyALy4ogmOOzfc5lEqLns6FM0PL8jlc734i1zRdv1wGz9Wgv67hE88jlKoaptuczoPqmgX9tOSJMJQOvKEt_RqnFqNWgEZv2J2q0KWpOJe8IrGdlsRhzqqVmkyI-CKhF1buQ/w640-h360/damian%20swearing%20in.jpeg" width="640" /></a><br /><p>That's her with her children and Chief Judge Altonaga. </p><p>That means all three new judges are in and working. Congratulations again to all three!</p><p>Cases will now start getting transferred.</p><p>Let the fun begin.</p><p><b>Update </b>with a picture of the swearing in of David Leibowitz, with his wife and son, by Judge Marcus. Judges Altonaga, Moreno, and Jordan were also present </p><p><b></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPnBKlcrQofnIUSv6Ci2cna7TmRw6k1Y8gXibIL9DmqnN3hkeNpovrvoqgNOqIQQeK1lj5psyhOU49mdBlE6mdsi8G8A5GhcTvkroACWMj_xsyOxJcKoDiL1r-WjV7NEF7z2keeviTrFS7oeE5r_rupvPvdHDmjFf2povUaKUWUclcuI0NJdi4hw/s4032/IMG_8331.heic" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3024" data-original-width="4032" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPnBKlcrQofnIUSv6Ci2cna7TmRw6k1Y8gXibIL9DmqnN3hkeNpovrvoqgNOqIQQeK1lj5psyhOU49mdBlE6mdsi8G8A5GhcTvkroACWMj_xsyOxJcKoDiL1r-WjV7NEF7z2keeviTrFS7oeE5r_rupvPvdHDmjFf2povUaKUWUclcuI0NJdi4hw/w640-h480/IMG_8331.heic" width="640" /></a></b></div><b><br /></b><p></p><p></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-54189758703875221142024-03-05T05:00:00.012-05:002024-03-05T17:38:03.102-05:00You won't believe this total screw up in the Trump case yesterday from SCOTUS<p><b><u>UPDATE</u></b> -- check out <a href="https://sdfla.blogspot.com/2024/03/you-wont-believe-this-total-screw-up-in.html?showComment=1709674203412#c2753701799324909135">Robert Kuntz' comment </a>in the comment section, theorizing that the metadata debacle wasn't incompetence but was intentional. I doubt it because it would not surprise me for a second that SCOTUS just does not understand basic tech issues. Your thoughts?</p><p> It's really hard to believe, but the Supreme Court forgot to wipe the metadata from the Trump opinion that came out yesterday. Internet sleuths found that the three liberal Justices' "concurrence" actually started out as a partial dissent by Justice Sotomayor. <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/03/supreme-court-metadata-sotomayor-trump-dissent.html">Slate tells the story here</a>:</p><blockquote>The Supreme Court’s decision on Monday to <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf">keep Donald Trump</a> on Colorado’s ballot was styled as a unanimous one without any dissents. But the metadata tells a different story. On the page, a separate opinion by the liberal justices is styled as a concurrence in the judgment, authored jointly by the trio. In the <a href="https://x.com/JakeTruscott_44/status/1764723582947475820?s=20">metadata of the link</a> to the opinion posted by the court, however, this opinion is styled as an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, authored not by all three justices but by Sonia Sotomayor alone. Even a techphobic reader can discern this incongruity through careful <a href="https://x.com/mjs_DC/status/1764720374107767190?s=20">copying and pasting</a>, piercing the facade of unanimity that the conservative justices sought to present.<br /><br />What happened? Most obviously, the Supreme Court rushed out this opinion and forgot to check the metadata. The court, after all, scheduled the opinion’s release only one day earlier, on Sunday afternoon, evidently to hand it down before Tuesday’s Colorado primary. Moreover, the justices did not take the bench to announce the opinion, as they usually do—probably because they had not all planned to be in D.C.—further proving that it was a last-minute release. The deeper question remains, of course: Why was an opinion originally authored by a lone justice as a partial dissent transformed into a concurrence authored by all three liberals together?</blockquote><p>In other news, the 11th Circuit bench-slapped DeSantis and Florida for passing a law called the Stop W.O.K.E. Act that prohibited woke mandatory workplace training. It obviously violated the First Amendment. <a href="https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202213135.pdf">Per Judge Grant, joined by Wilson and Brasher</a>:</p><p></p><blockquote><p> This is not the first era in which Americans have held widely
divergent views on important areas of morality, ethics, law, and
public policy. And it is not the first time that these disagreements
have seemed so important, and their airing so dangerous, that
something had to be done. But now, as before, the First
Amendment keeps the government from putting its thumb on the
scale.
The State of Florida seeks to bar employers from holding
mandatory meetings for their employees if those meetings endorse
viewpoints the state finds offensive. But meetings on those same
topics are allowed if speakers endorse viewpoints the state agrees
with, or at least does not object to. This law, as Florida concedes,
draws its distinctions based on viewpoint—the most pernicious of
dividing lines under the First Amendment. But the state insists that
ordinary First Amendment review does not apply because the law
restricts conduct, not speech. </p><p>We cannot agree, and we reject this latest attempt to control
speech by recharacterizing it as conduct. Florida may be exactly
right about the nature of the ideas it targets. Or it may not. Either
way, the merits of these views will be decided in the clanging
marketplace of ideas rather than a codebook or a courtroom. </p></blockquote><p></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-25375717406588092352024-03-04T08:21:00.000-05:002024-03-04T08:21:28.699-05:00Eleventh Circuit Votes En Banc to Consider Forum Designations<span style="font-family: inherit;">By <a href="https://maderalbyrne.com">John R. Byrne</a></span><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">For you First Amendment scholars out there, the Eleventh Circuit just granted re hearing en banc in <i>McDonough v. Garcia</i>, 90 F.4th 1080, 1086 (11th Cir. 2024). The case involved a community gadfly-type who was barred from attending Homestead city council meetings. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in;"><o:p><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In the opinion, Judge Grant surveyed Supreme Court and Eleventh Circuit cases discussing the four types of forums--traditional public forums, designated public forums, limited public forums, and non-public forums. The panel, seemingly begrudgingly, ruled that city council meetings fell into the more speech friendly "designated public forum" category, reversing the district court's grant of summary judgment to Homestead. But it seems like the Eleventh Circuit may be interested in moving those meetings into the less speech friendly "limited public forum" bucket (meaning the city can restrict speech so long as those restrictions are viewpoint neutral and reasonable).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in;"><o:p><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">Attached is the panel opinion, which is a must read if you're a law student about to take the final in your First Amendment class.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: Aptos, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div><a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/710299838/McDonough#from_embed" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" title="View McDonough on Scribd">McDonough</a><span style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> by </span><a href="https://www.scribd.com/user/521410006/John-Byrne#from_embed" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" title="View John Byrne's profile on Scribd">John Byrne</a><span style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> on Scribd</span></div><iframe class="scribd_iframe_embed" data-aspect-ratio="0.75" data-auto-height="false" frameborder="0" height="600" id="doc_1454" scrolling="no" src="https://www.scribd.com/embeds/710299838/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&access_key=key-A1Gs2ip2YW3dAClzCsxQ" title="McDonough" width="100%"></iframe>John R. Byrnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01296732486692497977noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-35422685388748432042024-03-01T07:54:00.006-05:002024-03-01T19:52:35.806-05:00Friday news<p> First, a big congrats to our three new judges. Jackie Becerra, David Leibowitz, and Melissa Damian were all confirmed this week. And Judge Becerra was sworn in yesterday, which means she will take the Miami seat. The next judge who is sworn in will spend a short amount of time in Ft. Lauderdale and then to Miami. The third judge to be sworn in will be in Ft. Lauderdale for a while. Current judges: get your transfer orders ready!</p><p>In case-related news, Manuel Rocha, the Cuban spy, announced yesterday that he would be pleading guilty. That was FAST. <a href="https://apnews.com/article/cuba-secret-agent-manuel-rocha-us-ambassador-b37ced95151526af4a9607eb50d9752d">From the AP's Joshua Goodman</a>:<br /><br /><i>A former career U.S. diplomat told a federal judge Thursday he will plead guilty to charges of working for decades as a secret agent for communist Cuba, an unexpectedly swift resolution to a case prosecutors called one of the most brazen betrayals in the history of the U.S. foreign service.<br /><br />Manuel Rocha’s stunning fall from grace could culminate in a lengthy prison term after the 73-year-old said he would admit to federal counts of conspiring to act as an agent of a foreign government.<br /><br />Prosecutors and Rocha’s attorney indicated the plea deal includes an agreed-upon sentence but they did not disclose details at a hearing Thursday. He is due back in court April 12, when he is scheduled to formalize his guilty plea and be sentenced.<br /><br />The brief hearing shed no new light on the question that has proved elusive since Rocha’s arrest in December: What exactly did he do to help Cuba while working at the State Department for two decades? That included stints as ambassador to Bolivia and top posts in Argentina, Mexico, the White House and the U.S. Interests Section in Havana.<br /><br />“Ambassador Rocha,” as he preferred to be called, was well known among Miami’s elite for his aristocratic, almost regal, bearing befitting his Ivy League background. His post-government career included time as a special adviser to the commander of the U.S. Southern Command and more recently as a tough-talking Donald Trump supporter and Cuba hardliner, a persona friends and prosecutors say Rocha adopted to hide his true allegiances.</i></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-37756471607378578332024-02-27T05:30:00.007-05:002024-02-29T17:29:19.829-05:00New judge update (NUMEROUS UPDATES)<p>1. Jackie Becerra is up for a full vote at 11am. <b>UPDATE -- Becerra has been confirmed 56-40. </b></p><p><b>Thursday update -- Judge Becerra was sworn in today after President Biden signed her commission. </b></p><p>2. David Leibowitz is expected to be up for a full vote at 2pm. <b>UPDATE -- Leibowitz has been confirmed 64-33.</b></p><p>3. Melissa Damian is expected to get a cloture vote next week. <b>UPDATE -- Actually, it will be this week. Debate ends Wednesday, and full vote Thursday. SECOND UPDATE -- the Senate is moving quickly. Damian is scheduled for final floor vote at 5:30 today (Wednesday)</b><br /></p><p><b>Third Update -- Damian has been confirmed 77-20. </b></p><p><b>Congrats to all three new judges!!</b></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-61265196212781478072024-02-26T14:14:00.002-05:002024-02-26T14:14:19.466-05:00“As Hyman Roth said, ‘This is the business we have chosen.’‘’ <p> That was Judge Bob Scola at the plea and sentencing of Philip Esformes. The Herald covers it <a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article285778766.html#storylink=cpy">here</a>:</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">A South Florida businessman pleaded guilty on Thursday to stealing millions of dollars from the taxpayer-funded Medicare program, capping a long-running healthcare fraud case marked by a commutation of his initial 20-year sentence by President Donald Trump in late 2020. </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">Philip Esformes, who formerly lived in Miami Beach while running a chain of skilled-nursing and assisted-living facilities, showed no emotion as a federal judge spared him from going back to prison but imposed tens of millions of dollars in financial penalties reflecting his ill-gotten gains. </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">Other than acknowledging his criminal activity as a healthcare operator who paid and received bribes in exchange for Medicare patients, Esformes said little during his change of plea hearing in Miami federal court and didn’t respond to a reporter’s question afterward. </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">The plea agreement was reached earlier this month between the Justice Department and Esformes in one of the nation’s biggest Medicare fraud cases. Despite Trump’s commutation of his initial prison term, Esformes faced a potential retrial on the main healthcare fraud conspiracy count and five related charges from his first trial in 2019 because a Miami federal jury deadlocked on those offenses while finding him guilty on 20 others. The Justice Department vowed to retry Esformes as prosecutors negotiated a plea deal behind the scenes with his defense lawyers.<br /></p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">U.S. District Judge Robert Scola highlighted the “unusual” circumstances of Esformes’ healthcare fraud case, revealing for the first time what he thought about President Trump’s commutation of Esformes’ sentence after he had only served 4 1/2 years, including his time in detention after his arrest in July 2016. </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">“I can’t say that I was not disappointed when his sentence was commuted by the president,” Scola said, while pointing out that under the Constitution a president has the prerogative to grant clemency petitions. </p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><blockquote>Then, referring to a mob boss’ famous line in the Godfather II movie, the judge noted: “As Hyman Roth said, ‘This is the business we have chosen.’"</blockquote><br /><p></p><p style="text-align: left;"><br /></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-13845985895510258912024-02-25T14:06:00.002-05:002024-02-25T14:06:33.109-05:00Two new Magistrate Judge positions opening (hopefully!)<p> <a href="https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/two-expected-magistrate-judge-vacancies-miami">From the court's website</a>; applications are due 3/31.</p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;">The Judicial Conference of the United States has authorized the appointment of two full-time United States Magistrate Judges for the Southern District of Florida at Miami, Florida. <b>These appointments will succeed incumbents who are expected to be confirmed as United States District Judges.</b> The term of office is eight years.</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;">A full public notice is posted on the Court's website at:</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;" /><a href="https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="background-color: white; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;" target="_blank">https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;">.</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;">Interested persons may contact the Clerk of the District Court for additional information and application form. The application form is also available on the Court's website </span><a href="https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="background-color: white; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;" target="_blank">https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #212121; font-family: wf_segoe-ui_normal, "Segoe UI", "Segoe WP", Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 13.3333px;">. Applications must be submitted only by applicants personally to; FLSD_magistratejudgerecruitment@flsd.uscourts.gov no later than 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, March 31, 2024.</span></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-60169023044749315032024-02-23T08:27:00.001-05:002024-02-23T08:27:33.884-05:00Update on new judges <p> I'm told that Jackie Becerra and David Leibowitz will get floor votes as early as next week. They should both get sworn in shortly afterwards. Whoever is sworn in first will get the open Miami seat with the other judge starting out in Ft. Lauderdale. I'm also told that Melissa Damian will be in the next batch right behind them, maybe a few weeks away. Those transfer orders will be flying across CM/ECF! </p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-27496422117988075692024-02-21T09:04:00.002-05:002024-02-21T15:31:12.693-05:00Maduro, Pardons, and Sentence ReductionsBy <a href="https://maderalbyrne.com/attorney/john-r-byrne/">John R. Byrne</a><div><br /></div><div>President Biden may have pardoned Alex Saab, a Venezuelan businessman and Maduro supporter who conspired with others to inflate the price of food and medicine during a hunger crises in Venezuela. But some of his co-conspirators were left behind. Judge Ruiz recently granted one of those co-conspirators a hefty sentence reduction, noting his cooperation and contrasting his situation with others like Saab who had "skipped town." The Associated Press covers it <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/venezuela-bribery-witness-gets-light-sentence-wake-bidens-107309082">here</a>.<div><br /></div><div>Apparently the pardon of Saab was part of a goal "to improve relations with the OPEC nation and pave the way for freer elections." <br /></div></div>John R. Byrnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01296732486692497977noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-22214847815592054302024-02-20T08:30:00.003-05:002024-02-20T08:30:00.348-05:00Bonus Podcast Episode -- Judge Nancy Abudu<center><table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" id="bodyTable" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; background-color: white; background-image: none; background-position: center; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: cover; background: center center / cover no-repeat rgb(255, 255, 255); border-collapse: collapse; height: 100%; margin: 0px; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; padding: 0px; width: 100%;"><tbody><tr><td align="left" id="bodyCell" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-top-color: currentcolor; border-top-style: none; border-top-width: 0px; border-top: 0; height: 100%; margin: 0px; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding: 10px; width: 100%;" valign="top"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="templateContainer" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; border: 0px; max-width: 600px; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; width: 100%;"><tbody><tr><td id="templateHeader" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-bottom-color: currentcolor; border-bottom-style: none; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-bottom: 0; border-top-color: currentcolor; border-top-style: none; border-top-width: 0px; border-top: 0; mso-line-height-rule: exactly;" valign="top"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="mcnTextBlock" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; min-width: 100%; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; width: 100%;"><tbody class="mcnTextBlockOuter"><tr><td class="mcnTextBlockInner" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding-top: 9px;" valign="top"><table align="left" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="mcnTextContentContainer" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; width: 100%;"><tbody><tr><td class="mcnTextContent" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #202020; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 16px; line-height: 150%; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 18px; padding-right: 18px; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px 18px 9px; text-align: left; word-break: break-word;" valign="top"></td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr><tr><td id="templateBody" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-bottom-color: currentcolor; border-bottom-style: none; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-bottom: 0; border-top-color: currentcolor; border-top-style: none; border-top-width: 0px; border-top: 0; mso-line-height-rule: exactly;" valign="top"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="mcnTextBlock" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; min-width: 100%; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; width: 100%;"><tbody class="mcnTextBlockOuter"><tr><td class="mcnTextBlockInner" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding-top: 9px;" valign="top"><table align="left" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="mcnTextContentContainer" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; width: 100%;"><tbody><tr><td class="mcnTextContent" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #202020; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 16px; line-height: 150%; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 18px; padding-right: 18px; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px 18px 9px; text-align: left; word-break: break-word;" valign="top"><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: Default Size;"><span face="arial,helvetica neue,helvetica,sans-serif"><img data-file-id="6765391" height="415" src="https://mcusercontent.com/d26c742f8cdc3e725cb310938/images/01ef911f-7e9c-9dff-d7da-53d51bff3028.jpg" style="-ms-interpolation-mode: bicubic; border: 0px; height: 415px; margin: 0px; outline: currentcolor; text-decoration: none; width: 500px;" width="500" /></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;"><em>Judge Nancy Abudu being sworn in as our newest 11th Circuit judge</em></div>
<br />
I am very excited to share this bonus episode with you -- an interview with our newest 11th Circuit Judge, <u><strong>Nancy Abudu</strong></u>.
I think you will be impressed with how open and humble Judge Abudu is,
not to mention how smart and quick-witted. I had never met or spoken to
her before, and it struck me how likable and nice she was!
<div style="text-align: left;">
<p style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #202020; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 16px; line-height: 150%; margin: 10px 0px; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding: 0px; text-align: left;">You can access it on <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/for-the-defense-with-david-oscar-markus/id1536699806?i=1000645987819">Apple</a>, <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/3qP8MCyDABuTwNxNrjvSXi" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #007c89; font-weight: normal; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; text-decoration: underline;" target="_blank">Spotify</a>, or any other platform from <a href="http://ForTheDefensePodcast.com" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #007c89; font-weight: normal; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; text-decoration: underline;" target="_blank">our website here</a>.<br />
<br />
You'll recall we've had other 11th Circuit judges on the show before,
including Chief Judge Pryor and Judge Rosenbaum, as well as district
judges Charles Breyer, Jed Rakoff, and former judge John Gleeson. If I
was putting together a Supreme Court, these six would be a pretty good
start.</p>
Anyway, I hope you enjoy the episode with the terrific Judge Nancy Abudu.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: Default Size;"><span face="arial, helvetica neue, helvetica, sans-serif">Thank you! --David</span></span><br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: Default Size;"><span face="arial,helvetica neue,helvetica,sans-serif"><a href="http://forthedefensepodcast.com" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #007c89; font-weight: normal; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; text-decoration: underline;" target="_blank"><img data-file-id="5039861" height="250" src="https://mcusercontent.com/d26c742f8cdc3e725cb310938/images/4e5e5be2-6f57-4a21-9f65-df2befb4617e.jpg" style="-ms-interpolation-mode: bicubic; border: 0px; height: 250px; margin: 0px; outline: currentcolor; text-decoration: none; width: 250px;" width="250" /></a><br />
Hosted by <a href="https://markuslaw.com/attorney-profiles/david-oscar-markus/" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #007c89; font-weight: normal; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; text-decoration: underline;" target="_blank">David Oscar Markus</a> and produced by <a href="https://www.rakontur.com/" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #007c89; font-weight: normal; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; text-decoration: underline;" target="_blank">rakontur</a></span></span></div>
<br />
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td id="templateFooter" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-bottom-color: currentcolor; border-bottom-style: none; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-bottom: 0; border-top-color: currentcolor; border-top-style: none; border-top-width: 0px; border-top: 0; mso-line-height-rule: exactly;" valign="top"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="mcnTextBlock" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; min-width: 100%; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; width: 100%;">
<tbody class="mcnTextBlockOuter">
<tr>
<td class="mcnTextBlockInner" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding-top: 9px;" valign="top">
<table align="left" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="mcnTextContentContainer" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; width: 100%;">
<tbody><tr>
<td class="mcnTextContent" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #202020; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; line-height: 150%; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 18px; padding-right: 18px; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px 18px 9px; text-align: left; word-break: break-word;" valign="top">
<em></em>
<br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="mcnTextBlock" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; min-width: 100%; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; width: 100%;">
<tbody class="mcnTextBlockOuter">
<tr>
<td class="mcnTextBlockInner" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding-top: 9px;" valign="top">
<table align="left" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="mcnTextContentContainer" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; mso-table-lspace: 0pt; mso-table-rspace: 0pt; width: 100%;">
<tbody><tr>
<td class="mcnTextContent" style="-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; color: #202020; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; line-height: 150%; mso-line-height-rule: exactly; padding-bottom: 9px; padding-left: 18px; padding-right: 18px; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px 18px 9px; text-align: left; word-break: break-word;" valign="top"></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</center>
David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-79280285348758984622024-02-15T20:49:00.002-05:002024-02-15T20:49:35.730-05:00Some questions about Fani Willis and the defense motion:<p>1. What did you think about Fani Willis' demeanor on the stand?</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">Fani Willis: "I probably had some choice words about some of the things that you said that were dishonest within this motion. I don't know that it was a conversation, as you know, Mr. Wade is a southern gentleman, me not so much." <a href="https://twitter.com/Acyn?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Acyn</a> <a href="https://t.co/SDiwAD6GRs">pic.twitter.com/SDiwAD6GRs</a></p>— The Intellectualist (@highbrow_nobrow) <a href="https://twitter.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1758228005636161612?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 15, 2024</a></blockquote><p> <script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
2. What, if anything, should the Court order as a result of her affair with special prosecutor Nathan Wade?</p><p><br /></p><p><br />
</p><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">Nathan Wade admits to having had sexual relations with Fani Willis while trying Trump in court. WATCH <a href="https://t.co/UyttJzGA0F">pic.twitter.com/UyttJzGA0F</a></p>— Simon Ateba (@simonateba) <a href="https://twitter.com/simonateba/status/1758199425669677557?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 15, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
<p></p><p>3. If Trump wasn't the defendant, would you answer to #2 be different?</p><p><br /></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-30322274486402315242024-02-13T09:12:00.004-05:002024-02-13T14:00:04.118-05:00Will Second Thoughts Unwind Verdict? (UPDATES WITH BREAKING NEWS)<p><b><u>Breaking News Update</u></b>: Looks like we will have some new judges pretty soon as the Senate is moving forward. From its Twitter account this morning:</p><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">Vote scheduled: At 5:30pm, on Monday, February 26th, the Senate will proceed to a roll call vote on the motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar #468 Jacqueline Becerra to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida.</p>— Senate Cloakroom (@SenateCloakroom) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenateCloakroom/status/1757370896065462611?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 13, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script> <p></p><p>It also shows that Schumer filed cloture for David Leibowitz. I assume all three will be moving forward on the same timeline but I will update that as I get information.</p><p><b>Second update</b> -- Looks like Becerra and Leibowitz re up for unanimous consent this Friday, and all three nominees are still listed on the Senate calendar <a href="https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/executive_calendar/xcalv.pdf">here</a>.<br /></p><p><b><u>Original post</u></b>: By <a href="https://maderalbyrne.com/">John R. Byrne</a></p><p>You'd think this fact pattern has come up a few times in SDFLA given the sheer number of criminal trials that are held here. Jury renders verdict. Court polls jurors who all confirm verdict. Then juror (or jurors) contact Court after rendering verdict saying they really didn't believe in their verdict. </p><p>Judge Williams is currently dealing with just such a fact pattern. Last Thursday, a jury convicted a former British Virgin Islands premier--Andrew Fahie--of conspiring to import cocaine. Then two jurors contacted the Court to express misgivings. Herald covers it <a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article285387257.html?deviceId=165858AA-D376-491D-861C-6431FDA71D55&tempKey=value">here</a>.</p>John R. Byrnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01296732486692497977noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-88939860363704609922024-02-12T09:41:00.005-05:002024-02-12T09:41:59.879-05:00News & Notes<p> 1. Did the Special Counsel's office overreach by saying that Joe Biden has a bad memory? <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/08/biden-classified-documents-charges-special-counsel-00140509">From Politico</a>:<br /></p><blockquote>The special counsel investigating President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents has concluded that no criminal charges are warranted in the matter and said they wouldn’t be even if the Department of Justice didn’t have a policy barring the prosecution of sitting presidents.<br /><br />That conclusion was <a href="https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf">revealed in a 345-page report</a> that the Justice Department released on Thursday.<br /><br />But while the report withheld condemnation of Biden on legal grounds, it presented a harsh portrait of his conduct and mental faculties. Biden improperly took classified material related to the 2009 Afghanistan troop surge and shared classified information with the ghostwriter of his 2017 memoir. The report also includes photos of classified documents in insecure places, including a cardboard box in Biden’s garage and a filing cabinet under his TV.<br /><br />In the report, Special Counsel Robert Hur, a well-respected former U.S. Attorney, explained the president’s “lapses in attention and vigilance demonstrate why former officials should not keep classified materials unsecured at home and read them aloud to others, but jurors could well conclude that Mr. Biden’s actions were unintentional.”<br /><br />But he said that Biden would make a defense that many jurors would find sympathetic.<br /><br />“[A] trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” reads the report.</blockquote><p>2. Is Justice Jackson going to side with President Trump in the Colorado case? <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/02/ketanji-brown-jackson-trump-supreme-court-ballot.html">From Slate</a>:</p><blockquote>If there was any surprise on Thursday, it was Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s embrace of Mitchell’s main theory that the president is not an “officer” of the United States, so Section 3 does not apply to him at all. Jackson pointed out, correctly, that the amendment lists specific positions (like senator) from which insurrectionists are disqualified and does not mention the president. “Why is that?” she asked Murray. “And if there’s an ambiguity, why would we construe it … against democracy?” Jackson suggested that the amendment was “about preventing the South from rising again” and was intended to prevent Confederates from prevailing in “local elections” involving “local concerns.” Doesn’t it seem, she mused, that the Framers excluded the presidency because of the “troubling potential disuniformity of having different states enforce Section 3 with respect of presidential elections”?<br /><br />To be clear, Jackson’s argument mirrored that of <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/12/supreme-court-trump-ballot-removal-colorado-wrong.html">professor Lawrence Lessig</a> in Slate, not the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/us/politics/tillman-constitution-trump-colorado-ballot.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Tk0.383r.ZbxYiJdkekjR&bgrp=c&smid=url-share">bizarre fringe hypothesis</a> about a <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/295290/20240109145107356_23-719%20Amicus%20Brief%20Professors%20Barrett%20and%20Tillman%20Final.pdf">secret constitutional code</a> distinguishing office and officers. (Only Justice Neil Gorsuch poked at that idea, and even then with little enthusiasm.) Jackson’s fundamental concern mirrored that of Roberts and Kagan: Letting states disqualify federal candidates would create a patchwork of 50 wildly different regimes, handing a few swing states the authority to decide each presidential election. Sotomayor eventually gestured toward this fear as well, though she sounded genuinely torn, more so than her left-leaning colleagues. She pummeled Mitchell over his reliance on Griffin’s Case, his departure from the constitutional text, and his distortions of history. If any justice dissents, it will be Sotomayor. Yet she, too, can be a team player when called upon. And it is easy to envision the justice signing on to an opinion for Trump to create the impression of consensus.</blockquote><p></p><p></p><p> 3. Is the federal prison system in crisis? <a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/9615048/8893986036370460992?hl=en">From the Hill</a>:<br /><br /></p><blockquote><p>Due to officer shortages, other BOP employees including nurses, teachers, maintenance workers, and counselors are <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/01/us/politics/prison-guards-teachers-staff.html">regularly pulled away</a> from their main duties to fill in for officer vacancies. This practice, known as augmentation, affects the safety of both staff and inmates. The added workload and stress can lead to burnout, as individuals are managing multiple responsibilities without proper support. Pulling employees away from their regular duties also reduces inmate access to medical staff, education programs, and rehabilitation services and hampers our ability to fulfill the requirements of the <a href="https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105139">First Step Act</a>, which Congress passed in 2018 to improve an inmate’s eligibility for early release.<br /><br />Ensuring everyone’s safety inside the prison walls is a major factor behind the use of special housing units, also known as <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/doj-report-outlines-steps-limit-solitary-confinement-prisons-use-only-rcna68384">restrictive housing</a>. These units serve various purposes in prisons, including protecting vulnerable inmates and isolating dangerous ones. As BOP Director Colette Peters acknowledged while <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/committee-activity/hearings/oversight-bureau-prisons">testifying before a House subcommittee</a> in November, a large portion of inmates assigned to special housing units are there voluntarily for their protection. The pressure to limit or eliminate the use of these housing units has had a negative effect on prison security, making it even harder to retain officers.<br /><br />Outside of staffing shortages, another major challenge facing BOP is the failing condition of its facilities due to lack of investment in maintaining them.</p><p></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-44231108349126057462024-02-09T09:44:00.004-05:002024-02-09T09:49:48.225-05:00Hawaii Supreme Court says U.S. Supreme Court doesn't know what it's talking about<p> Oh, you gotta like it when the states say the feds are messing things up. This time it's about guns. <a href="https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/hawaii-top-court-upholds-gun-laws-criticizes-us-supreme-court-2024-02-08/">From Reuters</a>:</p><i>The Hawaii Supreme Court has upheld the state's laws that generally prohibit carrying a firearm in public without a license--and in the process criticized the conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court's rulings that have expanded gun rights.<br />Justice Todd Eddins wrote <a href="https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/zdvxnxaqbvx/02082024hawaii.pdf">in a unanimous 5-0 decision</a> on Wednesday that under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, "states retain the authority to require individuals have a license before carrying firearms in public."</i><div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-2"><i>The
court, comprised of three appointees of Democratic governors and two
Republican-appointed judges, said it disagreed with the U.S. Supreme
Court's recent rulings interpreting the right to keep and bear arms
under the Second Amendment.</i></div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3"><i>It
expressed that disagreement as it interpreted a near-identical
provision of the state's constitution which says: "A well regulated
militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of
the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."</i></div></div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3"><br /></div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3"><a href="https://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/SCAP-22-0000561.pdf">Here's the opinion</a>, which even has a quote from <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0306414/">The Wire</a>:</div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3"><br /></div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3"><i>As the world turns, it makes no sense for contemporary society to pledge allegiance to the founding era’s culture, realities, laws, and understanding of the Constitution. “The thing about the old days, they the old days.” The Wire: Home Rooms (HBO television broadcast Sept. 24, 2006) (Season Four, Episode Three).</i></div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3"><br /></div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3">And the Court explains how the feds interpretation "clashes with Aloha spirit:"</div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3"><br /></div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3"><i>In Hawaiʻi, the Aloha Spirit inspires constitutional interpretation. See Sunoco, 153 Hawaiʻi at 363, 537 P.3d at 1210 (Eddins, J., concurring). When this court exercises “power on \behalf of the people and in fulfillment of [our] responsibilities, obligations, and service to the people” we “may contemplate and reside with the life force and give consideration to the ‘Aloha Spirit.’” HRS § 5-7.5(b) (2009). The spirit of Aloha clashes with a federally-mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons during day-to-day activities. </i></div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3"><br /></div><div class="text__text__1FZLe text__dark-grey__3Ml43 text__regular__2N1Xr text__small__1kGq2 body__full_width__ekUdw body__small_body__2vQyf article-body__paragraph__2-BtD" data-testid="paragraph-3">Being a Supreme Court Justice in Hawaii seems like a pretty good gig.</div>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-12743814805432347482024-02-08T08:22:00.006-05:002024-02-08T08:22:42.895-05:00Trump heads to SCOTUSBig argument at 10am this morning for the future of our country. Politico dives into the six actual legal questions that are presented <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/07/trump-supreme-court-case-questions-00140255">here</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote>Just 109 words.<br /><br />Whether Donald Trump can legally return to the White House will come down to how the Supreme Court interprets two rarely-invoked sentences written more than a century and a half ago as a battle-torn nation sought to recover from the Civil War.<br /><br />Those two sentences make up <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/section-3/">Section 3 of the 14th Amendment</a>, known colloquially as the insurrection clause. And on Thursday, the justices will publicly grapple with their meaning, as the court hears oral arguments on whether the provision disqualifies Trump from holding office again.<br /><br />Colorado’s top court, in a <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/19/colorado-disqualify-donald-trump-00132578">bombshell decision</a> in December, said Trump is indeed ineligible because of his efforts to subvert the 2020 election and his role in inciting the violent attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Scores of similar challenges are pending around the country.<br /><br />Most legal experts expect the court — which is controlled by a six-justice conservative majority, including three of Trump’s own nominees — to overturn the Colorado decision and keep him on the ballot. But it’s far from clear what route the court might take to reach that result.<br /><br />The justices have <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/08/trump-supreme-court-ballot-insurrection-offramps-00134364">many options</a>, ranging from a broad declaration that Trump is not an insurrectionist to a hyper-technical interpretation that a key phrase in the insurrection clause does not apply to Trump at all.<br /><br />The argument begins at 10 a.m. EST, and live audio (but no video) will be available. Here are the key questions the justices will likely grapple with.<br /><br /><b>Does the insurrection clause apply to Trump?<br /></b><br />Trump’s leading argument in the politically charged case is a semantic one: The president, he says, is not “an officer of the United States.” The reason that’s important is that the insurrection clause applies only to certain types of officeholders who took an oath to “support the Constitution” and then engaged in insurrection. In Trump’s case, the only way for the clause to apply is if he took such an oath as an “officer of the United States” when he was sworn in as president.</blockquote><br /><section class="page-content__row page-content__row--story main-section" data-content-section="4" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255); border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #696d70; display: block; font-family: din-2014, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-weight: 500; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 1.875rem auto 0px; max-width: 84.375rem; orphans: 2; padding: 0px 1.875rem; text-align: left; text-decoration-color: initial; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-thickness: initial; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><div class="container container--story story-layout--fixed-fluid" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; display: flex; flex-direction: row;"><div class="container__column container__column--story" style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex: 1 1 0%; margin-left: 1.875rem; margin-top: 0px; min-width: 0px; width: 960px;"><div class="container__row container__row--story story-layout--fluid-fixed" style="box-sizing: border-box; display: flex; flex-direction: row; flex: 1 1 0%;"></div></div></div></section>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-19573441706176663942024-02-06T08:00:00.001-05:002024-02-06T08:00:00.155-05:00“I’ll be 70 years old in a few months and it just seemed like the perfect time for me to step aside and make room for someone younger to have an opportunity to serve on the Eleventh Circuit.” <p> That's Judge Charles Wilson in his interview with the DBR, available <a href="https://www.law.com/dailybusinessreview/2024/02/01/federal-circuit-judge-takes-senior-status-sets-high-bar-for-nominee/">here</a>, about taking senior status (which this blog broke at <a href="http://sdfla.blogspot.com/2024/01/breaking-judge-charles-wilson-gives.html">this post</a>). Here's a snippet of the interesting article:</p><p><i>Following law school, Wilson served as a law clerk for Judge Joseph
Hatchett, the first Black judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Fifth and Eleventh circuits. Around that time, he also met his wife,
with whom he would have two children. From there, he engaged in private
practice in Tampa for five years and earned accolades such as the most
productive young lawyer by the Hillsborough County Bar Association.</i></p><i>“I practiced whatever paid the rent,” Wilson recalled. “I hung out my
shingle and it was probably the best thing I could do in my career. I
tried civil and criminal cases to conclusion before juries in federal
and state courts. I had a general practice. I provided representation to
clients in just about any case. It was a great background for a
judicial career.”
</i><p><i>Wilson went on to devote himself to public service and was later
appointed as a U.S. magistrate judge in the Middle District of Florida.
Then, following his recruitment by Janet Reno, the U.S. attorney
general, Wilson was appointed by President Bill Clinton to serve as the
U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Florida.</i></p>
<p><i>In September 1999, Wilson was sworn in as an Eleventh Circuit
judge following his appointment by Clinton to fill the vacancy created
by Hatchett’s retirement.</i></p>
<p><i>Wilson said that one of the lessons he imparts to his law clerks
is how to conduct themselves as young lawyers. Wilson said he applied
three times to serve as a federal district court judge, landed an
interview the third time, but was ultimately not selected.</i></p><p><i>“I just kept my head down and worked hard and earned a reputation in
the community,” Wilson said. ”Several years later I was selected to
serve as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals. And there I was reviewing
decisions by the district judges who were appointed when I was not
selected as a district judge.”</i></p><p></p>David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-84610334986826376812024-02-05T08:53:00.000-05:002024-02-05T08:53:46.594-05:00Both Parties in Ball & Chain Litigation Claim VictoryBy <a href="https://maderalbyrne.com/attorney/john-r-byrne/">John R. Byrne</a><div><br /></div><div>The City of Miami has been dealing with quite a bit of litigation in recent years, including defending against claims that the City helped Commissioner Joe Carollo exact revenge against political opponents and critics. The latest lawsuit, filed by businessmen Bill Fuller and Martin Pinilla, named a bunch of City employees as defendants, including City Attorney Victoria Méndez and City Manager Arthur Noriega. </div><div><br /></div><div><div>Judge Moreno held a status conference on Friday, ultimately ordering the Plaintiffs to file an Amended Complaint. After the Court's order, both sides claimed victory to the press, with the City asserting that the Court suggested that "plaintiffs stick to the facts instead of making jury arguments in their complaint" and counsel for Fuller/Pinilla highlighting that Judge Moreno was "helpful and supportive" and had given him the opportunity to include more specific allegations against the City.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>A lot more to come in this one. Herald covers it <a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article285028787.html">here</a>.</div><div><br /></div>John R. Byrnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01296732486692497977noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-17933475187138508862024-02-01T06:24:00.000-05:002024-02-01T06:24:09.970-05:00DeSantis Beats Disney Retaliation Suit<p>By <a href="https://maderalbyrne.com/attorney/john-r-byrne/">John R. Byrne</a></p><p>Governor DeSantis scored a victory yesterday in the Northern District of Florida. Judge Allen Winsor dismissed Disney's First Amendment retaliation lawsuit against the Governor and the directors of the newly constituted Central Florida Tourism Oversight Board.</p><p>Winsor held that Disney lacked standing to sue DeSantis, reasoning that Disney's asserted injury--lack of control over the special improvement district--is not "redressable" because the Court cannot give Disney that control back. Windsor wrote: "That injury would exist whether or not the Governor controlled the board, meaning an injunction precluding the Governor from influencing the board would not redress Disney’s asserted injury."</p><p>As to the Board, including its Vice Chair Charbel Barakat, Winsor held that Disney failed to allege a cognizable First Amendment retaliation claim. In short, where, as here, a statute was facially constitutional, it is irrelevant what motivated its passage. Because the Florida legislature has the power to determine the structure of Florida's special improvement districts, Winsor explained, it may exercise that power however it sees fit (retaliatory motives or not). The Court acknowledged exceptions for statutes involving race, religion, or those designed to regulate speech. But this wasn't such a statute.</p><p>The order, which Disney plans to appeal, is excerpted below.</p>
<p style="-x-system-font: none; display: block; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 12px auto 6px;"> <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/702785256/De-114-Disney-Dismissal-Order#from_embed" style="text-decoration: underline;" title="View De 114_Disney Dismissal Order on Scribd">De 114_Disney Dismissal Order</a> by <a href="https://www.scribd.com/user/521410006/John-Byrne#from_embed" style="text-decoration: underline;" title="View John Byrne's profile on Scribd">John Byrne</a> on Scribd</p><iframe class="scribd_iframe_embed" data-aspect-ratio="0.7729220222793488" data-auto-height="false" frameborder="0" height="600" id="doc_80661" scrolling="no" src="https://www.scribd.com/embeds/702785256/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&access_key=key-UCMeupqibmezKKjhz3KD" title="De 114_Disney Dismissal Order" width="100%"></iframe>John R. Byrnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01296732486692497977noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-35440158321077653032024-01-31T08:38:00.004-05:002024-01-31T08:38:50.435-05:00Testimony Concludes in Racial Gerrymandering Case Brought against City of Miami<p>By <a href="https://maderalbyrne.com/attorney/john-r-byrne/">John R. Byrne</a></p><p>Update on the racial gerrymandering case brought against the City of Miami. Trial testimony concluded yesterday. At issue are now "updated" voting maps, which have been challenged as unconstitutional. If the plaintiffs win, another map would be drawn.</p><p>Although a number of expert witnesses testified on statistical analyses and Miami's demographics, Judge Moore came back to statements made during public commission hearings. Judge Moore said that, in light of those statements, "it's really hard to get around the conclusion that race was" involved in the map drawing process.</p><p>Back in 2022, Commissioner Joe Carollo said the point of creating single-member districts was to ensure “there would be an African American sitting in this commission and there would be an Anglo” and “that there were three Hispanic districts.”</p><p>Commissioner Manolo Reyes also said “yes, we are gerrymandering to preserve those seats,” apparently referencing the five-person Commission. </p><p>“The problem that I have been confronted with," Judge Moore said, is "not so much the statistical or circumstantial evidence that we’ve heard a lot about in the past two days. It was the direct evidence in those commission hearings that we’re well familiar with.”</p><p>The Herald covers it <a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/article284875487.html">here</a>.</p>John R. Byrnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01296732486692497977noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-82588833696949118102024-01-30T07:38:00.000-05:002024-01-30T07:38:38.290-05:00No New Trial for Murdaugh<p>By<a href="https://maderalbyrne.com/attorney/john-r-byrne/"> John R. Byrne</a></p><p>Not SDFLA news or even news from the federal court world. But still worth covering. The judge in the Alex Murdaugh murder trial denied Murdaugh's request for a new trial. Murdaugh's team moved for a new trial, arguing that the Clerk of Court influenced the jury. The clerk, who wrote a book after the trial that was pulled because of plagiarism issues, apparently told jurors to watch Murdaugh closely when he testified. </p><p>One juror testified that "She made it seem like he was already guilty." Asked whether this influenced her vote to find him guilty, she said "Yes ma'am."</p><p>A wild case gets wilder. I have to think an appellate court may see this issue differently. </p><p>NPR covers it <a href="https://www.npr.org/2024/01/29/1227691743/alex-murdaugh-juror-says-clerk-made-him-seem-guilty-murder-appeal">here</a>.</p>John R. Byrnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01296732486692497977noreply@blogger.com0