CIR Defends Free Speech In Class Action Case

The Center for Individual Rights has filed a brief at the Supreme Court defending the free speech rights of plaintiffs in class action settlements. In Frank v. Gaos, plaintiffs are challenging a settlement of $8.5 million that Google agreed to pay for violating the privacy rights of their users. The settlement agreement granted the entire award to plaintiff’s attorneys and third party charities. Several of the plaintiffs who had their ...

Read More →
February 07, 2018 by CIR2 in Case Updates

Federal Judge Recommends James Madison University Pay $850,000 In CIR Case

A federal magistrate judge has recommended that James Madison University pay nearly $850,000 in attorney’s fees for CIR’s case defending a JMU student who was suspended without due process. A university panel initially found the student, accused of sexual assault, not guilty. But thanks to a one-sided appeals system used by the university, a secret faculty panel found the him guilty without giving him the chance to respond to all ...

Read More →
December 06, 2017 by CIR2 in Case Updates

CIR Urges Supreme Court To End Compulsory Union Dues

On Wednesday December 6th, CIR filed an amicus brief before the Supreme Court on behalf of Ryan Yohn and six other teacher plaintiffs from Yohn v. CTA. Our brief asks the court to end compulsory union dues and burdensome opt-out requirements when it considers Janus v. AFSCME in early 2018.

CIR’s brief draws on crucial information obtained in Yohn and makes three pivotal arguments.

First, we argue that laws compelling a person’s ...

Read More →
November 29, 2017 by CIR2 in Case Updates

Justice Department Joins CIR in Challenge to Voting Discrimination

On November 28th, the U.S. Justice Department filed an amicus brief before the Ninth Circuit in support of CIR client Dave Davis and his case against racial voting discrimination in Guam. The Justice Department brief fully supports CIR’s case and urges the Ninth Circuit to uphold our earlier victory in district court. The brief argues that “Guam’s plebiscite law intentionally discriminates based on race against non-Chamorros.”

The Justice Department affirmed that ...

Read More →
June 05, 2017 by CIR2 in Case Updates

Stun Gun Case Bolts Forward

Judge Douglas Woodlock of the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts recently asked CIR to file a Motion for Summary Judgment in our case against Massachusetts’s stun-gun ban. CIR jumped at the opportunity and filed the Motion and a detailed Memorandum on May 17th, asking the court to declare the ban unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

Our Memorandum makes it clear that the ban is in blatant violation of the Second Amendment. ...

Read More →