Sixth Circuit erroneously strikes down Michigan Prop. 2

July 01, 2011

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit today ruled that Michigan’s Proposition 2 violates the United States Constitution.  In 2006, by voting 58% to 42% to pass Prop. 2, better known as the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, the people of Michigan amended their state constitution to prohibit “preferential treatment to any individual

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

Supreme Court declines to address school interrogation issue

May 26, 2011

Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Camreta v. Greene, in which an Oregon policeman and a state child protection worker interrogated a nine-year-old girl in her public school for over an hour, not stopping until she was willing to say (untruthfully, according to her) that her father had acted inappropriately toward

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

Trial judge denies anti-recording law motion

May 23, 2011

Today U.S. District Judge M. James Lorenz denied both James O’Keefe’s and Hannah Giles’s motions to dismiss former ACORN employee Juan Carlos Vera’s suit against them at the pleadings stage.  The lawsuit by Vera, who is featured in a video by O’Keefe filmed in San Diego’s ACORN office, is based solely on the alleged violation

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

Obamacare threatened by CIR precedent

May 11, 2011

CIR filed a brief today in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in support of the State of Florida’s challenge to the constitutionality of the Obamacare legislation.  Judge Roger Vinson of the Northern District of Florida had struck down the legislation as unconstitutional, on the ground that Congress had no authority under the Commerce Clause to

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

Second Circuit victory in employment discrimination case

May 05, 2011

CIR’s long-running battle on behalf of New York City school building superintendents discriminated against by an agreement entered into by the City and the federal government reached a milestone today, but by no means its final one.  The Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 139-page ruling that settles one large point

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

Hearing in anti-recording law motion

April 28, 2011

Today a federal judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California heard oral argument on CIR’s motion, on behalf of James O’Keefe, to invalidate California’s law that bans citizens from recording what police officers say to them at traffic stops.

O’Keefe is being sued by Juan Carlos Vera, a former

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

James O’Keefe challenges California anti-tape recording law

March 15, 2011

Representing filmmaker James O’Keefe, CIR today filed a motion in federal court to strike down a California anti-tape recording statute that CIR contends violates the First Amendment. In that statute, California has made it a criminal offense for a person not affiliated with law enforcement to record his own “confidential” conversation

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

CIR files motion for expedited appeal

January 06, 2011

Today, CIR filed a motion for expedited review of Judge Bates’ December 20 ruling dismissing CIR’s challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.  The motion argues that there is an overwhelming public interest in the judicial resolution of the constitutional questions surrounding Section 5 in advance of the 2012

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

Court sets hearing date, further schedule in Section 5 challenge

November 12, 2010

Today U.S  District Judge John D. Bates set December 3, 2010, as the date he will hear the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss Laroque v. Holder, CIR’s lawsuit challenging Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The judge wrote that he expects to “resolve the motion promptly thereafter.”

Representing Stephen LaRoque and other individuals

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

Briefing complete in Mueller new trial motion

September 24, 2010

Today CIR filed a reply brief in its motion for a new trial In the Mueller family-rights case. One of the grounds for the motion is that the testimony of the only expert witness to give an opinion adverse to the Muellers at trial was scientifically unreliable and should have been excluded.

In June, the jury in Boise,

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates