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

CIR to appeal voting rights ruling

December 20, 2010

CIR will appeal a ruling today that CIR clients Stephen LaRoque, John Nix, Klay Northrup, Lee Rainor, and Tony Cuomo — individual candidates and referendum sponsors in Kinston, North Carolina — lack standing to challenge the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. According to federal District Judge Bates’s

Read More → Posted in 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

Family rights case set for battle in Idaho

September 24, 2010

Federal District Judge B. Lynn Winmill today set a trial date in CIR’s long-running case on behalf of the Muellers, a family whose five-week old daughter was unlawfully seized by police and state child protection officials in a Boise, Idaho, emergency room.

Corissa Mueller had brought her daughter Taige to the

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

Wait — hurry up

September 16, 2010

Today U.S. District Court Judge John D. Bates stayed LaRoque v. Holder, CIR’s challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Proceedings — including consideration of our motion for summary judgment — are stayed until the court decides the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case. In that motion, DOJ contends that

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

CIR moves for summary judgment in voting rights case

August 18, 2010

Today Lead Counsel Michael Carvin filed a motion for summary judgment in CIR’s case on behalf of citizens ofKinston, North Carolina, in which we ask the court to strike down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act as unconstitutional.

Section 5 requires “covered” jurisdictions (mostly in the South) to “preclear” any changes in voting

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

NC NAACP seeks to intervene in voting rights case

July 07, 2010

The North Carolina State Conference of Branches of the NAACP and several Kinston, NC residents moved to intervene as defendants in LaRoque v. Holder, CIR’s case challenging Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.  The proposed Defendant-Intervenors seek to defend the constitutionality of the preclearance provisions of Section 5, which the

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates

CIR files reply brief in voting rights case

July 01, 2010

CIR filed papers today responding to the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss CIR’s case challenging Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, LaRoque v. Holder.  DOJ contends that neither citizens, candidates, nor voters have standing to challenge the constitutionality of Section 5 because (to speak very generally), individuals do not have a constitutional right

Read More → Posted in Blog, Case Updates