Petition of the day

Petition of the dayThe petition of the day is: Medrano-Arzate v. May 17-601 Issue: Whether a plaintiff can state a cognizable claim for municipal liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for the deprivation of a citizen’s substantive due process rights without alleging that the employee who carried out the municipal policy also acted with a constitutionally culpable state of mind.

The post Petition of the day appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

Petition of the day

The petition of the day is:

17-601

Issue: Whether a plaintiff can state a cognizable claim for municipal liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for the deprivation of a citizen’s substantive due process rights without alleging that the employee who carried out the municipal policy also acted with a constitutionally culpable state of mind.

The post Petition of the day appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from http://www.scotusblog.com

Friday Squid Blogging: Peru and Chile Address Squid Overfishing

Peru and Chile have a new plan. As usual, you can also use this squid post to talk about the security stories in the news that I haven’t covered. Read my blog posting guidelines here….

Peru and Chile have a new plan.

As usual, you can also use this squid post to talk about the security stories in the news that I haven't covered.

Read my blog posting guidelines here.

from https://www.schneier.com/blog/

Justices release January calendar

Justices release January calendarToday the Supreme Court released the calendar for its January sitting, which begins on January 8. The justices will kick off the new year with not one but two interstate disputes over water: Texas v. New Mexico, involving the apportionment of the waters of the Rio Grande River, and Florida v. Georgia, involving the allocation of the […]

The post Justices release January calendar appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

Justices release January calendar

Today the Supreme Court released the calendar for its January sitting, which begins on January 8. The justices will kick off the new year with not one but two interstate disputes over water: Texas v. New Mexico, involving the apportionment of the waters of the Rio Grande River, and Florida v. Georgia, involving the allocation of the waters of the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin. Tuesday, January 9, the second day of the sitting, also features a common theme: the Fourth Amendment. In Byrd v. United States, the justices will consider whether a driver who is not included on a rental-car agreement has a reasonable expectation of privacy in that car, while in Collins v. Virginia they will consider whether the “automobile exception” to the Fourth Amendment allows a police officer to search a car parked on private property without a warrant. And on Wednesday, January 10, the justices will round out the first week of the sitting with Husted v. APRI, a challenge to Ohio’s efforts to keep its voter-registration lists up to date. Husted was originally scheduled for oral argument last week, but the case was rescheduled after one of the attorneys who was slated to argue the case became ill.

The justices resume oral arguments on Tuesday, January 16, after observing the Martin Luther King holiday on Monday, January 15. The four cases scheduled that week are:

Hall v. Hall (January 16): Whether the rule announced in Gelboim v. Bank of America – that a district court’s order dismissing the only claim in a case that is consolidated with other actions for pretrial proceedings in multidistrict litigation is final and appealable – applies to cases consolidated in single-district litigation.

Dalmazzi v. United States (January 16; consolidated with Cox v. United States and Ortiz v. United States): Challenges by servicemembers in the Air Force, who were charged with violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice, to the service by judges on the U.S. Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals concurrently with service on the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review.

Encino Motorcars v. Navarro (January 17): Whether service advisors at car dealerships are exempt from the overtime-pay requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

McCoy v. Louisiana (January 17):  Whether it is unconstitutional for defense counsel to concede an accused’s guilt over the accused’s express objection.

This post was also published at Howe on the Court.

The post Justices release January calendar appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from http://www.scotusblog.com

Petitions to watch | Conference of November 21

Petitions to watch | Conference of November 21In its conference of November 21, 2017, the court will consider petitions involving issues such as whether Congress possesses plenary power over Indian affairs and, if so, whether the plenary power expands the Indian commerce clause to authorize the displacement of state rights to territorial integrity; and whether, given the petitioner’s credible evidence that a juror […]

The post Petitions to watch | Conference of November 21 appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

Petitions to watch | Conference of November 21

In its conference of November 21, 2017, the court will consider petitions involving issues such as whether Congress possesses plenary power over Indian affairs and, if so, whether the plenary power expands the Indian commerce clause to authorize the displacement of state rights to territorial integrity; and whether, given the petitioner’s credible evidence that a juror voted for the death penalty because the petitioner is a “nigger,” the lower court erred in ruling that he failed to make “a substantial showing of the of the denial of a constitutional right” under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

16-9304

Issue: Whether, when the Alabama Supreme Court failed to apply the reasoning and analysis mandated by the Supreme Court’s decision in Foster v. Chatman, the U.S. Supreme Court should intervene to enforce its precedents following Batson v. Kentucky, which prohibit discrimination in jury selection on the basis of race or gender.

16-9604

Issue: Whether Missouri’s second-degree burglary statute is divisible into two offenses with separate elements for the purpose of analyzing whether a conviction under that statute qualifies as a conviction for a “violent felony” as defined in the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii).

17-6075

Issues: (1) Whether reasonable jurists could disagree with the district court’s rejection of the petitioner’s Rule 60(b) motion, and, accordingly, whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit erred in denying a certificate of appealability; (2) whether, given the petitioner’s credible evidence that a juror voted for the death penalty because the petitioner is a “nigger,” the lower court erred in ruling that he failed to make “a substantial showing of the of the denial of a constitutional right” under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); and (3) whether Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado created a new constitutional claim, and, if not, whether the lower courts erred in denying the petitioner’s motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(6).

17-8

Issues: (1) Whether a tribe that opted out of the Indian Reorganization Act can revive its status under that Act through the Indian Land Consolidation Act, 25 U.S.C. § 2202, even though the United States did not hold land in a trust for that tribe at the time the tribe sought a land-in-trust acquisition; (2) whether the land-in-trust provision of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. § 5108, exceeds Congress’ authority under the Indian commerce clause, Art. I § 8, cl. 3; (3) whether 25 U.S.C. § 5108’s standardless delegation of authority to acquire land “for Indians” is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power; and (4) whether the federal government’s control over state land must be categorically exclusive for the enclave clause, Art. I § 8, cl. 17, to prohibit the removal of that land from state jurisdiction.

16-1320

Issues: (1) Whether, in the exercise of its Article I powers, Congress can infringe, reduce or diminish the territorial integrity of a state without its prior consent; (2) whether Congress possesses plenary power over Indian affairs and, if so, whether the plenary power expands the Indian commerce clause to authorize the displacement of state rights to territorial integrity; (3) whether the land acquisition in this case via the mechanism of 25 U.S.C. § 465 (now 25 U.S.C. § 5108) represents a violation of the limits inherently expressed in the Indian commerce clause that limits Congress’ power to “regulate” “commerce”; and (4) whether the 300,000-acre ancient Oneida Indian reservation in New York still exists.

The post Petitions to watch | Conference of November 21 appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from http://www.scotusblog.com

School on high alert after principal is targeted in car bombing

A Massachusetts high school is on high alert after a homemade explosive device attached to the school principal’s car blew up outside of his home Thursday, police and neighbors said. Police in Blackstone said officers responded to a home at about 6:15 p.m. on Lakeshore Drive and were met by the homeowner who said he…

A Massachusetts high school is on high alert after a homemade explosive device attached to the school principal’s car blew up outside of his home Thursday, police and neighbors said. Police in Blackstone said officers responded to a home at about 6:15 p.m. on Lakeshore Drive and were met by the homeowner who said he...

from https://nypost.com

Categories: Uncategorized

‘I’m very drunk’: Police dispatcher fired after DUI arrest

An admittedly “very drunk” police dispatcher in Georgia is out of a job after she crashed into two cars while driving under the influence, police said. Laura Ricketts, who worked as a dispatcher for the Athens-Clarke County Police Department, was arrested at about 2:30 a.m. Saturday after running a red light and hitting two other…

An admittedly “very drunk” police dispatcher in Georgia is out of a job after she crashed into two cars while driving under the influence, police said. Laura Ricketts, who worked as a dispatcher for the Athens-Clarke County Police Department, was arrested at about 2:30 a.m. Saturday after running a red light and hitting two other...

from https://nypost.com

Categories: Uncategorized

SCOTUS for law students: The roles of the chief justice

SCOTUS for law students: The roles of the chief justiceWhen Chief Justice John Roberts takes his place in the middle seat on the bench, he is performing his most visible and widely known duty: presiding over the Supreme Court. But the chief justice also has a number of other roles, both within the judiciary and outside the court. Roberts acted in one of those […]

The post SCOTUS for law students: The roles of the chief justice appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

SCOTUS for law students: The roles of the chief justice

When Chief Justice John Roberts takes his place in the middle seat on the bench, he is performing his most visible and widely known duty: presiding over the Supreme Court. But the chief justice also has a number of other roles, both within the judiciary and outside the court.

Roberts acted in one of those roles a month ago, when he named several new chairs of committees of the Judicial Conference of the United States, the policymaking arm of the federal judiciary. Consisting of the chief judges and one district judge from each of the federal circuit appeals courts, the Judicial Conference meets twice a year to review rules for the judiciary and to recommend positions on legislation that affects the federal courts. As “Chief Justice of the United States,” Roberts is the head of the entire federal judicial system. In this capacity he is the chair of the 26-member Judicial Conference, presides over the semi-annual meetings and appoints members to committees.

Chief Justice Roberts (Art Lien)

What was especially interesting about the most recent appointments, announced on October 10, was that Roberts selected Merrick Garland, chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to chair the executive committee of the Judicial Conference. Garland was nominated by President Barack Obama to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016. The Republican majority in the Senate refused to consider Garland’s nomination, which lapsed in January. President Donald Trump then successfully nominated Neil Gorsuch, who joined the court in April. Roberts had appointed Garland to be a member of the executive committee in 2013 but has now elevated him to chair the panel, an important position for Garland.

Chairing the Judicial Conference is not the only role the chief justice plays at the top of the federal court system. At the end of the calendar year, the chief justice issues an annual report on the state of the federal judiciary. These reports highlight matters of concern or special interest in the federal courts, ranging from the need for more judges to pay raises or protections for judicial independence. In the most recent report, issued on December 31, 2016, Roberts focused on the important role of federal district judges, saying, “District judges make a difference every day, and leave a lasting legacy, by making our society more fair and just.” Each annual report includes a summary of the workload of the federal courts.

The chief justice also selects the director of the office that handles administrative issues for the courts, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, currently James Duff, and serves as chairman of the board of the Federal Judicial Center, the education and research arm of the federal courts.

As chief justice, Roberts has two other appointing roles. He picks the members of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secretive tribunal that reviews requests for wiretaps and other surveillance for foreign-intelligence purposes. Roberts also appoints judges to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, the entity that determines where trials will take place for cases that are filed in numerous federal district courts.

One of the chief justice’s most unusual jobs is as chancellor of the Smithsonian Institution, which runs the many public museums along the National Mall. As chancellor the chief justice presides over meetings of the Smithsonian’s board of directors, which meets four times a year. Roberts generally presides over the afternoon sessions, leaving the board chairman to run the meetings in the mornings.

Of course, it is his role at the Supreme Court that is the main focus for Roberts. As chief justice, Roberts is responsible for running the court, both judicially and administratively.

On the judicial side, the chief justice presides over the Supreme Court’s private conferences, in which the justices decide which cases to hear and then resolve the cases on the merits. Each year, the justices receive about 6,400 requests for review, known as petitions for certiorari, of which they grant only about 70. For each conference, the chief justice suggests which petitions merit discussion by circulating a “discuss list.” Other justices may add cases to the list. Cases that do not make it on to the discuss list are presumptively denied review by the Supreme Court.

As chief justice, Roberts is the most senior member of the Supreme Court, even though other justices have been there longer. As the court considers whether to grant or deny review in a case, the chief justice speaks first, summarizing each case and indicating whether he favors hearing it. The other justices then follow in order of seniority. This procedure is repeated again after the court hears oral argument in a case. When the justices go into their conference to consider and decide argued cases, Roberts speaks first and summarizes the issues and his take on them.

One of the most significant powers of the chief justice is choosing who will write the majority opinion. If the chief justice is in the majority, the assignment power is his. If the chief justice is in dissent, then the majority opinion is assigned by the most senior justice in the majority. By custom each of the nine justices is assigned roughly the same number of majority opinions, but the chief justice can decide who gets the more important ones. Once the opinions are assigned, the chief justice sometimes rides herd to make sure his colleagues keep the flow of opinions moving. Chief Justice William Rehnquist would refuse to give new opinions to colleagues who were well behind on cases they had already been assigned.

In other respects, the chief justice is often described as “first among equals.” He can try to set a tone for the Supreme Court, for example, encouraging the justices to interrupt each other less during arguments, or letting lawyers arguing cases complete a sentence when their time runs out. (Rehnquist used to interrupt lawyers in mid-sentence, occasionally even in mid-syllable when their time expired.) To promote civil discourse in the courtroom, Roberts has encouraged lawyers to refer to opposing counsel as “my friend” or “my friend on the other side.”

Administratively, the chief justice manages the Supreme Court as an institution, relying on a staff for personnel matters, building and maintenance issues and more. It also falls to the chief justice and his staff to deal with controversies or criticism of the court. For example, Jeffrey Minear, counselor to Chief Justice Roberts, recently explained in a letter to a bipartisan group of members of Congress why the court would not have live audio streaming of the oral argument on October 3 in the important Wisconsin gerrymandering case. “I am sure you are, however, familiar with the Justices’ concerns surrounding the live broadcast or streaming of oral arguments, which could adversely affect the character and quality of the dialogue between the attorneys and Justices,” Minear wrote. Chief Justice Roberts has also occasionally responded to criticism of the court’s lack of a code of ethical conduct for the justices.

Finally, the chief justice has two other critical roles. One happens rarely, and the other recurs every four years. According to the Constitution, the chief justice presides over Senate impeachment trials of the president. Rehnquist presided over the trial of President Bill Clinton, who was not convicted by the Senate.

The chief justice also administers the oath of office to the president at each inauguration. Roberts swore in Trump in January and administered the oath to Obama after the 2008 and 2012 elections. It is an historic anomaly that Roberts has actually administered the oath to Obama four times. At the inauguration in 2009, Roberts mixed up a line and Obama followed him down the wrong rhetorical path. To be safe, the oath was repeated the next day at the White House. And in 2013, Roberts administered the oath to Obama at the White House on Sunday, January 20, when the president legally had to be sworn in. But the oath was repeated the next day at the inauguration ceremony on Monday, January 21.

The post SCOTUS for law students: The roles of the chief justice appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from http://www.scotusblog.com

Man confesses to murder after DNA-based model released

A Texas man has confessed to killing a 25-year-old woman one week after investigators released a composite profile based on DNA found at the crime scene, authorities said. Ryan Riggs, 21, initially confessed to his church congregation Wednesday and lat…

A Texas man has confessed to killing a 25-year-old woman one week after investigators released a composite profile based on DNA found at the crime scene, authorities said. Ryan Riggs, 21, initially confessed to his church congregation Wednesday and later to investigators in the May 2016 murder of Chantay Blankinship, Brown County Sheriff Vance Hill...

from https://nypost.com

Categories: Uncategorized

Take a Deep Breath and Count to Three Before Posting…

This blog series highlights some of the top Social Media Beat posts from the last couple years. For more information about IACP’s Center for Social Media visit the project webpage. This post was originally published on Wednesday, November 23, 2016. … Continue reading

This blog series highlights some of the top Social Media Beat posts from the last couple years. For more information about IACP’s Center for Social Media visit the project webpage. This post was originally published on Wednesday, November 23, 2016.

Guest Blogger: Rebecca Rosenblatt, Sergeant, San Mateo County, California, Sheriff’s Office

While taking a moment to ponder the wisdom of messaging before hitting send is never a bad idea in any context, never more so does this advice bear repeating. No matter the size of the community you serve or the organization for which you work, politics is undoubtedly a hot topic. It is at the point where political beliefs and emotion converge with internet enabled devices that the potential for internal investigations and career ending mine fields begins and ends.

Though it is certainly not new advice, it is a lesson worth recounting, that what staff do in the privacy of their own lives, often becomes subject to public scrutiny when posted online. Politics and religion are often deal breakers for a myriad of relationships, and so too can they be the breaking point for the public image of your organization. All the bridges built through coffee with the cops and public safety citizens’ academies can be gone in an instant with one contentious or insensitive posting that reaches the wrong audience.

So, the obvious question remains what can be done to avoid this? How can you protect your organization and your community from suffering at the hands of an ill thought out social media posting by a member of your staff?

The answer is this; first and foremost encourage the men and women in your organization to review the privacy settings on their various social media accounts. With settings changing all the time, this is a good practice for everyone to get into no matter what they do for a living. The next most important practice to get into, is taking a beat. Take a moment before posting whatever you are feeling and ask yourself, is this in conflict with my organizational polices or guidelines? Is this post something that could paint me in a bad light should a member of the community see it? A good rule of thumb is to consider what you are about to post and decide if you would feel comfortable with it falling into the hands of your local news media. It is a story as old as the internet itself, where an officer-involved incident occurs and miraculously a web search results in posts and pictures from something completely unrelated, defining the character of those involved.

Don’t let this happen to you or your organization. Be smart and police yourself and those you care about in regard to the topic and type of material you choose to post online. Remind staff that what they choose to post on social media becomes a reflection of who they are, and in turn a reflection of the public safety organization they work for. In this day and age, where public trust in law enforcement is at a premium, these simple reminders about social media best practices cannot be reiterated enough.

 

from https://theiacpblog.org

Columbine No Longer in Top Ten of Worst U.S. Mass Shootings

Reading from the Voice Media empire: The day after Devin Kelley murdered 26 people at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, on November 5, filmmaker Michael Moore tweeted that the tragedy has pushed the April 20, 1999 massacre at Columbine High School, the subject of his 2002 Oscar-winning documentary Bowling for Columbine, from the list of America’s ten worst mass shootings. Westword has […]

The post Columbine No Longer in Top Ten of Worst U.S. Mass Shootings appeared first on True Crime Report.

Reading from the Voice Media empire: The day after Devin Kelley murdered 26 people at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, on November 5, filmmaker Michael Moore tweeted that the tragedy has pushed the April 20, 1999 massacre at Columbine High School, the subject of his 2002 Oscar-winning documentary Bowling for Columbine, from the list of America’s ten worst mass shootings. Westword has [...]

The post Columbine No Longer in Top Ten of Worst U.S. Mass Shootings appeared first on True Crime Report.

from http://www.truecrimereport.com