The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Decisions
Chalking tires, curbing meters, and secretly recording videos.
Please enjoy the latest edition of Short Circuit, a weekly feature written by a bunch of people at the Institute for Justice.
"The Onion may be staffed by socialist wackos, but in their brief defending parody to this Court, they hit it out of the park." So writes The Babylon Bee, a "'dangerous,' 'far-right misinformation site,'" whose staff is also urging the Supreme Court to take up Novak v. Parma and tell police everywhere that you can't arrest people for making fun of the police. Click here to read the Bee's amicus brief. Or click here to read their other brief in support of the police.
New on the Short Circuit podcast: We kick it live in NYC.
- Plaintiff: Your reporter defamed me by claiming that I was among the Trump supporters present at the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. Defendant: But you were among the Trump supporters who were present at the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. Plaintiff: Well, sure, I was with them, but I wasn't, like, among them among them. First Circuit: Case dismissed.
- Voter-registration orgs say Texas's new residency rules for voters have forced them to spend more money registering voters in Texas. Can they sue? Fifth Circuit: It seems like over a dozen new voter-registration laws in Texas have forced you guys to spend more money there, so you don't have standing to sue about just the one.
- Allegation: After inmate altercates with guard, he's taken in handcuffs to part of an Ohio prison without cameras, and a group of guards kick, stomp, punch, and pepper spray him. Then he's put into solitary confinement and told, among other misrepresentations, there are no forms available with which to file a formal grievance. Sixth Circuit (over a dissent): So he might be excused for failing to exhaust his administrative remedies. Case undismissed.
- Springfield, Ill. city water meter reader is fired for "curbing meters," the practice of recording a meter read without actually reading the meter, at seven homes. Former water meter reader: But the city did not fire this other water meter reader, who skipped out of work for hours at a time and who lied about his criminal conviction on his job application. Seventh Circuit (over a dissent): The two men's offenses are of comparable seriousness, and so the former water meter reader's reverse discrimination claims should not have been dismissed.
- Circuit split alert! Assuming that San Diego parking officers' routine "chalking" of car tires is a Fourth Amendment search, is it nonetheless constitutional under the "administrative search exception"? If a dragnet is okay to nab drunk drivers, says the Ninth Circuit, it's okay to preserve parking spots. Plus, c'mon, who really cares about the chalk? Dissent: "[T]he City's interests in perpetuating its parking enforcement regime don't chalk up." (We discussed the Sixth Circuit's contrary ruling last year on the podcast.)
- Allegation: Some users of Reddit post explicit images of children. When the victims and their parents ask Reddit to take them down, it does so haphazardly and doesn't take other actions that could help to stop the practice. Does Section 230 shield Reddit from liability? District court: Immune, dismissed. Ninth Circuit: There is an exception to Section 230 immunity under recent legislation, but only if the service provider itself violated federal trafficking law. Reddit didn't, so affirmed.
- In 2015, the Center for Medical Progress began releasing videos secretly recorded with abortion providers at Planned Parenthood clinics and at various conferences. Uh oh! CMP's founders signed a bunch of confidentiality agreements in order to gain access to these places. Planned Parenthood sues and is eventually awarded nearly $2.5 mil in damages. Ninth Circuit: And they get to keep almost all of it. CMP et al. had no First Amendment right to break the laws they broke.
- Over the last 25 years, Florida has repeatedly amended its sex-offender-registry law to require more information, more frequent updates, and more in-person meetings. The most recent amendments, from 2018, require registrants to report any absence from their permanent residence, for any reason, that lasts more than three days. And any failure to comply with the registry is a third-degree felony. Seven registrants, all of whom committed their crimes more than 25 years ago, sue. Eleventh Circuit: And most of their claims can go forward; because the registration requirements inflict an ongoing injury, they are not barred by the statute of limitations.
- The "bad faith" exception to Younger abstention is something of a rara avis. But in this lawsuit alleging that the Attorney General of Alabama seized a guy's $240k bank account as part of a feud with the guy's brother—Jefferson County, Ala. Sheriff Mark Pettway—the district court espied this South Philippine Dwarf Kingfisher of fed-courts doctrine. Younger abstention denied. Qualified immunity granted. Eleventh Circuit: The district court was right not to abstain (though for far more mundane reasons than the lower court relied on). But it does Brother Pettway no good. The AG gets qualified immunity.
- Harris County, Ga. deputy pulls woman over, forces her to perform oral sex. When she files a complaint, the sheriff reaches out to everyone the deputy pulled over for six months, which turns up other victims. (The deputy is now serving an eight-year prison term.) Can the woman sue the sheriff? The Eleventh Circuit says no. The deputy may have kneeled on a handcuffed suspect's neck (resulting in the suspect's death), and he may have followed his ex-wife around in his patrol car, but neither of those things put the sheriff on notice he'd sexually assault women.
- And in en banc news, the Fifth Circuit will not reconsider its decision that the SEC's system of in-house judges is unconstitutional thrice over.
- And in more en banc news, nor will Ninth Circuit reconsider its decision to preliminarily enjoin future private enforcement suits against California businesses for failure to comply with Prop 65, which requires warning stickers—that may or may not be misleading—about the dangers of acrylamide in foods and beverages. Five judges dissent.
For years, septuagenarian Norma Thornton has fed hot, nutritious, homecooked meals to the needy in a Bullhead City, Ariz. park, always leaving the area cleaner than when she arrived. But this spring, she was arrested and prosecuted for violating a new law that bans sharing food "for charitable purposes" without a permit, which are hard to come by and only available once per month. (After Norma rejected a plea deal, prosecutors dismissed the charges, but the city has made clear she'll go to jail if she continues to serve in the park.) But criminalizing charity is unconstitutional, so this week Norma is fighting back with a federal lawsuit. Click here to learn more. Or click here for some plucky local journalism.
Last month, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply in civil code enforcement proceedings, so it's no problem that Long Lake Township officials flew a drone over Todd and Heather Maxon's backyard taking high-res photos and videos without a warrant for over a year. That can't be right, and IJ asking the Michigan Supreme Court to say so. Click here to learn more.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The Eleventh Circuit's decision merits some criticism--ol' Deputy Dawg is out there killing a defenseless man and harassing his ex-wife--so obviously unfit. In tort law, the creator of a dangerous situation doesn't generally get to complain that the precise mechanism of damage is not foreseeable. I get that there's a difference, but you give someone the power of a gun and the ability to detain people, then coerced oral sex isn't so unimaginable with a person who acts this way.
Not sure about that. There should be some reasonable connection between the behavior that the sheriff should have taken notice of and the wrong actually committed. Just being a "bad" officer isn't enough. Otherwise, you could argue that sloppy or error-ridden paperwork, for instance, should put a sheriff on notice that an officer would be just as sloppy or negligent in all of his other duties.
I am right as a matter of tort law. How much that bleeds into this area of the law is an open question. But some does bleed into it. And stalking one's ex is a problem, as is killing a dude already in handcuffs by crushing his neck.
I'd say that if a cop was crappy with paperwork, perhaps we could hold the sheriff accountable if he got an address wrong on a no-knock warrant.
The reasonable connection is abuse of his authority, once resulting in death, once with stalking in his patrol car with the foreseeable implied threat of violence. No doubt the police union likes your quibble, but justice does not.
^^^This.
Kneeling on someone's neck until they are dead should be enough of a red flag to strip law enforcement credentials. Oh no, they also used their power to coerce sex. Who could have predicted they would be a bad apple?
"Otherwise, you could argue that sloppy or error-ridden paperwork, for instance, should put a sheriff on notice that an officer would be just as sloppy or negligent in all of his other duties."
Yes, obviously this is true. Polices that demonstrate an inability to do the little things right are not fit to be polices because, and this is hardly difficult to fathom, if they are willing to break the little rules even though it's obvious, they are certainly going to be willing to break more important rules when there's ample opportunity to cover it up. It is completely obvious that such rules should apply, as they do in almost every police force around the world (except in the US, where defrauding the public is considered acceptable practice).
There's no base-level respondeat superior in 42 USC 1983 law, is the problem.
That 5th Circ. standing case seems problematic to me. I don't have any opinion on the underlying issues, but the idea that you can "hide" an illegal law from review because you pass a lot of other laws so it is impossible to narrow the pocketbook injury to just the one seems ripe for abuse.
Standing does have a merits component. Federal courts really don't have jurisdiction to say 12(b)(6) where the claim doesn't rise to colorability, and complaining about residency requirements with the "it costs us more" is really a jus tertii type of argument.
I think the 5th Circuit comes out better after reading the case. This seems to be a case of simple bad lawyering/lousy drafting on the plaintiffs’ part. The plaintiffs alleged that SB 1111 “and all the other bad laws” caused their injuries, yet they challenged only SB 1111. A basic rule of pleading is that to allege you have standing, you have to claim that the thing you are challenging is the thing that caused your injuries. The plaintiffs simply didn’t do that, and that means they didn’t properly allege they had standing.
They either needed to allege that SB 1111 specifically caused their injuries, or challenge the other laws they claimed also caused their injuries. Either way, they had to somehow align what they were challenging with what they were claiming caused their injuries if they wanted a complaint that would get to first base.
That Judge Albandian of the Sixth Circuit seems an authoritarian jerk.
Groci Pelosi, demonrat and big defund the policer, has her house broken into by a crackhead in drug ridden San Fran. How long before this gets the old memory hole?
It's Trump's fault.
Yes, a random crackhead would surely be breaking into a house yelling “WHERE’S NANCY!” …
Reuters:
David Depape is also reportedly a Castro-loving radical anti-war Berkleylite protester who thinks Republicans are evil Jew-owned Nazis.
While he may or may not be a druggie, it seems quite suspect that this has anything to do with "right-wing" anything, despite the insinuations.
Citations, please.
I mean, what part of “anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, criticism of women, ‘satanic paedophilia,’ censorship by tech companies, and other far-right political themes” don’t you understand?
That said, paranoid schizophrenia is also a reasonable explanation, and it’s hard to blame that on either (D) or (R) in the final analysis.
I agree this is a very reasonable explanation = That said, paranoid schizophrenia is also a reasonable explanation, and it’s hard to blame that on either (D) or (R) in the final analysis
I have to say...this is horrifying. I want Paul Pelosi to recover quickly and fully. This guy has to be bats**t crazy to even attempt this. It is utterly insane. I wonder where the USSS was? The USSS was not even keeping watch over Speaker Pelosi's home? What?! I don't care if you are Team R or Team D, but don't you think the home of the Speaker of the House ought to have some level of protection? The Speaker is only third in line to be POTUS. Not like it is important or anything like that. /sarc
At some point, we (American society) have to ask ourselves, "How did we get to the point where the crazies even thought it would be Ok to attempt to kill a SCOTUS Justice, or the Speaker of the House?" We are descending quickly.
well, that's kind of the definition of crazy; someone who is crazy thinks it's OK to do stuff that's .. not actually OK.
But that's not the actual problem. I'm more concerned that folks on both extremes of both parties encourage "crazy" behavior in the guise of society and/or patriotism, so long as it supports them.
And I don't like that from either side of the political spectrum.
The Secret Service is not responsible for providing security to members of congress.
Well, a SF reporter posted the claim on Twitter.
Since the police haven't released anything yet, that's as good as we got.
Although we now do have more info: Depape is a nudist activist is SF, is a supporter of (and previously lived with) "Gyspy Taub" (a 'noted' left-wing SF nudist activist and 9/11 conspiracy theorist that blamed Bush for it), a "hemp jeweler", an addict of "hard drugs" that lives in a shipping container and who was known as a "creepy" and "aggressive" person by his fellow leftists activists back in the 2010s.
I tried to check the Facebook and blog sites that people have said were his, but they've already been removed, leaving only a few screenshots people took. In one, he describes Republicans as Jew-loving Nazis. In another, he describes the COVID vaccines as deadly.
As you said, this seems to be a crazy person. He was apparently in his underwear when he entered the Pelosi home, although oddly according to the police did not attack Pelosi until after the police arrived.
Of course, since we're sharing citations, I'm sure you can share your citations to your claims, too, right?
Also, just to check, are you claiming that:
anti-Semitism
criticism of women
belief that there is such a thing as 'satanic paedophilia'
(fear of?) censorship by tech companies
are all purely right wing political themes?
Because people like Louis Farrakhan and Al Sharpton (not to mention The Squad) have shown that anti-Semitism exists deep in the Left, too;
that criticism of women exists entirely unrelated to political ideology (I mean, do you think everything said about MTG proves her critics are 'right-wing'?);
and that Leftists also claim to be censored by tech companies (See: Jacobin, Socialist Workers Party, or Right Wing Watch).
Now, I'll give you the pedo accusations; the left-wing seems to have decide to fully accept NAMBLA and the academic push to normalize pedophilia. There do not seem to be anti-pedo frenzies associated with the Left anymore.
MTG - magic the gathering? ... not coming up with anything else...
Marjorie Taylor Greene - the rather off-base Republican congresswoman from Georgia. While not nearly as bad as hostile reports make her, she's not a shining example of sanity and reason.
Oh also the attacker is a believer in the “2020 election was stolen”. You know, like the typical Biden lib-y-rul supporter.
"other far-right"
All of those apply to far left people too.
There are bat-shit crazy people at both extremes, of course. And at some point there's wrap-around when crazy is as crazy does.
Are you agreeing that "anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, criticism of women, 'satanic paedophilia' ” censorship by tech companies" are bat-shit crazy and should be condemned?
Or are you just projecting and trying another deflection of "but the libz!!1!"?
the liberal bastion that is FOX News reports:
FOX is silent on political leanings - strangely silent.
Huhn. Skeptic that I am, I'd expect FOX to jump on evidence that the attacker is even remotely-frackin-liberal in any sense of the word.
Occam's Razor ...
San Francisco Chronicle lists one of the things know about him is that he is registered as a Green party member.
Damn hyper-conservative Green voters !
If you mix green and red, you get brown. Especially in the US, but also all round the world to a greater or lesser degree, green parties are usually Nazi, with a bunch of useful idiots making up the numbers. Germany is one of the few countries where this is not overwhelmingly the case, and they have mainstream, actual greens - still misguided wishful thinkers in many cases, but not Nazis in fancy dress.
It is hardly unusual for those with nazi sympathies to cross from the greens to other parts of the nutwing like the Trump-treason nutjobbery.
Most Green parties round the world are sincere and earnest centrists who just want everyone to join hands and save the world and who keep getting shafted and scapegoated by more cynical political parties. There are exceptions, of course, but they tend to be far too moderate and nice for the real eco-fascists.
"CNN and The Washington Post both reported, citing unnamed sources."
How could they be unnamed? Wasn't the mister the only one home? Doesn't that narrow it down a bit?
?
I believe the sources are law enforcement folks that have interacted with the suspect. Mr. Pelosi isn't the only one who has talked to the perp.
Oh yeah. 😀 Didn't think of that. Danke!
Try again gullible one.
https://twitter.com/jvanderbeken/status/1586111590188732416
But I get why you might want to deflect an attack by an [apparent, early reporting, disclaimers apply, more info may come out, etc. etc.] right-wing whacko as a “crackhead”.
And it may ultimately be a case of "disturbed individuals are disturbed"; quartz crystals and hemp bracelets are not MAGA hallmarks either.
But I get why you might want to blame an attack by an [apparent, early reporting, disclaimers apply, more info may come out, etc. etc.] crackhead whacko as “right-wing”.
Jimmy The Dane blamed a "crackhead" to deflect from the listed indicators of being a right-wing nutjob. Take it up the deflection with JtD.
Oooo, update, the perp is also a "2020 election was stolen" believer.
You know, like a typical lib-y-rul. (sarcasm, in case you're that obtuse. You might need it to be explicit.)
SFGate is reporting him as being a user of hard drugs, so he might be a "crackhead".
But you've yet to actually provide anything that shows he was a "right-wing nutjob" like you are claiming a lot here. A lot of vague unsourced and unbacked insinuations for unnamed other parties... for someone that tried to attack me for not providing citations, you seem to be lacking in more than a few yourself.
As you said in a moment of reason, this seems to have been "crazy man" more than "political violence". But unfortunately, that attitude did not seem to bleed into any of your "BLAME THE OTHER" posts.
More people are posting about stuff they found on the guy's social media before it got scrubbed.
It features a lot of insane ranting, but one of the things that stood out was an entire rant about "Jesus is the anti-Christ", complete with predictions that the Angels will save humanity.
Now, I get the impression many here aren't very religious, but this sort of thing should stand out to anyone. That's not a statement a sane-person can believe.
Like Loughner or Holmes, this really looks like an insane person that seized on every conspiracy, rebel, or counterculture theory no matter how contradictory or irrational. But instead of admitting that, we're seeing Leftists select subsets of this man's irrational and inconsistent behavior to paint him as right-wing, while ignoring everything that doesn't support that narrative.
The left (read corporate media) is going to have to work all weekend and looks like they are doing so to 1) frame this crackhead as some right winger and 2) deflect any kind of "soft on crime" blame that is surely coming during the last few days of election advertising.
The leftists here already have their marching orders and are obliging...
The Party Of Trump accusing others of being soft on crime is certainly a new flavour of assholery. What's next, ressurrecting Family Values?
Christ. What an asshole.
Fog of war. I know it's fun to run around saying, "See? It's one of your guys!"
Once we know, then we can engage the deterministic gears to use it as cheap rhetoric.
So, when someone breaks into the home of a political leader, and demands to know where that person is (yelling "Where is Nancy!") ...
... with an apparent social media history of "anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, criticism of women, 'satanic paedophilia,' censorship by tech companies" and also “2020 election was stolen” stuff ...
... yeah, sure, just blame "fog of war".
C'mon, that's bool and sheet. Even if the perp is mentally unstable, it's pretty clear where those voices in his head originate. You spread that? Then own the damage you're doing to society.
Yeah, I know you've already abandoned defending your losing claims, but just to make it clear to everyone:
DePape was a Leftist, politically active, a public supporter of most Leftist causes (like BLM), and a critic of Republicans. He was also a user of hard drugs, and insane. He was semi-homeless, staying at different places including a communal home, and tent camp, and a shipping container. He'd had a bunch of confrontations with people in the neighborhoods he'd sometimes stay, not infrequently involving either him calling the police on them for imagined offenses, or them trying to protect themselves and their things from him.
How was this amazing set of facts discovered? Well, a journalist actually went around and spoke to people that knew him, and then didn't suppress the answers.
So: Will you apologize for incorrectly jumping to your bigoted conclusions and accusing the "right-wing" of being responsible for this guy's actions? Will you admit you should not have been spreading 'that' sort of hatred?
A guy who ran against Gavin Newsom, who wrote "San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities", and who has renounced the Democratic Party - this is the objective journalist you want to appeal to? Well, at least it's not OAN.
When he records the neighbor giving the interview, and you can watch it yourself, it becomes pretty stupid to try to claim that he misrepresented her.
But sure! Go ahead with your conspiracy theories – try to claim she’s a crisis actor reading a script. That’s worked out real well for others, right?
"The "bad faith" exception to Younger abstention is something of a rara avis. But in this lawsuit alleging that the Attorney General of Alabama seized a guy's $240k bank account as part of a feud with the guy's brother—Jefferson County, Ala. Sheriff Mark Pettway—the district court espied this South Philippine Dwarf Kingfisher of fed-courts doctrine. Younger abstention denied. Qualified immunity granted. Eleventh Circuit: The district court was right not to abstain (though for far more mundane reasons than the lower court relied on). But it does Brother Pettway no good. The AG gets qualified immunity."
How in the world do you get qualified immunity for this? Doesn't qualified immunity require you to be acting within the duties of your job? In what world is 'stealing the bank account of the brother of a guy i have a beef with' in the normal course of duties for an AG?
To be clear, the AG didn’t “steal” the bank account: he had it frozen (pursuant to a warrant) to seize proceeds of an illegal gambling operation.
But if, as the court found, the warrant was in bad faith (hence no younger abstention), is it still in the AG's official duties? The one finding should preclude the other.
As much as I hate federal standing doctrine, I've always felt that the "we will voluntarily spend more money fighting against/dealing with this change in state law" argument from advocacy organizations was really weak, and not even good enough for state standing. It basically just boils down to "I don't like X enough to spend money fighting X", which would basically mean everybody would have standing to challenge anything they don't like.
"If a dragnet is okay to nab drunk drivers" - it's really not, and the cases finding otherwise are very problematic.
But until the Supreme Court overruled them, a circuit court has to take them as the law.