Short Circuit: An inexhaustive weekly compendium of rulings from the federal courts of appeal

Horseracing integrity, beneficial owners, and bills of attainder.

Please enjoy the latest edition of Short Circuit, a weekly feature written by a bunch of people at the Institute for Justice.

New cert petition: In 2014, federal task force officers beat up an innocent college student whom they'd mistaken for a suspect. But the Sixth Circuit has twice ruled that the case, which has never gotten to a judgment, cannot proceed because of the Federal Tort Claims Act's judgment bar. We're asking SCOTUS to resolve a circuit split (on Rule 60(b)(6)) and let the case proceed. Click here to learn more.

New on the Short Circuit podcast: A couple Master Thespian attorneys explain how being a good actor makes for being a good lawyer.

New on the Unpublished Opinions podcast: Sure, federal officials may have absolute immunity for violating the Constitution, but Congress has already told state legislators there's another path to accountability.

1. In 2025, Congress wrote a law that withholds Medicaid funding from certain abortion providers—specifically, providers that have the characteristics of Planned Parenthood (and basically nobody else). A bill of attainder? First Circuit: The law may single out Planned Parenthood, but it doesn't single them out for punishment, so no.
2. Second Circuit: Look, we understand the plaintiff says this New York subpoena is abusive and violates the First Amendment, but the fact that the New York state courts already heard and rejected exactly those arguments about exactly this subpoena kind of ties our hands here, guys.
3. Philly SWAT breaks into home of teen murder suspect (who is ultimately cleared of wrongdoing) before dawn. Yikes! The teen hasn't lived there in years; the raid discommodes an (also) innocent couple. Third Circuit (over a partial dissent): Mistakes happen. No Fourth Amendment violation.
4. In 2017, off-duty Baltimore cop, who is walking in plainclothes near his Columbia, Md. home, sees two teens standing (innocently, it turns out) in carport outside another home. He demands that they account for themselves; they politely suggest he mind his own business; he … pulls a gun!? and chases them!? Jury: Pay $250k for gross negligence (in your private capacity, not as an officer). Fourth Circuit: Just so. (Reportedly, he was employed by the city years after the incident, at one point earning six figures for instructing young officers about the use of force.)
5. Allegation: In 2018, Texas inmate serving life without possibility of parole is attacked by guard and defends himself. (The guard resigns before his disciplinary hearing.) At the inmate's disciplinary hearing, he's not permitted to show the video of the incident. He's been in solitary ever since and has lost over 135 pounds. Fifth Circuit (unpublished): First of all, his suit isn't Heck-barred, as he's not attacking his underlying conviction; he's going to be serving life no matter what happens. And second, no qualified immunity on his due process, retaliation, conditions of confinement, and other claims.
6. Chinese national has lived in Texas for 16 years, is in divinity school planning to become a pastor in Texas, and believes that "the United States is the land of opportunity and equality, and everyone has a chance to realize the American Dream." He challenges a Texas law barring people "domiciled" in China (among other countries) from buying real estate in the Lone Star State. Fifth Circuit: Your patriotic commitment to Texas, America, and apple pie is inspiring. But it means you don't have standing because you are definitely not domiciled in China.
7. Mississippi man gets probation for failure to pay child support, but the felony conviction also means he's lifetime-banned from having a gun. Fifth Circuit (over a dissent): That violates the Second Amendment. His gun-possession conviction is reversed.
8. Man jailed for failure to pay child support is put in a Barren County, Ky. cell with two inmates who have, between the two of them, previously attacked cellmates 11 times. They attack him almost immediately, leaving him paralyzed and in assisted living. Sixth Circuit: The county might be on the hook for keeping them in gen pop. Grant of summary judgment reversed.
9. Is talk therapy speech or medical conduct? The Supreme Court will be answering that question this term, but the Sixth Circuit is in no mood to wait around, declaring, over a dissent, that talking to people is in fact speech. (IJ filed a sublime amicus brief in this case.)
10. In 2020, Congress enacted the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act to establish a nationwide framework for regulating thoroughbred horseracing under the auspices of a private corporation, the Horseracing Authority. In response to lawsuits, Congress in 2023 amended the Act to give the FTC final say over the Authority's rules. Sixth Circuit: And that resolves the plaintiffs' nondelegation and commandeering arguments.
11. Are people unlawfully in this country members of "the people" protected by the Second Amendment? Sixth Circuit: Yes. But it doesn't matter for this guy as he seems pretty darn dangerous. Concurrence: They are not "the people" for the Second Amendment and I'm not so sure they're "the people" in the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth, or Tenth Amendments either.
12. Former Illinois state legislator hops on a carousel of tax-evasion maneuvers, gets convicted. Seventh Circuit: The evidence sufficed to show she understood her tax obligations and willfully violated them—not least because she had sponsored tax legislation during her time as a lawmaker.
13. Jurisdiction pop quiz! A couple marries in Minnesota, the groom a member of the Prairie Island Mdewakanton Dakota tribe, the wife a non-Indian. They live in Edina, Minn., largely relying on the community's monthly disbursement of its gaming revenues, have three kids who are all members. Where can they divorce: tribal court or Minnesota state court? Eighth Circuit: State court it is. Might be different if they'd married or lived on the reservation or if their marriage had any legal significance to their relationship with the tribe, but the kids were members regardless of the marriage, and the monthly disbursement never became marital property based on the tribe's laws. (There's also a fun portion on whether the community was a required party to the suit under FRCP 19. (It was not.))
14. Jurisdiction pop quiz! Man, a member of the Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate tribe, is driving erratically in Sisseton, S.D., and state police officer pulls him over. He runs into nearby tribal housing complex, where tribal police apprehend him. The tribe charges him with DUI and resisting arrest; the state charges him with resisting arrest, reckless driving, and assault against a police officer. He pleads guilty to reduced state charges, after which the tribe dismisses the DUI charge. Query: Did the DUI charge exceed the tribe's jurisdiction? Eighth Circuit: Dunno. We don't have jurisdiction to consider it after the tribe dismissed the DUI charge, mooting the question.
15. 2007: Mexican citizen pleads guilty to California burglary. 2009: Department of Homeland Security issues him a notice that he's subject to administrative removal. To which the man responds by waiving his right to challenge removal. Leading a DHS "deciding Service officer" to order him removed. 2023: Man reenters the United States and is charged with illegal reentry. Man: Aha! But my 2009 removal was fundamentally unfair because deciding Service officers are "inferior Officers" under the Appointments Clause, and my decider had not been properly appointed. Ninth Circuit: The officer was an "employee," not an inferior officer. Illegal-reentry conviction affirmed.
16. Security guard who has lived in the U.S. since 1997 and has a citizen wife and 3 citizen children is pulled over and found to have a firearm. Is he one of "the people"? Tenth Circuit: We assume he is. But, too bad, the law criminalizing his possession of a firearm is constitutional because it's part of our history and tradition to deny rights to outsiders. I mean, have you heard of Henry VIII?
17. In 2020, Congress passed a law requiring certain types of corporate entities to identify their "beneficial owner" to federal regulators—something state corporate law generally doesn't require. Businesses: No fair! Creating a corporation is just filing a piece of paper with a state office. That's not "interstate commerce." Eleventh Circuit Yeah, but after you file that piece of paper, we bet you do some commerce. Case dismissed!
18. A 2024 Alabama law that outlaws—on pain of up to 20 years in prison and $30k fines—payment to folks who assist other folks filling out absentee-ballot applications has vague and contradictory language, says the Eleventh Circuit, so how to know if plaintiffs are indeed at risk of prosecution and thus have standing to challenge it? "Rather than stumble around in the dark, we humbly ask the Alabama Supreme Court to turn on the lights." Questions certified.
19. And in en banc news, the Fifth Circuit will not reconsider its opinion that the NLRB was free to sua sponte vacate a two-year-old unanimous ruling that ExxonMobil had not violated federal labor law. Judge Oldham, joined by three others, thinks this is exactly what's wrong with "independent" federal agencies.

In May, officials in Wenatchee, Wash. abruptly ordered Lighthouse Christian Ministries to shut down its soup kitchen, which had served hot meals to all comers since 2019. But the city wasn't responding to any health and safety issues or legitimate problems—it was just catering to a few politically connected business owners who complained. For shame. After receiving its conditional-use permit, Lighthouse spent over $1.6 mil remodeling a warehouse in an industrial part of town, and it had scrupulously complied with its city-approved management plan. So this week, Lighthouse filed suit in federal court. Property owners have strong reliance interests in their conditional-use permits, which cities can't revoke for bogus or insubstantial reasons. Click here to learn more.