|
|
|
Federal court upholds Texas open meetings law
Court Press News |
2012/09/27 15:39
|
A federal appeals court has upheld Texas' open meetings law as constitutional, rejecting a lawsuit that argued it stifled free speech for government officials.
The 1967 Texas Open Meetings Act prohibits a quorum of members of a governmental body from deliberating in secret. Violations are punishable by up to six months in jail and a $500 fine.
Officials from a group of 15 Texas cities, including Alpine, Arlington and Houston suburb Sugar Land, challenged the law in 2009. A U.S. district judge ruled against them, prompting an appeal the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
A three-judge panel ruled Tuesday that the law promotes disclosure of speech and does not restrict it.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott called the decision a victory for open government. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court upholds summary for St. Louis police measure
Court Press News |
2012/08/24 14:44
|
A Missouri appellate court has upheld the proposed ballot summary for an initiative that would end state control of the St. Louis Police Department.
The Missouri Court of Appeals' Western District ruled Tuesday that the summary is fair and sufficient. The American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri had filed a lawsuit challenging the summary.
The ballot measure calls for St. Louis to oversee the city's police department instead of a state commission. Election officials reported earlier this month that supporters had submitted enough valid signatures for the measure to appear on the November statewide ballot. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge won't halt Pa. voter identification law
Court Press News |
2012/08/15 11:05
|
A Pennsylvania judge isn't stopping a tough new voter identification law from going into effect.
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson on Wednesday refused to grant an injunction that would have halted the law requiring each voter to show a valid photo ID. Opponents are expected to file a prompt appeal to the state Supreme Court as the Nov. 6 presidential election looms.
The law is the subject of a furious debate over voting rights. People challenging it include some who say they'll be unable to vote.
Democrats say the law will make it harder for the elderly, minorities, poor and young adults to vote, and is designed to help Republican challenger Mitt Romney beat Democratic President Barack Obama.
Republicans who control the Legislature and the governor's office say they think it'll prevent voter fraud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NJ court upholds decal law for young drivers
Court Press News |
2012/08/10 12:43
|
Young drivers in New Jersey will have to continue displaying a red decal on their license plates.
The state Supreme Court upheld "Kyleigh's Law" in a ruling Monday.
In a unanimous opinion, the high court ruled that requiring the decals doesn't violate federal privacy laws or laws against unreasonable search and seizure. An appeals court had ruled similarly last year in a challenge brought by two parents.
The law is named for a New Jersey teenager who was killed in a 2006 crash. It's meant to aid police in enforcing restricted privileges for young drivers.
Opponents say displaying the decals could leave teen drivers vulnerable to predators. But a report last year found only one reported incident in which an underage driver was stopped by someone impersonating a police officer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gay marriage ban backers seek Supreme Court review
Court Press News |
2012/08/04 16:56
|
Backers of California's ban on same-sex marriages asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday to overrule a federal appeals court that struck down the measure as unconstitutional, a move that means the bitter, four-year court fight over Proposition 8 could soon be resolved.
Lawyers for the coalition of religious conservative groups that sponsored the voter-approved ban petitioned the Supreme Court to review the lower court's finding that the 2008 amendment to the state constitution violated the civil rights of gay and lesbian Californians. The request had been expected since a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its 2-1 decision earlier this year.
If the high court declines to take the case, it would clear the way for same-sex marriages to resume in California. Gay couples could get married in the state for several months before Proposition 8 passed, a right the measure was designed to take away. Same-sex couples still have the rights and benefits of marriage controlled by state law if they register as domestic partners.
The divided appeals court panel cited those conditions, which were unique to California at the time, as grounds for striking down the ban as a violation of the U.S. Constitution's promise of equal protection. But it also went out of its way to state it was not saying similar bans in six other states it oversees were inherently unconstitutional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
