233 results for 'cat:"Civil Rights" AND cat:"Constitution"'.
Per curiam, the circuit finds the district court properly dismissed the constitutional claims filed by the "George Floyd" protesters. The protesters allege First, Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment violations based on the claimed absence of probable cause to arrest them for violating the Texas Penal Code making it illegal to obstruct thoroughfares. The size and location of the protests supplied the arresting officers with probable cause to conclude the protestors were rendering passage on the thoroughfares unreasonably inconvenient. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: August 6, 2024, Case #: 24-20026, Categories: civil Rights, constitution
J. Colloton finds that a lower court properly dismissed the Human Rights Defense Center's claims that an Arkansas county violated the center's civil rights by refusing to accept publications the center mailed to detainees. The Human Rights Defense Center was aware of the detention center's "postcard-only policy" when it mailed the publications. The policy "is rationally related to legitimate penological objectives," as the evidence shows that the policy reduced avenues for contraband to enter the detention center. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Colloton, Filed On: August 6, 2024, Case #: 23-1677, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Due Process
J. Gregory finds a lower court erred in granting summary judgment to law enforcement after they were sued by a deceased man’s estate, as well as by that man’s former girlfriend, after authorities entered his house following a high-speed chase, ultimately killing the man and injuring the woman. Because there are genuine factual disputes on claims including excessive force, warrantless entry and trespass, the lower court was wrong to grant summary judgment at this time. Reversed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Gregory, Filed On: August 1, 2024, Case #: 22-2187, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Police Misconduct
J. Hamilton finds the district court properly found for the department of human services. The mother who lost custody of her daughter in state court and regained custody a year later filed suit alleging department officials violated her federal constitutional rights. A welfare check done on the mother was based on the report of an anonymous caller saying the mother and child were living in a garage during hot summer weather. When a detective and social worker later returned at the mother's request, they asked her for a urine sample knowing she had a pending drug charge and a history of drug abuse. If certain actions could be construed as “interference” with family integrity, officials never acted without consent, reasonable suspicion or both. The substantive due process claim based on officials' conduct leading up to the mother's arrest fails. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Hamilton , Filed On: August 1, 2024, Case #: 22-1037, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Family Law
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Reidinger grants a county social services supervisor and social worker their motion for summary judgment following allegations of Fourth Amendment violations, among others, brought by a mother after the county removed her three children from her home. The county workers found that the children’s father regularly abused methamphetamines and behaved violently in the home. The county intervened and required the mother to choose safe adults to place her children with for two weeks and file a one-year restraining order on the father, both of which she did. Then her children were allowed to return to their home with her. She argues that the county unlawfully took custody of her children, but it never took custody; she retained custody the entire time. Therefore, there is no genuine issue of fact regarding her Fourth Amendment claim.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Reidinger, Filed On: July 30, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv143, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Family Law
[Consolidated.] J. Guirola grants the Mississippi Secretary of State's motion for summary judgment, finding that allowing absentee ballots to be counted if mailed by election day and received within five business days does not violate federal election laws as claimed by the Republican National Committee and the state Libertarian Party. The Mississippi statute is "consistent with federal law" and is not in conflict with the election-day statutes.
Court: USDC Southern District of Mississippi , Judge: Guirola, Filed On: July 28, 2024, Case #: 1:24cv25, NOS: Voting - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Elections
J. Eagles partially grants Planned Parenthood’s motion for summary judgment on two provisions that were previously preliminarily enjoined when it sued the North Carolina General Assembly’s abortion law revision made in response to the Supreme Court’s overturn of Roe v. Wade in 2022. The first provision, requiring providers to document the existence or probable existence of an intrauterine pregnancy before a medical abortion, is unconstitutionally vague, and so summary judgment is granted. However, with the second provision, requiring surgical abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy to be performed in a hospital, summary judgment is denied. This is because although Planned Parenthood has provided credible evidence that abortion need not be performed in a hospital at 12 weeks, and doing so is more dangerous and expensive for the pregnant person, there is no longer a fundamental right to abortion since the Supreme Court’s decision. The General Assembly need only offer rational speculation for its legislative decisions, which it has done. Because Planned Parenthood has not disputed every conceivable reason the General Assembly may have for ordaining the hospitalization requirement, Planned Parenthood's motion for summary judgment on this requirement is denied.
Court: USDC Middle District of North Carolina, Judge: Eagles, Filed On: July 26, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv480, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Health Care
J. Shepherd finds a lower court properly dismissed a student organization's First and 14th Amendment claims concerning the designation of lounge space inside of a memorial union establishment. The student organization argued that the allocation of permanent lounge space to cultural organizations at the expense of other student organizations constituted "viewpoint discrimination." However, the Board of Regents sufficiently showed in court that the allocation procedure was "viewpoint neutral." Even if the university were motivated by a belief that supporting cultural centers is a worthwhile goal, that still does not amount to viewpoint discrimination. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Shepherd, Filed On: July 25, 2024, Case #: 23-1346, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Education
J. Crabtree grants a city's motion to dismiss a civilian's civil rights claims under the Fourth Amendment concerning a police officer, a "convicted serial rapist," who attacked her in 2015. The former police officer presented sufficient evidence in court that his victim's claims are time barred.
Court: USDC Kansas, Judge: Crabtree, Filed On: July 22, 2024, Case #: 6:23cv1163, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Negligence
J. Lake dismisses part of a prisoner’s civil rights complaint. The prisoner sued a prison nurse, claiming she refused to examine him when he felt sick, and a prisoner doctor, claiming she prescribed him a nutritional liquid supplement but failed to diagnose his diabetic ketoacidosis, which the prisoner says led to a two-day coma. The court has already given the prisoner permission to sue the nurse, but he cannot sue the doctor for violating his Eighth Amendment rights, as failing to properly diagnose a medical condition does not constitute deliberate indifference.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Lake, Filed On: July 19, 2024, Case #: 4:23cv1558, NOS: Prison Condition - Habeas Corpus, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Prisoners' Rights
Per curiam, the USDC Southern District of Mississippi rules that to remedy violations of the Voting Rights Act, the Mississippi Legislature will be allowed until the conclusion of its regular 2025 session to create new districts and hold elections.
Court: USDC Southern District of Mississippi , Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: July 18, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv734, NOS: Civil Rights - Habeas Corpus, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Elections
J. Cobb denies the transit authority's motion to dismiss the panhandler's suit challenging the transit authority's permitting scheme for panhandlers and his arrest for panhandling outside of a 15-foot zone surrounding subway escalators where panhandling is banned. The panhandler has standing to bring his challenge, since panhandling is at least arguably protected speech and his panhandling violates regulations imposed by the transit authority. He has also stated a plausible First Amendment claim, since he has alleged that the transit authority acted beyond its lawful authority by punishing panhandling outside of the area where he could be impeding pedestrian traffic into and out of the subway.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Cobb, Filed On: July 18, 2024, Case #: 1:19cv3145, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution
J. Summerhays denies an officer's motion for summary judgment on an individual's Fourth Amendment claim related to his arrest on a rape charge for which he was later acquitted. Whether the officer omitted material information about the alleged victim's mental health from the court-approved arrest warrant “recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally” is a decision for the trial court. The detective’s omission of any details regarding the woman’s very recent hospitalization and diagnoses, her statements that she had not taken her psychiatric medications for three days prior to the incident, and her admission that she drank excessively that evening were material omissions that were necessary for the officer's application for an arrest warrant.
Court: USDC Western District of Louisiana , Judge: Summerhays, Filed On: July 17, 2024, Case #: 6:20cv1430, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Police Misconduct
J. Dick grants requests for a preliminary injunction barring the Baton Rouge Police Department from continuing its written policy of conducting strip searches of non-arrested persons or suspects. The court finds that, for any search beyond a frisk or pat-down of a citizen stopped pursuant to an investigative stop, the Constitution requires police officers have probable cause. One of two non-arrested persons suing the police for civil rights violations has demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits the pertinent portion of the police strip search policy as to non-arrestees is unconstitutional on its face. Injunctions preventing the violation of constitutional rights are “always in the public interest.”
Court: USDC Middle District of Louisiana, Judge: Dick, Filed On: July 12, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv1229, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Police Misconduct
J. Cogburn denies the state’s department of adult corrections’ motion to stay proceedings following a previous injunction in this case concerning a trans woman’s right to have gender-affirming surgery while incarcerated. During the injunction, the department was instructed to reconstituted its committee to include two medical doctors with gender dysphoria experience to decide whether prohibiting gender-affirming surgery violates the woman’s Eighth Amendment rights. Instead of complying with the injunction, the department appealed to the Fourth Circuit and now requests a stay until that appeal is resolved. However, the appeal does not apply to the question of the alleged Eighth Amendment violation because the department had previously agreed to reconstitute the committee anyway. Now, the department has 14 days to form this new committee to reassess the woman’s request for accommodation.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Cogburn, Filed On: July 12, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv191, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Lgbtq
Per curiam, the circuit finds that the district court properly dismissed claims contending plaintiff's arm was broken while he was being restrained by security personnel following a courtroom outburst during sentencing because eighth amendment use of force claims against security personnel and the U.S. Marshals Service would require judicial expansion of the recognized Bivens causes of action, and plaintiff has the alternative of bringing claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Affirmed.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: July 12, 2024, Case #: 22-654, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Tort
[Consolidated.] J. Pryor finds that the lower court properly dismissed the parents' cases against the hospitals, which reported them to the state child welfare agency for medical negligence after the parents refused a Vitamin K shot for their newborn babies, a preventative shot given to all babies to protect against very rare cases of hemorrhagic bleeding. In one case, the hospital threatened to take the baby without the parents consent to administer the shot, forcing the parents to call the police to put a stop to it. However, there is no merit to the parents' claims that the state agency conspired with the hospitals to deprive parents of their constitutional rights. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Pryor, Filed On: July 11, 2024, Case #: 22-2096, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Health Care
J. Friedrich partially grants the religious group's application for a preliminary injunction barring the school district from citing its anti-discrimination policy to deny official club recognition to a chapter, or "huddle," of the group at its largest high school. The group has shown that it is likely to succeed on its claims that the policy, which barred the group because of its stances on sexual relations and LGBTQ people, violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the free exercise clause of the U.S. Constitution. It has also shown that it would suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction. The requested injunction, however, is narrowed to apply only to the high school, and not to the rest of the district, since circumstances at other schools are distinguishable.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Friedrich, Filed On: July 11, 2024, Case #: 1:24cv1332, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, First Amendment
J. Cooper dismisses remaining claims in the Federal Circuit judge's suit against various members of the court challenging her suspension for refusing to cooperate with an investigation into her fitness to continue carrying out her duties at the age of 96. The claims allege that portions of the Judicial Conduct & Disability Act are unconstitutionally vague and violate the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. While a provision allowing the chief judge of a circuit to investigate complaints of judicial misconduct or disability authorizes conduct that may violate the Fourth Amendment's unreasonable-search prohibition, it also authorizes conduct that does not. The Act is also not unconstitutionally vague.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Cooper, Filed On: July 9, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1334, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, Judiciary
J. Ludwig partially denies the protest group's motion for a preliminary injunction in their lawsuit claiming the city and U.S. Secret Service's restrictions on their protest march planned for the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee are unconstitutional. The restrictions on protest parades put in place by officials with the city, law enforcement and the Secret Service, including those relegating the group's protest parade to an area not of the group's choosing, do not violate the group's First Amendment rights, so the portion of their injunction motion seeking to allow them to march on their chosen route is denied. The motion is granted as to a portion of the city's special event ordinance that would allow it to revoke protest permits based on past criminal convictions, as that portion of the ordinance is an "unconstitutionally broad prior restraint under the First Amendment." Therefore, the city is enjoined from denying or revoking permits based on prior criminal convictions.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Ludwig, Filed On: July 8, 2024, Case #: 2:24cv704, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, constitution, First Amendment
J. Smith finds the district court properly dismissed the protester's civil rights claims. The protesters were arrested during the “George Floyd” protests in Dallas and say a Dallas PD "general order" permitting officers to conduct arrests as they see fit during events of civil unrest, with no further guidance, is unconstitutional. The protesters have not plausibly pleaded the order is unconstitutional on its face, as the general order does not do away with preexisting constitutional protections. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Smith , Filed On: July 8, 2024, Case #: 23-10395, Categories: civil Rights, constitution
Per curiam, the Ninth Circuit withdraws an opinion filed on January 11, 2024 in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson which held that the enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property does not constitute “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: July 8, 2024, Case #: 23-15087, Categories: civil Rights, constitution
J. Friedrich overrules the activist organization's objection to the substitution of the United States for the federal officials who authorized or engaged in the violent dispersion of a protest in Lafayette Square in an action against them by the protest's participants. The organization's negligence and D.C. First Amendment Assemblies Act claims doe not arise under the Constitution, and therefore are not brought for a violation of the Constitution as required by the Westfall Act's exceptions to substitution for such violations.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Friedrich, Filed On: July 4, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv1469, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, civil Rights, constitution