A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Decisions

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

Almost ten years ago, New Mexico largely abolished civil forfeiture, putting an end to the practice of seizing people’s belongings without convicting them of a crime. And what happened next? Did the state spiral into chaos? On the contrary, crime rates remained unaffected. This is according to a peer-reviewed study recently published in the Criminal Justice Review, which analyzed nine years of monthly data and compared it to control states. Therefore, policymakers can now be reassured that eliminating civil forfeiture is not only the right thing to do but also a way to protect civil rights.

1. Environmentalists in California sue the FAA and the National Park Service over compliance with regulations issued by the Council on Environmental Quality. D.C. Circuit: Surprise! The CEQ does not have the authority to issue regulations, despite 50 years of practice, as it was established by executive order, not by Congress.
2. During a shutdown of most businesses in Puerto Rico in March 2020, certain big-box chains continued to operate and allegedly sold non-essential items. Competing businesses that were closed down file a lawsuit against these chains for unfair competition. District court: Class certification denied, and no cause of action established. First Circuit: Remanded to Puerto Rican state court. Dissent: Agreement, but should have granted Costco’s motion to sever.
3. American Airlines and JetBlue attempt to merge their flight services in Boston and NYC. Is this considered a restraint of trade under the Sherman Act? District court: After a lengthy trial with biased experts and extensive evidence, the court rules in favor of restraint of trade. First Circuit: No clear error in applying the rule of reason.
4. New York’s State Ivory Law imposes restrictions on the sale of ivory items beyond those permitted under the federal Endangered Species Act. Antique dealers argue that the law is preempted by the ESA and that the display restriction violates the First Amendment. Second Circuit: The law is not preempted, but the display restriction does violate the First Amendment. Dissent: The law is preempted.
5. North Carolina mandates that federal-office candidates disclose felony convictions on their ballot applications. Prospective candidate argues that this violates the Qualifications Clause and the First Amendment. Fourth Circuit: No violation as checking a felony box does not impose an unconstitutional qualification for candidacy, nor does disclosing this fact constitute compelled speech under the First Amendment.
6. In 2023, former lawyer Alex Murdaugh is found guilty of murdering his wife and son. During the trial of a bank CEO accused of helping him steal from clients, a juror expressing anxiety is removed, leading to the banker’s conviction being overturned. Did the removal of the juror violate the banker’s rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments? Fourth Circuit: Yes, the removal of the juror violated the banker’s rights, and a new trial is ordered.
7. A teen in Austin, Texas, experiences intense bullying at school for his political beliefs and sues the school district under Title VI. District court dismisses the case, determining that the bullying was not racially motivated. Fifth Circuit: Affirmed. Dissent: The bullying was based on multiple reasons, including race.
8. An Ohio man sues jail officials for deliberate indifference after experiencing severe withdrawal symptoms while in custody. Sixth Circuit (unpublished): Qualified immunity granted to all officials, as there was no clear evidence of deliberate indifference.
9. A Michigan woman is arrested for disorderly conduct despite being calm and steady on her feet. She sues the arresting officer for false arrest. Sixth Circuit: While there was no probable cause for the arrest, qualified immunity is granted to the officer.
10. In Indiana, physicians are prohibited from treating gender dysphoria in children with medication or surgery. District court issues a preliminary injunction, stating that the law likely violates the Equal Protection Clause. Seventh Circuit (2-1): The law is subject to rational-basis review and likely passes constitutional scrutiny.
11. A case in the Eighth Circuit involves a business relationship that was never formalized in a contract, possibly due to the involvement of Jägermeister.
12. In a lawsuit against the US Dept. of Ed. and a Missouri credit agency, a Kansas man alleges violations of the FCRA after errors in his credit report led to negative consequences. Tenth Circuit: Lawsuits allowed to proceed against both entities.
13. A nonprofit organization in Kansas sues the state for outlawing the sending of partially completed vote-by-mail forms, claiming that the restriction violates their First Amendment rights. Tenth Circuit: The regulation is considered content-based but is deemed harmless and not subject to strict scrutiny.
14. The Plaintiffs in a case involving the shooting of a teenager by police argue that the officer used excessive force. Eleventh Circuit: The officer’s actions were deemed reasonable given the circumstances.
15. Project Veritas files a defamation lawsuit against CNN for misreporting the reason for their suspension from Twitter. Eleventh Circuit: Lawsuit allowed to proceed based on sufficient evidence.
16. The Fifth Circuit declines to reconsider a decision involving a street preacher challenging an ordinance in Brandon, Miss. Fifth Circuit: En banc review denied by a close vote.
17. The Supreme Court denies certiorari in Martinez v. High, a case involving a law enforcement officer’s disclosure of confidential information leading to abuse. Ninth Circuit: Officer’s actions deemed unreasonable, setting a clear precedent against such behavior.

New case alert! As reported by the Texas Tribune, there is a severe shortage of social workers in Texas, with many counties lacking licensed professionals. Katherin Youniacutt and Tammy Thompson, aspiring social workers with past convictions, file a lawsuit challenging a recent law banning individuals with felony assault convictions from becoming social workers. The lawsuit, supported by the Institute for Justice, seeks to overturn the law and restore the ability of the licensing board to consider evidence of rehabilitation. Learn more here.