News & Media
Bernie Sanders v. DNC
Bernie Sanders sues the Democratic National Committee and the complaint is here. The legal issues are less exciting than Bernie’s hair style. What is more exciting is that Bernie Sanders isn’t taking this shit from the DNC. The DNC is playing the part of Roger Goodell in the 2016 election cycle. See Former NFL VP Of Officiating: “Looks Like The League Office Is Making Decisions On Who Wins/Loses Games” With New Playoff Officiating Rule, Masshole Sports. My take on this is that the DNC was pissed off enough last time around when its anointed candidate didn’t beat the upstart. They weren’t going to let it happen again, and they’ll do whatever it takes to put her highness on that ballot.
Circuit Split Over Cybersquatting Act – 11th Circuit Rejects GoPets in Jysk v. Roy
The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d), provides: “A person shall be liable . . . by the owner of a mark . . . if . . . that person . . . has a bad faith intent to profit from that mark . . .; and . . . registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that . . . is identical or confusingly similar to that mark.” Back in 2011, the 9th Circuit came up with a pretty bizarre decision, GoPets Ltd.v. Hise, 657 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2011). In that case, the 9th Circuit held that a “re-registration” is not a “registration” under the ACPA. Therefore, if you register a domain name
The First Amendment is not a free pass to harass
A charter school in Washington DC is suing abortion protesters. (source) Why? Because Planned Parenthood is opening next to the school, so the abortion protesters have decided to focus their protests on the children, parents, and employees of the school. Nobody ever said that abortion protesters were required to use logic. Although one might say it is logical. The protesters hope that the parents at the school will use their political clout to demand that Planned Parenthood move, so their kids can get back to getting an education. The school is suing for intentional infliction of emotional distress and for relief from a private nuisance. (complaint) Further, they are seeking an injunction to limit the anti-abortion folks’ right to protest.
The First Amendment is not a free pass to harass
A charter school in Washington DC is suing abortion protesters. (source) Why? Because Planned Parenthood is opening next to the school, so the abortion protesters have decided to focus their protests on the children, parents, and employees of the school. Nobody ever said that abortion protesters were required to use logic. Although one might say it is logical. The protesters hope that the parents at the school will use their political clout to demand that Planned Parenthood move, so their kids can get back to getting an education. The school is suing for intentional infliction of emotional distress and for relief from a private nuisance. (complaint) Further, they are seeking an injunction to limit the anti-abortion folks’ right to protest.
Good First Amendment Case – Biro v. Conde Nast
Peter Biro was the subject of a 2010 article in The New Yorker. Biro sued the publisher and other defendants who allegedly republished statements from the original article. Since Biro was deemed to be a limited purpose public figure, the court dismissed the claims against him because he did not allege sufficient facts to plausibly support an eventual finding of actual malice. The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal in Biro v. Conde Nast. The facts of the case really don’t matter for the purposes of this post. For all I know, Mr. Biro got a really raw deal, and the defendants really did defame him. So, for the sake of this article (and the comments, please) lets give him that
Revisiting Prostitution
by Jay Marshall Wolman My recent post on the Ninth Amendment got me thinking about Griswold v. Connecticut, and its progeny, including Lawrence v. Texas. Although the latter explicitly stated it wasn’t ruling on prostitution, it didn’t say it wasn’t protected. Assuming a logical thread from Griswold, the case law is that, basically, whatever two consenting adults choose to do in private is private and the government should not be intruding. There are governmental interests in preventing abuse (based on consent or ability to consent) or preventing public sex, but other than that, how is prostitution still a crime? The government has no interest in restraining two (or more) consenting adults from having intercourse. States do have the ability to declare certain contracts unlawful–working
Happy 5/6 Bill of Rights Day
by Jay Marshall Wolman We here at the Legal Satyricon are big fans of the Bill of Rights. Over at the Runt Piglet Squeals, the official blog of the Third Amendment Lawyers Association, I have a post discussing the less commonly understood history of the proposal and ratification of the Bill of Rights. The tl;dr version: it was originally 12 articles and numbers 3-12 became amendments 1-10 of the U.S. Constitution on Dec. 15, 1791. (Article 2 became the 27th Amendment on May 7, 1992, yes, 1992.) One thing I noted in that post is that, if another 27 states ratified Article the First, the Congressional Apportionment Amendment, we would have about 6,400 members of Congress. Originally submitted with the rest, Article
Good First Amendment Case – Biro v. Conde Nast
Peter Biro was the subject of a 2010 article in The New Yorker. Biro sued the publisher and other defendants who allegedly republished statements from the original article. Since Biro was deemed to be a limited purpose public figure, the court dismissed the claims against him because he did not allege sufficient facts to plausibly support an eventual finding of actual malice. The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal in Biro v. Conde Nast. The facts of the case really don’t matter for the purposes of this post. For all I know, Mr. Biro got a really raw deal, and the defendants really did defame him. So, for the sake of this article (and the comments, please) lets give him that
She’s/He’s Got The Jack, Do You Got a Case?
A guy went on Tinder, picked up a woman, and got herpes from her. Yeah? Why is that news? Well, the guy sued her for giving her the as-of-today incurable disease. (source) The woman knew that she had herpes, but she lied to the guy about her condition. She claims that she only thought it would be contagious during an outbreak. He is now suing her for giving him the virus. Does he have a case? Probably. People do bad things to one another with their genitalia. In one case I reviewed, a wife accused a husband of intentionally infecting her with an STD. Adam M. v. Christina B., 2013 Alas. LEXIS 73 (Alaska June 5, 2013). This guy went
She’s/He’s Got The Jack, Do You Got a Case?
A guy went on Tinder, picked up a woman, and got herpes from her. Yeah? Why is that news? Well, the guy sued her for giving her the as-of-today incurable disease. (source) The woman knew that she had herpes, but she lied to the guy about her condition. She claims that she only thought it would be contagious during an outbreak. He is now suing her for giving him the virus. Does he have a case? Probably. People do bad things to one another with their genitalia. In one case I reviewed, a wife accused a husband of intentionally infecting her with an STD. Adam M. v. Christina B., 2013 Alas. LEXIS 73 (Alaska June 5, 2013). This guy went
The Man in the High Castle in Albany and The First Amendment
The Man in the High Castle is a piece of alternative history fiction, which imagines an alternate future in which fascist forces won World War II. The Nazis occupy the eastern part of the United States, while the Japanese take up residence in the west. The Italians are non-existent in the series. You would think that they would get Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey… but I digress. So there is an alternate future in which America loses its civil liberties and fascist forces occupy it. There is a surveillance state. Political dissent is not tolerated. Hmm… add in a butterfly ballot and some hanging chads and its… well, I digress again. Suffice to say, this alternate future provokes the
Revolution Number 9
by Jay Marshall Wolman As previously discussed, reader Angie NK asked for a post about the Ninth Amendment. I digressed to the Fourth Amendment as I had some thoughts already percolating on it. [Side note: turns out people still actually make and sell percolators.] But, ask and thou shalt receive. The Ninth Amendment reads: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. So, what does this mean? It is a savings clause. James Madison explained the purpose during the introduction of those clauses that might become part of a bill of rights: It has been objected also against a Bill of Rights, that, by enumerating particular exceptions to
Randazza: The Man in the High Castle in Albany and The First Amendment
The Man in the High Castle is a piece of alternative history fiction, which imagines an alternate future in which fascist forces won World War II. The Nazis occupy the eastern part of the United States, while the Japanese take up residence in the west. The Italians are non-existent in the series. You would think that they would get Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey… but I digress. So there is an alternate future in which America loses its civil liberties and fascist forces occupy it. There is a surveillance state. Political dissent is not tolerated. Hmm… add in a butterfly ballot and some hanging chads and its… well, I digress again. Suffice to say, this alternate future provokes the
Prosecuting Police for Trespass
by Jay Marshall Wolman In a comment to my post announcing the formation of the Third Amendment Lawyers Association, reader Angie NK asked for some Ninth Amendment love. I’ll get there, Angie, I promise. But, before I do, I had some questions and thoughts about #3’s neighbor, the Fourth Amendment. The Third Amendment protects the home from a chronic invasion–the quartering of soldiers. The Fourth Amendment protects the home from an acute invasion–improper police searches. As a refresher, the Fourth Amendment states: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
Why this Liberal is Writing a Check to the Rubio Campaign
Yes, I’m planning to vote for Bernie Sanders, but I’m going to cut the Rubio campaign a check just the same. It won’t be much, but, as the Supreme Court said, “money equals speech.” Citizens United v. F.E.C., 558 U.S. 310 (2010). So I’m going to speak in favor of Rubio, even though I am a Liberal. Don’t have a conniption. I’m not buying in to his politics. Although, I do respect how he gets them done. For example, he has likely quietly killed Obamacare, without grandstanding. But to be clear, I don’t think I would ever vote for the guy. So why am I “speaking” with my money to support his campaign? Because a story is making the rounds
No "safe spaces" for Conservatives
Madison Gesiotto is a law student at Ohio State, and is also the author of the “Millennial Mindset” column at the Washington Times. (Pause for laughter at the thought of “Millenial Mindset”) She recently wrote a column called “The number one killer of black Americans.” What is this killer? According to Gesiotto, the number one killer of Black Americans is abortion. She believes that life begins at conception (as a lot of people do) and she then tallies up deaths from disease, murder, etc., and comes to the conclusion that this is a real problem. I don’t agree with her. But, ok… I get what she was trying to say. It’s fair to criticize it. But, it is consistent with a
Trump Cybersquats on Jeb – The Legal Analysis
Type in jebbush.com to your browser. If you would rather not, I can just tell you what happens. It brings you to the Trump campaign website. There are plenty of news sites reporting this, but we at Popehat, we’re the only ones to give you the hot and bothered legal analysis. Someone at the Bush campaign is about to get a stern talking to. Yes, he should have thought to register that domain first. But, we often hear that from cybersquatters, who take the position that you should think to register every permutation of your name, from zero to infinity, or it is fair game. Morally, we can debate that. Legally, it isn’t the case. It seems to me that
Some Peace of Mind for Free Speech in Massachusetts
Massachusetts has given the world its fair share of musical greatness. From the Dropkick Murphys back to Jonathan Richman, The Cars to the Pixies, Aerosmith to Mission of Burma. Bim Skala Bim to the Lemonheads. The Unband to the Mighty Mighty Bosstones. Lets put it this way, your musical life would suck without the 617/413 and later fragmented area codes. (Fine, we apologize for New Kids on the Block. That abomination cancels out the points we gained from Til Tuesday and Billy Squier.) But, I gotta be honest. Like any Patriots fan has to admit that the Pittsburgh Steelers are, to date, the better franchise. It doesn’t mean I love the Pats any less, but… you might love your wife
Why this Liberal is Writing a Check to the Rubio Campaign
Yes, I’m planning to vote for Bernie Sanders, but I’m going to cut the Rubio campaign a check just the same. It won’t be much, but, as the Supreme Court said, “money equals speech.” Citizens United v. F.E.C., 558 U.S. 310 (2010). So I’m going to speak in favor of Rubio, even though I am a Liberal. Don’t have a conniption. I’m not buying in to his politics. Although, I do respect how he gets them done. For example, he has likely quietly killed Obamacare, without grandstanding. But to be clear, I don’t think I would ever vote for the guy. So why am I “speaking” with my money to support his campaign? Because a story is making the rounds
No “safe spaces” for Conservatives
Madison Gesiotto is a law student at Ohio State, and is also the author of the “Millennial Mindset” column at the Washington Times. (Pause for laughter at the thought of “Millenial Mindset”) She recently wrote a column called “The number one killer of black Americans.” What is this killer? According to Gesiotto, the number one killer of Black Americans is abortion. She believes that life begins at conception (as a lot of people do) and she then tallies up deaths from disease, murder, etc., and comes to the conclusion that this is a real problem. I don’t agree with her. But, ok… I get what she was trying to say. It’s fair to criticize it. But, it is consistent with a
