“Federal court in Atlanta rules against Epstein victim but is sorrowful; ‘The whole thing makes me sick,’ judge says”: Bill Rankin of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has this report.
John Pacenti of The Palm Beach Post reports that “Federal appeals court deals huge blow to Jeffrey Epstein victims looking for justice.”
Jonathan Stempel of Reuters has a report headlined “Jeffrey Epstein’s accusers cannot challenge plea agreement — U.S. appeals court.”
Bernie Pazanowski of Bloomberg Law reports that “Epstein Victim’s Challenge to Non-Prosecution Agreement Tossed.”
Kayla Goggin of Courthouse News Service reports that “Victim’s Challenge to Epstein Plea Deal Rejected by Full 11th Circuit; A deeply divided 11th Circuit acknowledged prosecutors misled victims of billionaire Jeffrey Epstein when they struck a plea deal granting him immunity from prosecution on sex-trafficking charges, but a majority held victims cannot challenge the deal now.”
And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Paul Cassell — counsel for the mandamus petitioner — has a post titled “The Eleventh Circuit Rules Against Jeffrey Epstein’s Sex Abuse Victims’ Efforts to Rescind His Secret Plea Deal; The en banc ruling calls the sordid deal a ‘national disgrace’ but concludes the courts are powerless to enforce crime victims’ rights in pre-charging situations — a disturbing ruling that I hope will be quickly overturned.” Cassell writes that he and his co-counsel will be seeking U.S. Supreme Court review on their client’s behalf.
You can access Thursday’s 185-page, 7-to-4 en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit at this link.
“Trump Adviser Can’t Sue Over Abortion Pill Story, Panel Rules; An appeals court rejected senior Trump adviser Jason Miller’s $100 million libel lawsuit over a story about claims that he slipped a woman an abortion pill in a smoothie after impregnating her”: Kayla Goggin of Courthouse News Service has this report on a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued Friday.
“Federal appeals court overturns verdict that found Sherwin-Williams, other paint companies responsible for lead poisoning”: Bruce Vielmetti has this front page article in today’s edition of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel about a ruling that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued yesterday.
“The chipping away of a woman’s right to choose; This most private personal decision, as the Supreme Court declared, must be protected”: Mary Ann Sorrentino has this essay online at The Boston Globe.
“Supreme Court rulings on traffic stops reinforce structural racism in policing; The court was well aware of what it was doing”: Dean A. Strang and Nancy Gertner of The Boston Globe have this report.
And online at Politico Magazine, Christopher Wright Durocher has an essay titled “How the Supreme Court Helped Create ‘Driving While Black’; A reckoning with police violence must include a reckoning with how the nation’s highest court enabled it.”
“Controversial MN Supreme Court ruling fuels legislative change to protect sexual assault survivors; With student support, the Minnesota Legislature is working to close the ‘intoxication loophole'”: Samantha Woodward of The Minnesota Daily, the student newspaper of the University of Minnesota, has this report.
“The Supreme Court’s key Second Amendment opinion and what might come next”: Joan Biskupic of CNN has this report.
“What is the perfect number of Supreme Court justices?” Columnist Alexandra Petri has this op-ed in today’s edition of The Washington Post.
“Have tech platforms captured the Supreme Court?” Law professor Jonathan M. Barnett has this essay online at The Hill.
“The 2020 election still hovers over the Supreme Court with another pending Pennsylvania case”: Ariane de Vogue of CNN has this report.
“The Supreme Court hears a case next week that could make Citizens United even worse; The Court’s new majority could make it much easier for big spenders to influence American politics in secret”: Ian Millhiser has this essay online at Vox.
“Stylish judicial writing undermines legal system, may breach judges’ duties — new paper”: Alison Frankel’s “On the Case” from Thomson Reuters News & Insight has this post about a new paper that I linked to in this earlier post.
