A new Florida law allows residents to challenge any school textbook that they find inappropriate.

The legislation, which went into effect on July 1, is known as the Instructional Materials Bill. It permits any resident, regardless of whether or not they have a child in school, to challenge what Florida students are learning via an independent hearing. If the hearing officer deems the complaint justified, they can order the school to ban the book. However, school districts will still have the final say.

The Florida Citizens’ Alliance, a conservative group, pushed for the law after examining more than 60 textbooks in 2015. The group’s founder, Keith Flaugh, found more than 80 instances in one government textbook that he believes gives false information.

“We found [the textbooks] to be full of political indoctrination, religious indoctrination, revisionist history and distorting our founding values and principles, even a significant quantity of pornography,” he told NPR.

He goes on to explain the pornography is in literature within the school library or on summer reading lists.

While the bill can apply to any piece of required reading, the FCA’s main concern is with science textbooks. The group does not believe the schools should teach evolution or climate change as facts. One unnamed member claimed that the “vast majority of Americans believe that the world and the beings living on it were created by God as revealed in the Bible,” so the textbooks should only present evolution as a theory.

Similarly, an affidavit from a teacher complains that her school is teaching climate change as “reality.”

Other issues the FCA has with the books include attitudes toward Islam and anti-American portrayals of history.

In response to the bill, the Florida Citizens for Science Group posted a statement on its blog:

We believe that should this bill become law with the governor’s signature, people who crusade against basic, established science concepts such as evolution and climate change will have the green light to bog down the textbook selection process on the local level and bully school boards into compromises that will negatively impact science education.

Glenn Branch, deputy director of the National Center for Science Education, is also concerned. “It’s just the candor with which the backers of the bill have been saying, ‘Yeah, we’re going to go after evolution, we’re going to go after climate change,'” he said.

Delaney Cruickshank

Delaney Cruickshank is a Staff Writer at Law Street Media and a Maryland native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in History with minors in Creative Writing and British Studies from the College of Charleston. Contact Delaney at DCruickshank@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Florida Law Fights Against “Political Indoctrination” in School Textbooks appeared first on Law Street.

Over the past couple of years, America has been engaged in a public conversation about policing. After the scores of deaths at the hands of police officers, many people called on police departments to install body cameras on officers. Technology is changing policing in a number of other ways, including in how officers enforce minor infractions–like speeding.

With the advent of more sophisticated cameras, traffic enforcement officials have been relying on red light cameras to catch drivers who speed, run red lights, or break other traffic laws. There is some debate over whether or not a camera can be used to accuse someone of running a red light, and a general confusion about the effectiveness of such cameras. Despite the inconveniences these measures may cause drivers, their purpose is to keep drivers, pedestrians, bikers, and road workers safe.

Read on to learn more about the red light cameras, and the legislative battles they have led to.

History of the Red Light Camera

In 1993 New York City signed the first bill to install red light cameras, along with other so-called “automated enforcement” measures. The new technology only grew from there. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 421 communities in 23 states and the District of Columbia use red light cameras as of July 2017.

Red light cameras were introduced with the intention of making intersections safer. The thinking is that if someone sees a sign that says they will be photographed, they would be deterred from speeding.

How a Red Light Camera Operates

In certain places, there are cameras installed that trigger when a driver breaks certain rules, whether it is speeding or running a red light. Then a few weeks later they receive a letter in the mail that includes their picture and how much they owe. Drivers have three options when they receive one of these letters. First, they can say that they were guilty. Second, they can say that there is no contest. Regardless, the driver would mail in a check for the amount owed. The third option is to plead not guilty.

A Second Tool: Speeding Cameras

Another tool police departments are relying on to deter dangerous driving behavior: speeding cameras. There is evidence that speeding cameras in work zones can decrease accidents. The Illinois Center for Transportation released a report on the positive results of speed photo-radar enforcement (SPE) vans. The state of Illinois was seeing between 6,000 and 7,000 crashes a year in work zones. In crashes where there was an injury or fatality, 85 percent of the time it was the motorist, not the road worker, who suffered the injury or fatality. These staggering statistics prompted the state to begin using SPE vans in 2004.

The vans have a radar to monitor drivers’ speeds, which is shown on a monitor on top of the van. “If the driver does not reduce his or her speed, a camera captures the face of the driver and the front license plate. The SPE also records the speed of the violator, date, location, and time of the violation,” the report said.

Police officers stationed in the vans determine whether the vehicle was posing a serious threat. They then compare the photo that was taken of the speeding driver to the driver’s license database. If the cop sees that the pictures match, he or she may send out a ticket to the driver.

UIUC Professor Ray Benekohal, who conducted experiments on vehicles’ behavior in the presence of SPE vans, found promising results. In an interview with the Illinois Center for Transportation, Benekohal said:

SPE was very effective in reducing the average speed of cars and trucks, thus calming traffic and improving safety in work zones. The research found the reductions to be significant. When the SPE was present, on average, cars traveled 5.1-8.0 mph slower in the median lane and 4.3-7.7 mph slower in the shoulder lane.

Traffic vehicles, or SPE vans, are an effective option for increasing safety, for drivers, pedestrians, and anyone else on the roads.

Red Light Cameras and Public Safety

Red light cameras are also showing positive effects for public safety. Data compiled by American Traffic Solutions (ATS) has found a negative trend in deaths resulting from automobile accidents after red light cameras were installed.

The group’s data found that in areas where red camera lights had not been installed, there was an average of two deaths a day in 2015. Between 2011 and 2015, an average of 719 people died every year from an accident caused by someone running a red light. These crashes resulted in 126,000 injuries in 2014, and $390 million in damages was lost each month between 2011 and 2015.

When compared with cities that installed red light cameras, the results were very encouraging. Researchers saw a 21 percent decrease in crashes that resulted from a car running a red light. Conversely, in cities that eliminated their red light camera programs, the data found a 30 percent increase in fatal red light crashes.

Contested Tickets

While many states vary in terms of how their red light camera laws are worded, there are some common issues that arise. For one, if the ticket was mailed more than 30 days after the infraction took place, the ticket is invalid. In addition, if the camera or the camera’s warning sign were installed less than 60 days prior to the incident, the ticket is invalid. Sometimes the warning sign is not sufficiently clear or visible, and drivers are unaware the traffic stop has a camera installed. 

Different states have different standards for allowing drivers to contest a ticket that was issued as the result of a red light camera. For example, Delaware’s law allows for very few drivers to get out of paying their ticket or getting their charges dropped. The law states:

For a violation to occur, the front of a vehicle must be behind the stop line marked on the pavement at the time the traffic light signal turns red and must then continue into the intersection while the traffic light signal is red.

In an article in Delaware Online, Judge Susan Cline said, “The city does not have to prove intent, or even that you were the driver of the vehicle.” In Prices Corner, an unincorporated town near Wilmington where Cline works, in 63 out of 850 cases in 2013 involving red light cameras, the ticket was dismissed. The reasons that cases were dismissed included people running a red to avoid funeral processions or emergency vehicles, and being directed by road crews around traffic.

Baltimore officials recently said the city could expand its current red light traffic camera program. The city recently installed speed enforcement cameras near school zones and are planning to install red light cameras throughout the city. Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh said the cameras will generate more revenue for the city.

State-Level Legal Battles

Some states have debated the usefulness and legality of red light cameras altogether. In May 2017, the Florida Supreme Court announced that it would hear a case on whether or not the state should ban red light cameras altogether. The Tampa Bay Times reported:

The move comes after two appellate courts ruled that cameras in Oldsmar and the city of Aventura in Miami-Dade County can be used to ticket drivers. Those rulings, however, conflicted with one from the 4th District Court of Appeal, which shut down the city of Hollywood’s program in 2014.

Florida’s legislature is also trying to tackle the problem. In March 2017 the Florida House passed a bill to outlaw red light cameras. The bill is currently under consideration in the Florida Senate. The case for eliminating the cameras altogether lies in the cameras themselves. Usually when a cop sees someone speeding they pull them over and write them a ticket. Now it’s not the cop seeing people speed, it’s the cameras. When violators go to court, there is no one to confront in court because the “defendant” is the camera. 

Traffic attorneys have filed approximately 65 lawsuits against Florida communities that use cameras because of what many drivers feel are unfair practices. Essentially, many of the traffic attorneys have alleged that because many of the red light cameras are owned by third-party operatives, it is illegal to use them to issue someone a ticket. Law enforcement cannot be delegated to a third party under Florida Law. The court defined this in the 2014 case, City of Hollywood v. Arem:

In sum, Florida law does not grant the City any authority to delegate to a private third-party vendor the ability to issue uniform traffic citations. Only the City’s law enforcement officers and [traffic infraction enforcement officers] have the authority to issue such citations. The City also lacks the lawful authority to outsource to a third-party vendor the ability to make the initial review of the computer images of purported violations and then use its unfettered discretion to decide which images are sent to the TIEO, and which ones are not.

If Florida were to ban red light cameras, it would not be the first state to do so. In 2014, South Dakota passed House Bill 1100 which outlawed red light cameras in the state. The bill stated that it “prohibits the use of certain photo monitoring devices to detect red light violations. This bill prohibits the use of red light cameras.” Furthermore, House Bill 1122 protects South Dakotans from being charged by a red light camera in any state. House Bill 1122 reads:

No collection agency or company may contact a South Dakota resident by telephone, mail, electronic means, or any other manner, nor utilize the court system of South Dakota, in an effort to collect a fine derived from a speed camera or red light camera civil violation, or file a report with any credit bureau regarding the unpaid civil fine. No court of the State has jurisdiction to enforce a speeding camera or red light camera civil judgment against a resident.

South Dakota’s problems with red light cameras started in 2006, when a driver was ticketed $86 for allegedly running a red light. The driver, I.L. Weidermann, challenged the ticket, leading to four years of legal battles. The judge eventually agreed with Wiedermann, saying that Sioux Falls (the city in which he was ticketed) was imposing its own laws that were “less stringent” than the state laws regarding traffic by using the red light cameras. The judge also found that Weidermann was not given an opportunity to be heard, which was in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. This was the beginning of the end for red light cameras in South Dakota.

Conclusion

Despite the legal battles and contested tickets, red light cameras do not appear as if they will be going away anytime soon. The tickets themselves are difficult to fight and, perhaps most importantly, red light cameras appear to have positive effects on driver safety. They discourage drivers from running red lights, and thus causing accidents that result in death or injury.

Anne Grae Martin

Anne Grae Martin is a member of the class of 2017 University of Delaware. She is majoring in English Professional Writing and minoring in French and Spanish. When she’s not writing for Law Street, Anne Grae loves doing yoga, cooking, and correcting her friends’ grammar mistakes. Contact Anne Grae at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Red Light Cameras: Saving Lives or Infringing on Rights? appeared first on Law Street.

Orenthal James “OJ” Simpson, the Hall of Fame NFL running back who was once lauded for his speed and ability to escape defenders on the field is now equally as recognizable for his ability to escape lengthy prison sentences.

On Thursday, a Nevada Parole Board unanimously voted 4-0 in favor of granting OJ Simpson an early release on his 33-year sentence for a bizarre incident that took place in a Las Vegas hotel in 2007. Simpson, along with other armed men, attempted to reclaim sports memorabilia items that he claimed were stolen from him. Simpson was convicted of armed robbery, attempted kidnapping, and assault in 2008 and is set to be released as early as October 1.

But Simpson is far more notorious for his involvement in what was known as “the trial of the century. ” He was accused and eventually acquitted of murdering his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman in Nicole’s home in Brentwood, California in June of 1994.

Tony Corda, one of the parole commissioners on the hearing, cited as his reasoning that Simpson was at “low risk to re-offend” and the board felt that he had served enough time based on his criminal actions as well as his good behavior in prison.

During his hearing Simpson expressed remorse for his actions, saying: “I am sorry the things turned out the way they did…I had no intention to commit a crime.” But Simpson also expressed that he felt that he had served his time and that he deserved to become a free man.

So what are the legal ramifications for Simpson’s parole? His parole will likely be set to expire on September 29, 2022. Based on Nevada law he must submit written reports to his parole officer every month, and he will be subjected to random drug and alcohol screenings. If he violates the terms of his parole in any way he can be sent back to prison.

He did indicate to the parole board during his hearing that if granted parole he wished to return to his home state of Florida, saying: “I can easily stay in Nevada, but I don’t think you guys want me here,”

Whether this request will be granted or not depends on a couple of factors. Florida has to first confirm that Simpson is eligible to complete parole in the state, and he needs to have an approved place to live. The home that he bought in Miami in 2000 was foreclosed upon in 2012, so that seems like an unlikely destination for now.

But money shouldn’t be a big problem for Simpson, despite the fact that he is still responsible for paying damages from a multi-million dollar lawsuit to Ron Goldman’s family. He is still receiving his NFL pension. Based on his time in the NFL, ESPN estimated that OJ could have made up to $600,000 while in prison.

Simpson had managed to live a relatively media-free life since his conviction, but after the release of two enormously successful television series based on his life, he has been thrust back into the pop culture news scene. So when word broke that Simpson will be getting out of prison, social media exploded:

OJ Granted Parole! @RealDonaldTrump, You got a position for OJ in your Administration. This Murderer is gonna need a job! #OJSimpsonParole pic.twitter.com/7nF6si1Izx

— stacey roberts (@1sroberts) July 20, 2017

OJ Simpson has been granted parole. As awful as it is, the board had to follow the law + not consider past behavior he wasn’t convicted for

— Yashar Ali (@yashar) July 20, 2017

POLL: Should OJ Simpson be granted parole? 888-788-9910 #ToddStarnesShow #OJSimpsonParole

— toddstarnes (@toddstarnes) July 20, 2017

James Levinson

James Levinson is an Editorial intern at Law Street Media and a native of the greater New York City Region. He is currently a rising junior at George Washington University where he is pursuing a B.A in Political Communications and Economics. Contact James at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post OJ Will Be Free: Here’s What You Need to Know appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Pardon Me?

As the investigation into the Trump Administration’s ties to Russia continues to heat up, Trump has reportedly asked for more information about the power of his presidential pardon. Specifically, he has asked about the power he has to pardon his aides, family members, and even himself.

In 1974, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) explained that Nixon could not pardon himself. https://t.co/KKfSVe3Vzx

— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) July 21, 2017

He has also asked questions about the reach of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation. According to the New York Times, Trump’s team has been looking into whether it’s possible to fire Mueller or some members of his staff. Trump claims that Mueller should not be looking into any issues other than the allegations of collusion with Russia during the 2016 election. That worry isn’t without precedent. Kenneth Starr’s investigation into former President Bill Clinton’s land deals in Arkansas eventually led to his impeachment after it was discovered he had lied about an affair. But many point to Trump’s shakiness when it comes to Mueller as evidence that his team is increasingly uncomfortable with the amount of scrutiny placed on the president.

Bonus: for more info on what a presidential pardon actually is, check out Law Street’s explainer.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: July 21, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

A Miami judge ruled on Monday that new revisions to Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law are unconstitutional. Florida Governor Rick Scott signed the amended “Stand Your Ground” law on June 9,  requiring prosecutors to prove a defendant wasn’t acting in self-defense at pretrial hearings.

Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Milton Hirsch held that the legislative changes altered the burden of proof in “Stand Your Ground” cases, raising the threshold “from mere preponderance of the evidence to clear and convincing evidence.” Per Florida’s Constitution, such changes could only be made by the Florida Supreme Court, not the state legislature, and were therefore unconstitutional, Hirsch said. In outlining the necessity for a separation of powers among the three branches of government, Hirsch even referenced a paper about the Ministry of Magic’s judicial overreach in “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.”

Hirsch’s ruling comes as the result of two “Stand Your Ground” cases in his court. Liletha Rutherford was charged with aggravated assault with a firearm and grand theft for pulling a gun on a couple during an argument. Omar Rodriguez was charged with first-degree murder for shooting and killing Jose Rey over an argument about Rey’s dog. Rodriguez claimed Rey charged at him with a knife. Police recovered a knife at the crime scene, but discovered Rodriguez’s DNA on the knife, not Rey’s.

Florida lawmakers reacted to the ruling on social media. State Senator Rob Bradley, who sponsored one of the amendments to the “Stand Your Ground” law, said in a tweet that the court’s ruling “attacks the Legislature’s role in defining and protecting our individual rights.”

Today’s Miami trial court ruling attacks the Legislature’s role in defining and protecting our individual rights. /1

— Rob Bradley (@Rob_Bradley) July 3, 2017

Following Hirsch’s ruling, Rutherford and Rodriguez will now each have to prove they acted in self-defense. Currently, the ruling only applies to those two cases. However, appeals are likely to make their way to appellate courts and the Florida Supreme Court.

The effectiveness of “Stand Your Ground” laws hasn’t exactly been clear. In March, Florida State Senator Dennis Baxley claimed that since Florida’s 2005 “Stand Your Ground” law, “we’ve seen violent crime continuously go down.”

PolitiFact pointed out some flaws in that statement. While violent crime in Florida has dropped a cumulative 34.9 percent from 2005 to 2015, that decrease is not “continuous” as Baxley contends. Data show occasional increases in Florida’s violent crime rate during that 10-year period, however not enough to really counteract that overall decline in violent crime.

That said, PolitiFact also highlighted the fact that national violent crime rates have also been decreasing since the 1990s. It has yet to be proven whether Florida’s decrease in violent crime has been due to its “Stand Your Ground” laws, considering several states with similar drops do not have “Stand Your Ground” laws.

Critics of “Stand Your Ground” say the laws disproportionately benefit defendants who kill black victims compared to those who kill white victims, and often allow defendants to avoid murder charges.

The Tampa Bay Times identified nearly 200 “Stand You Ground” cases. Of those cases, 70 percent of defendants who invoked a “Stand Your Ground” defense were acquitted. Seventy-three percent of defendants who killed a black person faced no penalty, while 59 percent of defendants who killed a white person faced no penalty.

One of the most high-profile “Stand Your Ground” cases involved George Zimmerman, the “neighborhood watchman” who shot and killed 17-year-old black Florida teenager Trayvon Martin in 2012. Zimmerman did not invoke the “Stand Your Ground” law in his trial, but the judge issued instructions to the jury along the same lines as the law’s language, saying Zimmerman “had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another.” Zimmerman was acquitted of all charges in Martin’s death.

“Stand Your Ground” may stay in place in Florida for now, but Hirsch’s ruling could limit the extent to which the law is allowed to reach. The question has the potential to make it to higher courts and get decided once and for all.

Marcus Dieterle

Marcus is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is a rising senior at Towson University where he is double majoring in mass communication (with a concentration in journalism and new media) and political science. When he isn’t in the newsroom, you can probably find him reading on the train, practicing his Portuguese, or eating too much pasta. Contact Marcus at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Miami Judge Rules “Stand Your Ground” Law Revisions Are Unconstitutional appeared first on Law Street.

A Florida extortion case involving two social media influencers and some X-rated blackmail has renewed interest in the debate over cellphone privacy–specifically, whether or not a suspect’s phone password is protected by the Fifth Amendment.

The case involves Hencha Voigt, 29, and her then-boyfriend, Wesley Victor, 34, who were arrested last July after they allegedly threatened to leak sexually explicit videos and photos of social media star Julieanna Goddard unless she paid them. The pair reportedly requested that Goddard–better known as “YesJulz” on social media–pay them $18,000 within 24 hours, according to a Miami Police Department report.

Law should support their phones being searched.They were seized as evidence 2the crime- extortion,which is a felony. https://t.co/xT2xLN391i

— Julz (@YesJulz) April 26, 2017

Goddard has over 460,000 followers on Instagram and has been referred to as “the Queen of Snapchat” by the New York Times in a profile last year. The 26-year-old multi-hyphenate (she’s a promoter, social-media marketer, and model) has worked with brands like Puma and Red Bull and can be seen hanging out with the likes of Lebron James and footwear and clothing designer Ronnie Fieg.

Voigt, on the other hand, is an Instagram celebrity in her own right. The fitness model starred last fall in “WAGS Miami,” an E! reality TV show about the wives and girlfriends of sports figures in South Beach.

According to CNN, prosecutors have been unable to search through Voigt and Victor’s confiscated cellphones for more evidence, since both locked phones are password protected. Now, prosecutors have asked the judge to compel Voigt and Victor to give up their passwords, but lawyers for the pair are pushing back, arguing that passwords are equivalent to self-incriminating testimony that is protected under the Fifth Amendment.

“They’re asking for the passcode so they can keep on searching what’s on the phone–which may be incriminating my client–and then use that against her,” Kertch Conze, Voigt’s attorney, told CNN. While its unclear how the judge will rule in this case, this is yet another example of investigators fighting over what protections are afforded to defendants’ locked phones.

Last year, Apple notably pushed back against the FBI after it wanted the company to devise a way to unlock one of the San Bernardino shooters’ phones. Apple CEO Tim Cook argued that the “back door” could potentially be used by sophisticated hackers and cyber-criminals, which would effectively put tens of millions of Americans at risk.

However, this “sextortion” case is clearly different. For one, the defendants aren’t dead and no back doors are needed, and two, there isn’t a threat of a possible terror attack at stake.

While some lower courts have ruled that forcing suspects to reveal their passcodes is unconstitutional due to the Fifth Amendment, other courts have contradicted these rulings. Therefore, we’ll just have to wait and see if the judge will  grant prosecutors in this case an exception.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Florida “Sextortion” Case Renews Phone Password Privacy Debate appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Shooting in Paris Could Impact Presidential Elections

Just a few days before the first round of voting in France’s election, a terror attack in Paris has the potential to deepen the nation’s already dramatic political divide. One man, identified as Karim Cheurfi, opened fire with a machine gun on the Champs-Elysee, one of Paris’ famous streets. Cheurfi killed one police officer and injured two others. He was then shot by law enforcement.

There may be a connection to Islamic State–a note supporting the terrorist organization was found near Cheurfi’s body, and the organization claimed responsibility for the attack. However, Islamic State also got salient details about the attack wrong, and it’s unclear why.

Belgian minister says gunman killed in Paris shooting was French national https://t.co/hctNtRoZGQ pic.twitter.com/QyRaHgVvOT

— ITV News (@itvnews) April 21, 2017

The first round of voting for the French presidential election will take place on Sunday, and today was slated to be the last day of campaigning. The attack could have an impact on the election–far-right candidate Marine Le Pen has called for the closure of all “Islamist” mosques in France, and one of her leading opponents, Emmanuel Macron has encouraged the French people to not “give in to fear.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 21, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

As of April 11, Alabama no longer grants state judges the authority to override jury recommendations in capital cases. As one of her first acts as governor, Kay Ivey signed the SB16 bill into law and put an end to judicial override in capital cases in Alabama. The move was likely a preemptive response to shifting legal tides. Had Alabama not revised its laws, it would likely have faced fierce and ongoing battles in court.

Alabama, Florida, and Delaware are the only states to have ever allowed judicial override in capital cases. In the 2016 case Hurst v. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court found Florida’s sentencing scheme in violation of the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury. In response to the high court’s ruling, Delaware’s Supreme Court ruled its state’s sentencing scheme unconstitutional a few months later.

In the wake of Hurst v. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court denied an appeal by an Alabama death row inmate who claimed he was sentenced under a scheme similar to Florida’s. Alabama’s Supreme Court upheld judicial override nine months later. In spite of these victories, it seems that Alabama was no longer willing to put resources toward defending judicial override in court.

Following Hurst v. Florida, the Florida legislature amended its sentencing practices to reinstate capital punishment. However, Delaware’s General Assembly has yet to pass any such legislation, meaning there is an effective halt on the death penalty in the state. By amending its sentencing laws, Alabama has put an end to a recurrent legal battle and ensured the perpetuity of capital punishment in the state.

While Alabama has removed judicial override, its new sentencing practices could still face legal challenges. Following the chain of events set in motion by Hurst v. Florida, Alabama is now the only state that allows a jury to non-unanimously recommend the death penalty.

Before the Hurst v. Florida ruling, Alabama, Florida, and Delaware allowed a jury to recommend the death penalty with 10 of 12 votes. In the same ruling that banned judicial override, Delaware’s Supreme Court deemed non-unanimous recommendations unconstitutional. While Florida’s initial legislation preserved the practice, the Florida Supreme Court later found non-unanimous recommendations constitutional.

Alabama’s Supreme Court would almost certainly uphold non-unanimous death penalty recommendations, and the U.S. Supreme Court has not explicitly ruled on the matter. The overwhelming consensus against the practice suggests Alabama could once again find itself in court.

Callum Cleary

Callum is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is from Portland OR by way of the United Kingdom. He is a senior at American University double majoring in International Studies and Philosophy with a focus on social justice in Latin America. Contact Callum at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will Banning Judicial Override for Capital Cases Keep Alabama Out of Court? appeared first on Law Street.

Republican Governor Rick Scott of Florida used an executive order on Monday to remove the first black elected prosecutor in the state, Orange County State Attorney Aramis Ayala, from 21 murder cases. The conflict between Ayala and Scott started last month after Ayala, a Democrat, announced that she wouldn’t be seeking the death penalty in a murder case. Scott reacted by taking the case, in which a man is accused of killing a pregnant woman and a police officer, away from Ayala.

Scott called the decision “unacceptable,” and said “that she is not interested in considering every available option in the fight for justice.” According to Ayala’s spokesperson Eryka Washington, she didn’t know about the reassignments until they were reported in the media. Washington said that Ayala believes Scott is abusing his authority and “has compromised the independence and integrity of the criminal justice system.”

The news created a lot of mixed feelings on social media, with a lot of people criticizing the governor for overreach.

does an elected prosecutor have right to decide against seeking death? – ongoing legal battle worth following in FL https://t.co/9pLaX7yYJQ

— Wesley Lowery (@WesleyLowery) April 3, 2017

Many also pointed out concerns about the death penalty:

Thank you to Aramis Ayala. The death penalty is an ineffective deterrent, racially discriminatory and morally wrong. https://t.co/LiFtodFqat

— Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) April 4, 2017

Also on Monday, State Representative Bob Cortes urged Scott to go even further and remove Ayala from office. He argued that she is trying to change the law–he said that “she is elected there to follow it,” and not change it. He claimed that Ayala is neglecting her responsibility to those who elected her by not considering the death penalty. According to the Florida state constitution, a governor can remove any elected official who isn’t fulfilling her duty.

But it’s hard to determine whether or not she is fulfilling her duty, given that prosecutorial discretion allows Ayala to decide how to best pursue her cases. And it’s worth noting that opinions on the death penalty differ in the United States. Research has repeatedly shown that it’s not effective in deterring people from committing crimes. There is also the risk of executing an innocent person, and examples of botched executions where the prisoner doesn’t die right away but has to endure a slow, torturous death. The drugs that are used are increasingly expensive and hard to access, as many medical companies don’t want to contribute to executing people. And the trials where prosecutors seek the death penalty involve an additional phase for sentencing, which makes the whole ordeal more expensive than a regular trial.

Back in March, when Ayala made it clear that she wouldn’t be seeking the death penalty for the rest of her term, she also mentioned the downside of instilling hope in victims’ families about an execution that might take months or years before being carried out–if ever. “I have determined that doing so is not in the best interests of this community or in the best interests of justice,” she said.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Florida Prosecutor Won’t Seek Death Penalty, Governor Yanks Her Cases appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

100+ Arrested and Three Killed in Chechen Crackdown on Gay Men

Over the past week, more than a hundred gay men went missing in Chechnya, the semi-autonomous Russian republic located in the southernmost part of Eastern Europe. The republic is predominantly Muslim and extremely conservative. On Saturday, a Russian opposition newspaper reported that the men had been arrested by Chechen police and confirmed that at least three had been killed.

After 100+ gays seized in Chechnya, human rights official says homosexuality=”evil every Chechen will fight against” https://t.co/dT6zu1NeGv

— Alec Luhn (@ASLuhn) April 1, 2017

Allegedly, the crackdown started after a gay rights group in Moscow applied to hold Pride parades in areas close to Chechnya. But the leader of the republic, Ramzan Kadyrov, said through a spokesman that the reports are false and impossible. In fact, he seemingly flat-out denied that gay people exist in the area. “You cannot arrest or repress people who just don’t exist in the republic,” spokesman Alvi Karimov said. He added, “If such people existed in Chechnya, law enforcement would not have to worry about them, as their own relatives would have sent them to where they could never return.” These horrendous comments caused international outrage and gay men have started fleeing the republic.

LGBT activist handcuffs himself to Petersburg’s Akhmat Kadyrov bridge to protest news that 100+ gays detained in Chechnya, at least 3 dead https://t.co/V49WGZos45

— Alec Luhn (@ASLuhn) April 2, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 3, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

A Miami woman, commonly known as the “toxic tush” doctor, was sentenced to a decade behind bars Monday for administering botched buttocks injections that left one woman dead.

Oneal Ron Morris, 36, pled no contest last month to manslaughter and practicing medicine without a license. She was sentenced to 10 years in prison followed by five years probation.

‘Toxic tush doctor’ who ‘injected women’s bums with sealant and cement’ jailedhttps://t.co/8S3N0Z4Mmv pic.twitter.com/VhihBW5cr8

— Daily Mirror (@DailyMirror) March 28, 2017

Morris, who was known by her patients as “Duchess,” was accused of injecting toxic materials–cement, silicone mineral oil, bathroom caulking, Fix-a-Flat tire sealant, and superglue–into women’s backsides to cosmetically enhance their curves.

In 2012, Shatarka Nuby, died in prison from complications related to Morris’ procedures. Prior to her death, the 31-year-old mother of three had penned a letter to the state’s health department claiming that her butt had hardened and turned black, and that she felt sick. She had allegedly paid Morris $2,000 for as many as 10 injections between 2007 and 2010. Officials began an investigation and interviewed Nuby, but four months later she was pronounced dead.

According to the Washington Post, the medical examiner listed the official cause of death as respiratory failure from “massive systemic silicone migration” from injections to Nuby’s buttocks and hips.

“My daughter died the most inhuman death,” Nuby’s mother, Sherri Pitts, said at the hearing. “Eighteen months she suffered not knowing the full of what [was] put in her body.”

However, Morris’ defense lawyer, William Lanphear, disagreed with the sentence, claiming that her patients knew they were not dealing with a real doctor.

“All parties share the responsibilities and the blame for their own actions and the role they played,” he said. “There was an assumption of risk obligation from the victims.”

Morris was previously convicted in Miami-Dade County for practicing without a license and served one year in prison.

In 2013, Morris–and her butt–became a viral sensation after photos of her were released; the attention resulted in the media dubbing it the “toxic tush” case. She reportedly injected herself with the same toxic cocktail she used on her clients, disfiguring her own body.

During the sentencing, Morris denied that she knowingly injected household materials into women’s bodies, stating: “I’ve been found guilty by the media and outside sources based on lies.”

“I have never ever or would dare ever to inject or have injected any human with any type of unknown substance,” Morris said.

The judge ordered Morris, who was born male, to serve her time in a men’s prison because Florida law doesn’t have exemptions for transgender inmates. While the punishment may very well fit the crime, Morris’ lawyers argued that she could become a victim herself in an all-male prison.

According to a 2011-2012 survey conducted by the Bureau of Justice, 39.9 percent of transgender prison inmates and 26.8 percent of transgender jail inmates reported some type of sexual assault. That’s 10 times higher than for the general prison and jail populations, according to the New York Times.

“This isn’t ‘Orange Is the New Black.’ This isn’t going to be all fun and games for her,” said her attorney, Kirstie Cohen. “She’s at risk, and a very high risk, to be abused by not only inmates but guards.”

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post “Toxic Tush” Doc Sentenced to 10 Years in Prison For Deadly Butt Injections appeared first on Law Street.

Sponsored Content

Do you read every article you can find about the Tidal lawsuits? Are you fascinated by the legal effort to recover art stolen by the Nazis during World War II? Do you have strong feelings about the legal side of “Deflategate?” Do you want a legal career that’s dynamic, fast-paced, and challenging? If you answered yes to any or all of those questions, a career in Entertainment, Arts, or Sports law may be something to consider.

These specialties incorporate a wide range of legal disciplines, including IP and Copyright law, Contract law, and Labor law. And without the behind-the-scenes work of the lawyers who specialize in these fields, our favorite music, TV shows, movies, sports, and art would be unrecognizable. So, how do you get started? The University of Miami School of Law, home to the unique Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law LL.M program, has the answer. Read on to learn more.

A Primer on Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law

First things first: what are we talking about here? These fields, while distinct, are certainly related. But it’s still important to understand some of the nuances.

What is Entertainment Law? 

There’s no set-in-stone definition of exactly what Entertainment law constitutes, but in many ways it involves the application of legal concepts to real world problems. Entertainment lawyers deal with a myriad of legal issues arising from the entertainment and performing arts industry, including TV, movies, radio, theater, and publishing. It can include anything from working on contracts for performers or employers, to filing trademarks, confronting First Amendment issues, and dealing with lawsuits involving those in the entertainment industry. According to Miami Law:

Although entertainment lawyers might represent ‘talent,’ such as directors, actors or musicians, they more often advise companies that produce and distribute entertainment content, license celebrity brands, purchase and sell motion picture or music publishing catalogues, raise or invest debt and equity capital, and purchase and sell companies engaged in one or more of such activities.

Entertainment law is fast-paced and multi-dimensional, and can incorporate many legal questions that a lot of us probably don’t even think about on a daily basis. For example, imagine some of the legal issues that go into creating a movie:

• Actors, writers, and workers on the movie will need contracts to be negotiated. The presence of unions–for example the Screen Actors Guild–may also mean that labor law considerations are in the mix.
• Music used in the movie will need to be properly licensed.
• Marketing materials for the movie, including catchphrases, may need to be trademarked.
• Say the movie involves a “real life story” or biography–an attorney may be needed to deal with any defamation lawsuits that arise.

This list is by no means dispositive, but it goes to show that there are a lot of moving parts that go into what we see as final products in entertainment–and many of them require lawyers.

What is Arts Law?

Like Entertainment law, Arts law exists at a large intersection of legal issues, largely focused on the creation, ownership, and business of art. Intellectual Property law plays a large part–as art depends on the creation of unique work–but Estate and Property law, Contract law, Torts, and other areas factor in as well.

According to Miami Law:

Today, art lawyers work in law firms, museums, auction houses, and financial institutions. Works of art are bought and sold, implicating issues of good title and authenticity; loaned from museums to galleries and other museums, implicating insurance and contract matters; travel internationally for both commercial and private purposes, implicating international treaties and customs laws and regulations; and are often important assets in decedents’ estates, implicating tax and estate planning concerns. An art lawyer must be able to navigate this complex terrain of legal concepts and practical strategies.

Let’s look at an example, like we did with Entertainment law. What might you need to consider if you’re providing legal counsel to an artist?

• Contract law comes into play if the artist wants to be represented in any galleries.
• The artist may be able to receive royalties if their art is used for commercial purposes, or if someone uses the artist’s art without their permission, intellectual property rights could protect them.
• Artists sometimes become involved in performance art as public protests–First Amendment considerations may be at issue.

If any of those hypothetical issues piqued your interest, maybe Arts law is a discipline that you would want to consider.

What is Sports Law?

Sports law, like its Entertainment and Arts law counterparts, also sees a mix of legal principles and factors. Sports lawyers can represent players in the sports industry, including professional and amateur athletes, venues, organizations and teams, and companies that work with athletes or teams.

According to Miami Law:

Sports lawyers usually require knowledge of various areas of law including: contracts, labor, antitrust, tax, intellectual property and media law. To represent sports industry clients, a lawyer also needs strong contract negotiation and drafting skills in addition to an understanding of the arbitration process. Other areas of law, like immigration, can also come into play for foreign athletes and international leagues or clubs.

Let’s try our “day in the life” exercise with Sports law. Let’s say that you represent a team. Here are some questions that could come up:

• You’ll be needed to draft contracts for the athletes who join the team.
• In the cases of international athletes, you may need to deal with Immigration law to ensure that they are able to work in the United States.
• If an athlete gets injured in the course of a game, he may sue the organization he’s playing for.
• A team’s logo and mascot can be trademarked, and you may need to deal with infringing uses on unlicensed merchandise.

Needless to say, there’s no guarantee that any given sports lawyer will deal with those exact issues. But it’s important to note that Sports law, just like Entertainment law and Arts law, requires lawyers who enjoy working in an unpredictable and quickly evolving field.

You’ve Convinced Me–I want to be an Entertainment, Arts, or Sports Lawyer. Where do I start?

Miami Law’s LL.M in Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law can help you make that dream a reality. The program is designed for working lawyers who want to narrow their focus on one of these specialties or students who have already received their law degrees abroad. An LL.M can provide the leg up you need in a competitive environment. The clients you’ll represent–whether it’s an actor, artist, athlete, venue, or company–need to know that you have the wide breadth of legal knowledge to help confront whatever problem they run into. A focused LL.M could make it clear that you have that expertise.

Why Miami Law?

Miami Law’s LL.M program offers some unparalleled perks to get you on the right track.

Location, Location, Location 

Miami is a vibrant, bustling city that serves as an epicenter for entertainment, art, and sports. Miami is home to a number of entertainment production companies, including Telemundo, Univision, HBO Latin America, Viacom International, Sony, and BBC Latin America. The art scene in Miami features many galleries and museums; the city has traditionally been known for its art deco flair. And don’t forget–Miami is home to the Miami Heat, the Miami Dolphins, and the Miami Marlins, in addition to countless amateur and college teams.

Connections are Key 

Who are some Miami alums in the fields of Entertainment, Arts, or Sports law? Take, for example, Horacio Gutierrez, class of ’98. He now serves as General Counsel for Spotify, one of the fastest-growing music streaming services in the world. In the field of Sports law, Dennis Curran is a Miami Law alum, class of ’75. He currently serves as the Senior Vice-President and General Counsel for the NFL Management Council, which represents the 32 teams in the NFL. And Professor Stephen K. Urice, the Director of the Arts law track, comes from a background in arts and museum law–at one point he directed the national culture program at The Pew Charitable Trusts. Miami Law’s faculty, staff, and alumni can help you bridge the gap between your education and getting involved in the job of your dreams.

Hands-On Experience

Miami Law provides its LL.M students with unparalleled hands-on experience. Each of the three tracks–Entertainment law, Art law, and Sports law–requires a practicum component that will give them experience in the field. For example, Maria Jose Rivera, a student in the LL.M program, is completing her practicum requirement at the NBC Universal Telemundo. She describes her work as a fall legal intern to the Telemundo Network with Music Affairs, saying:

I want to get to counsel and represent television and motion picture productions in all legal aspects. Whenever I walk into a studio set, I get thrills by seeing it and hearing in all in real life. I see the drafting of agreements as creating the safeguards to making those audiovisual productions come strong from a legal standpoint.

And she described her experience with the LL.M program as a whole, saying:

The program has helped me get there by not only placing me into the real practice but by granting me the privilege to work with and learn from these role models I look up to professionally. I’m drafting and negotiating agreements for the first time while being challenged to develop the skills that are in demand when becoming an effective lawyer in the entertainment industries.

So, are you ready to make a change, and work on something you’re truly passionate about? Consider Entertainment, Arts, or Sports Law. It’s a growing and exciting field, and it’s time for you to take the plunge.

Resources

Primary

Miami Law: LL.M. in Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law

Miami Law: Entertainment Track

Miami Law: Art Track

Miami Law: Sports Track 

Additional

LexisNexis: Researching Entertainment Law

ABA: What Is Sports Law and Who Is a Sports Lawyer?

Lawyers for the Creative Arts: Legal Issues in Film Production

University of Miami School of Law

The University of Miami School of Law’s mission is to foster the intellectual discipline, creativity, and critical skills that will prepare its graduates for the highest standards of professional competence in the practice of law in a global environment subject to continual–and not always predictable–transformation; to cultivate a broad range of legal and interdisciplinary scholarship that, working at the cutting edge of its field, enhances the development of law and legal doctrine, and deepens society’s understanding of law and its role in society; and to fulfill the legal profession’s historic duty to promote the interests of justice. Visit www.law.miami.edu for more information. The University of Miami School of Law is a partner of Law Street Creative. The opinions expressed in this author’s articles do not necessarily reflect the views of Law Street.

The post What Does it Take to Become an Entertainment, Arts, or Sports Lawyer? appeared first on Law Street.

In Florida’s Everglades, the Burmese Python population has spread rapidly over the past two decades, thanks to the warm climate and variety of local wildlife that snakes can eat. The Burmese Python is not native to Florida but has spread after many pet owners (illegally) released their snakes in the wild. According to the National Park Service, more than 2,000 pythons have been removed since 2002, but that is likely a very small portion of the total population. The snakes feed on local groups of mammals and birds, and compete with native predators for food, so they could have a big impact on the ecosystem. After trying several different methods of dealing with the problem, authorities have now turned to singing snake catchers from India to try to catch the big reptiles.

Last year, the University of Florida, Everglades National Park, and the Department of Environmental Protection organized the second edition of Florida’s Python Challenge–a competition that urged residents to capture as many big snakes as they could. The month-long challenge, with a thousand participants, resulted in 106 caught pythons. That may sound like a lot, considering that the pythons are huge and well camouflaged. But in only two weeks, the two Indian men, Masi Sadaiyan and Vadivel Gopal, caught 14 snakes—and one was 16 feet long. They are members of the Irula tribe, from South India. The group is famous for hunting snakes.

Irula tribesmen & detector dogs help @UF @usfwsvero & @MyFWC battle #pythons in #Florida https://t.co/VdFicBd73H #snake pic.twitter.com/ZFN0LDNmJ2

— South Florida FWS (@USFWSVero) January 23, 2017

Sadaiyan and Gopal have headed out to the Everglades almost every day since arriving in the U.S., armed only with tire irons and accompanied by some biologists. They move slowly and head straight into the deep bushes. These experts know how to trace snakes from subtle signs like a specific pattern in the sand or a tunnel through the grass. From traces that the snakes leave, Sadayian and Gopal can determine the animal’s sex, size, and how long ago it was there. Though many people opposed the idea at first, and didn’t think that the methods that work in India would transfer easily to Florida, biologist Frank Mazotti and herpetologists Romulus Whitaker and Joe Wasilewski have been working on the plan for years.

“This is very big and probably the biggest invasive reptile problem that has ever existed on the planet,” said Whitaker, and added that they had to do something. Importing and transporting Burmese Pythons has been banned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service since April 2015. The species is harmful to wildlife, agriculture, and humans. And the snakes reproduce quickly; the females lay between 30 and 100 eggs each spring.

Until now, the problem has been that local snake catchers haven’t been able to find the pythons quickly enough to halt their spread. Their pattern is extremely difficult to spot in the wild. The pythons have spread to more areas and were found in Key Largo for the first time last year. Sadaiyan and Gopal caught four snakes in Key Largo alone during their first eight days. “It is outstanding that they have been able to remove pythons from Key Largo,” said Mazzotti. “And to get four pythons, including a 16-foot female, is just incredible.”

According to the National Geographic, the Burmese Python is behind the decline in common mammals such as the cottontail rabbit, but also bigger ones like raccoons, deer, foxes, opossums, and bobcats. And the Fish and Wildlife Conservaton Commission hopes that local workers could learn some of the skills the Indian men possess, to keep up the work after they go home. “Since the Irula have been so successful in their homeland at removing pythons, we are hoping they can teach people in Florida some of these skills,” said Kristen Sommers, chief of the FWC’s Wildlife Impact Management.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Florida Employs Snake Hunters to Tackle its Burmese Python Problem appeared first on Law Street.

A California woman is suing the popular fast-casual burrito chain Chipotle, alleging that the company used a photo of her in its advertisements, but that she never gave it permission to do so. Leah Caldwell, the plaintiff, is asking for over $2 billion, specifically $2,237,633,000, arguing that the company has made that much money off of the use of her photo that was taken in 2006.

Caldwell claims that she was sitting down to eat at one of the chain’s stores in Colorado, when a photographer snapped her photo without asking permission first. While he then asked her to sign a release to use the photo,  Caldwell claims that she left the store without signing it, thereby preventing Chipotle from using the photo. That photographer, Steve Adams, is also listed as a defendant, along with the food chain.

Caldwell says that she then saw the photo of her in multiple promotional materials in Florida and California in 2014 and 2015, and that alcohol had been photoshopped onto the table in front of her. While the photo was taken in 2006, she didn’t see the picture being used in any promotional materials until 2014, so she didn’t sue before then. She has filed the suit in the U.S. District Court in Colorado.

Some of the news outlets who picked up the story pointed out–perhaps rightly so–that Caldwell’s estimate for how much she is “owed” for the picture is a bit high. Caldwell got the $2 billion-plus number by adding up the total of all of Chipotle’s profits from 2006-2015, and believes that Chipotle’s 2016 profits, when they are calculated, should be added to her paycheck as well. But that would mean that all the profits the company made in that eight year period were attributable to her photo. As Lee Morris pf FStoppers–a site dedicated to providing news for photographers–pointed out:

I don’t think there is any doubt that Caldwell should be compensated for this error, but $2.2 billion may be a bit high. Ten thousand dollars and a year’s supply of burritos would be more than enough to compensate for the error, don’t you think?

Chipotle has not made a statement about the lawsuit yet, except to say that it does not comment on pending cases.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post California Woman Files $2 Billion Lawsuit Against Chipotle After Company Uses her Photo appeared first on Law Street.

At least five people were killed and at least eight were injured when a gunman opened fire inside the Fort Lauderdale International Airport in Florida on Friday afternoon, the Broward Sheriff’s Office confirmed via Twitter.

Update: 5 ppl dead; 8 injured were taken to an area hospital.

— Broward Sheriff (@browardsheriff) January 6, 2017

The office said it got the initial 911 call around 12:55 p.m., and around 2 p.m., it tweeted that a suspect was taken into custody. But even after that, closer to 3 p.m., additional shots were heard inside the airport and the search for more perpetrators was ongoing.

Active search: Unconfirmed reports of addt’l shots fired on airport property.

— Broward Sheriff (@browardsheriff) January 6, 2017

Everyone evacuated off neighboring plane after reported shooting in baggage. We’re sitting on tarmac. Florida! pic.twitter.com/4h5kRTECso

— Stephen Falk (@stephenfalk) January 6, 2017

Photos and videos shared on social media showed injured people bleeding and general confusion about what was going on.

Shots fired at FLL airport. Guy is bleeding profusely. Supposedly others are shot on the lower level at Delta Term 2. pic.twitter.com/UcL73Y8yGx

— Maxwill Solutions (@MxWllSolutions) January 6, 2017

People started running across the tarmac as CNN tried to figure out what the current situation was.

JUST IN: Passengers at Fort Lauderdale airport seen running across the tarmac https://t.co/mSBYzuRvC5 https://t.co/UsnVix6kjc

— CNN (@CNN) January 6, 2017

Former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer was there during the shooting and reported via Twitter that no one was let out of the airport.

All seems calm now but the police aren’t letting anyone out of the airport – at least not the area where I am.

— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) January 6, 2017

Andrea Ruiz is the daughter of an airport worker and told Buzzfeed News that her mother didn’t know what was going on and it seemed like the situation was not safe yet. “SWAT and police ran into parking garage in front of Terminal 2. My mother and coworkers are back in office hiding. No one knows what is happening…something else has happened,” she said.

According to CNN, the FBI and ATF are at the scene. MSNBC reported that the shooter in custody had been identified as Esteban Santiago, a man born in 1990 with a U.S. military ID. It is unclear whether the ID is genuine.

Senator Bill Nelson on MSNBC right now. Says shooter has been identified as Esteban Santiago – carrying a military ID #FortLauderdale

— Stewart Moore (@Stewartmoore) January 6, 2017

Additional threat? After suspect arrested, police now running w weapons drawn & another terminal at Ft Lauderdale airport being evacuated.

— Lisa Fletcher (@lisa_fletch) January 6, 2017

As of Friday afternoon, the situation is still ongoing and the story is developing.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post At Least Five People Dead After Gunman Opens Fire at Fort Lauderdale Airport appeared first on Law Street.

In key battleground states and some Republican strongholds, early voting trends appear more favorable to Democrats this year compared with the same time last cycle. With less than two weeks to Election Day, 13.4 million voters have cast ballots by mail or in person in 37 states. For starters, the early vote total is far higher than during the same period in 2012. Forty percent of the electorate, or 46 million people, are expected to vote before Election Day on November 8. Below are some takeaways from a handful of key states.

North Carolina

Republican Mitt Romney won this vital battleground state in 2012. But if current trends hold, it seems the state could swing to the left. Fewer people have voted early in North Carolina this year compared to 2012, but of those who have, 46 percent are Democrats and 29 percent are Republicans.

According to a CNN analysis of the early votes, Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, will need a strong turnout from African-American voters to capture the state. Their share of the electorate is down five percent from 2012. In the most recent poll, Clinton leads Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, by seven points.

Florida

The Sunshine State went to Democrat Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. Democrats seem poised to repeat their victory there on November 8. Two million ballots have been cast in Florida so far, with the two major parties in a dead heat, each garnering 41 percent of the voters. This bodes well for Democrats: at the same point in 2008 (the most recent available data) Republican voters cast 113,222 more votes than Democrats, according to CNN.

This could be due to changing demographics: the Hispanic portion of the electorate is up four percent in Florida from 2008, while the share of whites has dropped from 82 percent in 2008 to roughly 77 percent this year. But the most recent poll shows Trump edging Clinton by two percentage points in Florida.

Red to Blue?

Some traditionally purple states are showing signs of turning blue, including Nevada and Colorado. Democrats have cast 46 percent of the ballots in Nevada thus far, compared to 35 percent for the GOP. In Colorado, over 400,000 people have cast early ballots, 40 percent Democrats and 34 percent Republicans. CNN’s analysis of the early vote data shows the Democrats with a 15,000 vote lead, which is slightly more than they had in 2012. Obama won Nevada in 2012, though recent polls show a tie between Clinton and Trump.

Historically, Nevada is not necessarily a Republican shoo-in. Bill Clinton won there in 1992 and 1996. George W. Bush won there in 2000 and 2004. And President Obama won in 2008 and 2012. The past two decades or so in Colorado are nearly identical, aside from the 1996 election, when Bob Dole picked up its eight electoral votes.

Obama won Colorado in 2012, but compared to the same early voting period, Republicans held a slight lead. This year, Democrats are up by about 10,000 votes, according to CNN.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Road to 270: A Look at Early Voting Trends in 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Haitians Urging People Not to Donate To the American Red Cross

While many people across the world are calling for donations to help the 350,000 displaced and vulnerable victims in Haiti, others are pointing to the red flag that is the American Red Cross. Facebook and Twitter posts are popping up, warning altruists not to give to the organization:

Do *NOT* donate any monetary funds for #Haiti to the American Red Cross. ARC has a *long* track record of pocketing donations.

— canoecanoa (@canoecanoa) October 8, 2016

According to The Independent, “despite collecting nearly half a billion dollars to provide relief after the 2010 Haiti earthquake and pledging to build 700 permanent homes, the ARC has been accused of only building six.”

In a joint investigation, ProPublica and NPR found that ARC has a huge issue with donation mismanagement and does not accurately report the success of its rebuilding projects.

via GIPHY

An estimated 10,000 people are sick with a recent outbreak of cholera and more than 80,000 Haitians have fallen ill with the disease since 2010 when the bug was introduced into the country’s river system.

This essentially means many of the issues Haiti now faces could have been prevented years ago.

Clintons/Red Cross /several Republicans just big fish in #Haiti aid scam, 100s of churches/NGOs/charities make it a cottage industry

— HaitiInfoProject (@HaitiInfoProj) October 8, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: October 12, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Vladimir Putin Dubbed Peacemaker by Surprise Banner

A banner lauding Putin as a “Peacemaker” appeared on NYC’s Manhattan bridge Thursday. It immediately stirred up a lot of buzz. It was removed in a couple of hours, but not before Twitter users grabbed some pics.

We spotted this Putin banner being unfurled on north side of the Manhattan Bridge at 1:47 p.m. https://t.co/DStAoerBz9 pic.twitter.com/kL2uUh9Vhe

— Gothamist (@Gothamist) October 6, 2016

Some observers were amused, but others not so much.

This Vladimir Putin banner dangling on Manhattan Bridge is equally as disturbing as the numerous clowns that are showing up in random places

— Call me James (@nyjones7) October 6, 2016

The thing that makes me madder than this banner is the fact that someone had to piss off a whole lot of bikers going uphill to put it there. https://t.co/qLAp9t09ie

— Scott Steinhardt (@ScottFromNY) October 6, 2016

Police are checking surveillance cameras to see who the person is behind this obvious statement.

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: October 7, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

On Thursday afternoon, certain states began to feel the impact of the storm that has already claimed 108 lives in Haiti. President Obama declared a state of emergency in Florida as Hurricane Matthew started approaching the coast. This measure allows the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to start working on coordinating disaster relief and releases federal funding for that purpose.

BREAKING: President Barack Obama declares state of emergency in Florida as potentially catastrophic Hurricane Matthew approaches.

— The Associated Press (@AP) October 6, 2016

As some people planned on keeping their businesses open or even having a “hurricane party,” Florida Governor Rick Scott ordered 1.5 million residents to seek safety. With the chilling words “You need to leave. Evacuate, evacuate, evacuate […] this storm will kill you,” he made sure people know this is no laughing matter.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott: “Do not surf. Do not go on the beach. This will kill you.” https://t.co/5kRoLafLlr pic.twitter.com/sc1fj1WGdL

— Yahoo News (@YahooNews) October 6, 2016

One man told NPR he was going to wait out the hurricane in his RV less than a mile from the beach. “The hype is going to be worse than the actual storm. I feel I can do quite well,” he said.

But that doesn’t sound like a very good idea. According to the National Hurricane Center the storm is increasing in strength as it moves toward the U.S. It is now a Category 4 storm. By Thursday morning, 3,000 people were already in shelters in Florida. Disney World will close by 5PM on Thursday and stay closed on Friday.

Wind speeds reached 140 mph as Hurricane #Matthew battered the Bahamas https://t.co/UMxnwOqZ1O pic.twitter.com/Qiu3Asx7xH

— CNN International (@cnni) October 6, 2016

At the same time in Georgia, Governor Nathan Deal ordered the first evacuation in 17 years, which will affect 500,000 people. The Georgia coast has not been hit with a major hurricane since 1898, which is why extra safety measures may be a good idea. The lanes of some interstates are being reversed so that traffic can only move west. South Carolina has also ordered around 1.1 million people to leave. As natural disasters can create panic and confusion, a fight about evacuation routes in South Carolina resulted in gunfire between police and a driver on Wednesday night, leaving the driver injured.

Haiti was dramatically hit by the hurricane, leaving 108 dead and 300,000 people in shelters across the country. This is the worst crisis for the country since it experienced a massive earthquake six years ago.

100+ have lost their lives. 15k ppl evacuated. Help us rebuild Haiti after #HurricaneMatthew. Donate now: https://t.co/VqEulpDwPM pic.twitter.com/Kc6ckNK0mq

— UN Development (@UNDP) October 6, 2016

No one knows how hard the hurricane is going to hit the U.S. coast or if it will even move in over land at all. But it could potentially get really bad. Researcher Brian McNoldy told the AP:

In some ways, the worst-case scenario would be if the storm’s eye stays just offshore, enabling it to feed over water and avoid weakening while its strongest hurricane winds keep smacking the beaches.

Hopefully people will listen to the evacuation orders and stay out of the way of the worst of the storm.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Florida Governor Orders Evacuation: “This Storm Will Kill You” appeared first on Law Street.

Sunday night a fire broke out at the Florida mosque that Orlando shooter Omar Mateen used to attend. The St. Lucie County Sheriff’s Office said it got a 911 call around 12:30 am Monday and fire crews were sent to extinguish the fire at the Islamic Center of Fort Pierce. According to the authorities, security footage obtained from the mosque indicated it might be arson. In a statement they said:

Video captured at the Fort Pierce Islamic Center shows an individual approached the east side of the building just moments before a flash is seen and the fire starts […] As soon as we are able, we will release the video of this incident and ask for the public to assist us in identifying the person or persons responsible.

Fire at Orlando gunman’s mosque was ‘set intentionally,’ authorities say – Washington Post https://t.co/JeonpHAVT0 #breakingnews #news

— Breaking News (@140BreakingNews) September 12, 2016

The timing of the fire is particularly troublesome as it comes right after 9/11 and the morning before the big Muslim holiday Eid-al-Adha, the holiday of the sacrifice. It’s a major Muslim holiday that is celebrated by prayer, visits to family and friends, exchange of gifts, and feasts. It goes on for four days and commemorates when God appeared to Ibraham and asked him to sacrifice his son. As Ibraham was ready to do so, God stopped him and rewarded him for his loyalty.

David Thompson from the Sheriff’s Office spoke to reporters early Monday morning, saying:

I don’t want to speculate on a motive. We all know the implications of the date and the time of year that this is — the 9/11 anniversary. Is that related? I wouldn’t want to speculate, but certainly that is in the back of our minds.

Omar Mateen, who was responsible for the mass shooting at the gay nightclub Pulse in June, occasionally visited the Islamic Center to pray with his family. People there described him as quiet and focused on his prayers. If this connection is the reason that someone put the mosque on fire remains to be seen. It is also unclear how badly damaged the mosque was. People that wish to pray and honor Eid-al-Adha were asked to go to other mosques nearby.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Fire at Orlando Shooter’s Mosque Investigated as Arson appeared first on Law Street.

On Monday, police in Tequesta, Florida walked in on Austin Harrouff biting chunks off a dead man’s face. The man he was eating was a complete stranger who he’d just stabbed to death, along with the man’s wife whose bloody body was lying nearby.

Police struggled to get the 19-year-old Florida State University student to release his victim, deploying stun guns and a K-9 to no avail. It eventually took three or four cops to pull the former high school wrestler off the dead man. Reports say he was making “animal noises” and “grunting and growling” as officers carried him away.

Now the whole world is wondering what would make a seemingly normal college student turn into a psychotic cannibalistic murderer. If it wasn’t premeditated, and it wasn’t a psychotic break or the beginning of a zombie outbreak, could bath salts or its newer counterpart Flakka be to blame?

Florida man, 19, kills older couple and eats man’s face off while “grunting and growling” https://t.co/Tnu6pYNSz1 pic.twitter.com/eRjdvJ98V4

— Boing Boing (@BoingBoing) August 17, 2016

What Happened?

On the night of the attack, Harrouff was eating dinner with his family in a nearby sports bar when he suddenly became enraged–possibly due to slow service–and stormed out of the restaurant. According to the Miami Herald, the teen was in town to visit some of his Alpha Delta Phi fraternity brothers.

He then walked a few blocks in the direction of his father’s house, before coming across John Joseph Stevens, 59, and his wife, Michelle Mishcon Stevens, 53, sitting inside of their garage at 19009 SE Kokomo Lane. This is where the story turns violent.

The Herald reported that multiple “weapons of opportunity” were used to beat, slash, and attack the couple, including a switchblade the suspect was known to carry. Officials said it looked like the husband tried to fight back. A neighbor tried to intervene, but suffered several stab wounds before fleeing to call police.

Couple brutally killed in Martin Co. were raised in South Florida; friends & family in shock. @WPLGLocal10 at 11pm pic.twitter.com/vUCapYZTtV

— Janine Stanwood (@JanineStanwood) August 17, 2016

Why Didn’t the Police Shoot Him?

After news broke of the gruesome murder, several users on Twitter couldn’t help but wonder why the police chose to use non-lethal force.

How come police officers didn’t shoot the 19 year old white kid who ate the flesh off of, and killed a married couple? Hmm.

— Gigi Zamora (@gigizamoraa) August 17, 2016

He ate a man’s face & the police didn’t shoot/called him a good kid. Tell me again how white privilege isn’t real https://t.co/wlDPuU0ikF

— bex (@iguanamilkshake) August 17, 2016

During a press conference Tuesday, Martin County Sheriff William Snyder told reporters that the responding officer used a taser instead of a gun because “the angles there were extremely dangerous, and had there been a gun shot it could have hit the victim.”

Was He High on Flakka?

Doctors tested Harrouff for common drugs such as cocaine, opiates, methamphetamine, and marijuana, but all of the results came back negative. They are still awaiting the toxicology results for more unique synthetic drugs, but Snyder said he “wouldn’t be surprised” if Flakka was involved based on his bizarre behavior.

Harrouff is currently under sedation at a nearby hospital, and is in stable condition after undergoing multiple surgeries for an unspecified life-threatening condition.

Austin Harrouff in stable condition at unnamed Palm Beach County hosp. Had mult surgeries today, “stable, conscious” per @MartinFLSheriff

— Alex Harris (@harrisalexc) August 17, 2016

Find out more about Flakka here.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Did Flakka Make a Florida Frat Bro Kill 2 People and Eat his Victim’s Face? appeared first on Law Street.

On Monday, ten more people were confirmed by Florida Governor Rick Scott to have been infected by a Zika carrying mosquito in the Miami area. That brings the total number of local Zika cases–that is, those where transmission took place on American soil as opposed to an infected traveler from Latin America–to 14. All the cases, the first of which was reported a few weeks ago, are believed to have emerged in a one square mile area just north of downtown Miami, in the Wynwood arts district. The latest cases were found among more than 200 people who were tested for Zika within the affected area of Miami.

Governor Scott said in a statement that he will issue a travel notice to pregnant women or women who are thinking about conceiving a child in the near future. Zika is especially dangerous to pregnant women, because a child born to a Zika-infected mother has a high chance of developing microcephaly. Scott also said he will be calling on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to assist in investigating the Wynwood cases, as well as in preventing further transmission.

Dr. Antonio Crespo, an infectious disease specialist with Orlando Health, said it’s no shock that Florida is the site of the first local Zika transmissions in the U.S. Aedes aegypti, the mosquito that carries Zika and thrives in tropical climates, is common in Florida, Crespo said. That, combined with the fact that travelers from parts of Latin America where Zika is rampant often land in Florida, is why local cases were inevitable. “When you put the two together it’s not a surprise that at some point there was going to be a local transmission,” he told Law Street in a phone interview.

Dr. Crespo is optimistic that the disease will be contained, however. “I’m optimistic with Zika–maybe cautiously optimistic–because of what we have seen in the past,” he said, referring to the state’s successful campaigns to thwart dengue fever and chikungunya, two mosquito-borne diseases also carried by Aedes aegypti. Those diseases saw sporadic outbreaks in Florida over the past decade, but were contained by a process called vector control–a similar process is now being employed to deal with Zika.

Vector control is a two-pronged strategy, both to prevent further transmission and the spread of existing cases. First, people in an affected area–in this case, Miami-Dade and Broward counties–must take pains to avoid getting bitten. The best way to do that, according to Dr. Crespo, is to follow the precautions prescribed by the CDC: apply repellent and erect mosquito nets inside and around their homes. The mosquito’s population is then contained by draining standing water–a favorable breeding ground–and spraying the affected area with larvicide. Eventually, Dr. Crespo said, the disease will be contained and choked at the source.

Crespo is confident that Zika will be contained, but considering the connectedness of the world today, he said, the threat should not be taken lightly. “We live in a world where people travel, so it’s very easy for one disease to be transferred from one country to another in a matter of hours,” he said. “We need to continue to be on high alert.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Zika Cases in Miami Rise to 14; Governor Calls on CDC to Help appeared first on Law Street.

By now you’ve seen the video of a black man lying in the street with both hands firmly in the air pleading with police, “don’t shoot me!” The man is Charles Kinsey, a 47-year-old behavioral therapist from North Miami, Florida,  and he was shot in the leg by police while trying to help his autistic patient.

Police were responding to reports that a man was suicidal and had a gun. Cellphone footage captured Kinsey lying on the ground trying to explain to police that the man sitting next to him was autistic and was holding a toy car–not a gun. But it didn’t matter that his hands were in the air, or that he was lying on his back, or that he wasn’t even the individual suspected of having a gun–he was still shot.

Watch the Video Below

“As long as I’ve got my hands up, they’re not gonna shoot me, that’s what I’m thinking,” Kinsey told reporters. “Wow, was I wrong.”

Kinsey was shot Monday, but his attorney released the video filmed by witnesses to the public Wednesday afternoon. While the video does not show Kinsey being shot, it clearly shows him on the ground complying with police. Versions of the footage have been viewed collectively over a million times already on YouTube.

Kinsey has been released from the hospital and is expected to fully recover. Before leaving the hospital he told WSVN, a CNN affiliate, that he asked the officer for an explanation after the shooting. “I’m like, ‘Sir, why did you shoot me?'” Kinsey recalled. “He said to me, ‘I don’t know.'”

It appeared to the officers that the white male was trying to do harm to Mr. Kinsey. In fearing for Mr. Kinsey’s life, the officer discharged his firearm trying to save Mr. Kinsey’s life and he missed.

The shooting comes after the recent police shootings of Alton Sterling and Phillando Castile rocked the nation. After the video went viral Thursday, Twitter quickly exploded with people condemning the shooting.

“Sir, why did you shoot me?”
“I don’t know…”
is 400 years of American history wrapped into one conversation #CharlesKinsey

— AHill (@al3x_hill) July 21, 2016

Officer says he “thought” #CharlesKinsey was in danger. Doesn’t explain why he handcuffed him after he shot him.

— Goldie Taylor (@goldietaylor) July 21, 2016

Until police officers are routinely held accountable for shooting unarmed civilians, especially of color, it won’t end. #CharlesKinsey

— Dr. Jill Stein (@DrJillStein) July 21, 2016

I’ve been thinking about this all morning.
“Sir, why did you shoot me?”
“I don’t know.”

This is insanity. #CharlesKinsey

— Johnetta Elzie (@Nettaaaaaaaa) July 21, 2016

Plot twist: Even if you surrender completely with both hands in the air lying down, you will still get shot by a cop. #CharlesKinsey

— NUFF$AID (@nuffsaidNY) July 21, 2016

So is this #CharlesKinsey silence the “he’s no angel” portion of the game? Where y’all check his 8th school reports & his driving records?

— Questlove Gomez (@questlove) July 21, 2016

Don’t swim. Don’t listen to loud music. Don’t walk home. Don’t ask for help. Don’t sell CDs. Don’t breathe. Don’t be black. #CharlesKinsey

— Black Magic Woman (@jananamirah) July 21, 2016

The unidentified officer, who is described as being a 30-year-old Hispanic, was placed on administrative leave pending an investigation. Kinsey’s attorney Hilton Napoleon II told CNN,

The reality is that he believed … that if you comply with the police and you lay on the ground with your hands up, and if you speak to them like my client was speaking to them, as Americans, we try to believe that that will not result in you getting shot.

[…]

Physically, he will recover, but mentally, he felt like he did everything he could possibly do and that wasn’t good enough.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Charles Kinsey’s Hands Were Up and He Was Still Shot By Police appeared first on Law Street.

Congresswoman Corrine Brown, who represents Florida’s 5th Congressional District, was indicted late last week on 22 charges that include fraud and conspiracy. Brown’s chief of staff, Elias “Ronnie” Simmons, was also hit with a number of related charges–both individuals are pleading not guilty on all counts. And Brown is fighting back against the charges in the court of social opinion as well, writing in a blog posted by her campaign that “I’m not the first black elected official to be persecuted and, sad to say, I won’t be the last.”

Brown is accused of using a sham education charity to solicit donations, as well as using those donations for her own personal gain. The group, called One Door for Education, allegedly never received the money that Brown raised on its behalf. Instead, according to a local ABC affiliate,

Much of the money was deposited to Brown’s personal bank accounts so she could pay taxes that she owed, investigators said.

More than $200,000 in One Door funds went to pay for events hosted by Brown in her honor, including a golf tournament in Ponte Vedra Beach, receptions at an annual conference in Washington, D.C., and luxury boxes for a concert and an NFL game in Washington, D.C., investigators said.

Brown wrote a blog post last week, entitled “Note to my Friends” after news of the indictment broke, in which she claimed that the prosecutor wasn’t telling her side of the story. She wrote:

The most important thing I want you to understand is that an indictment is not a conviction. An indictment is an accusation. Anybody can make an accusation. You’ve heard the prosecutor’s side, but you still have not heard the rest of the story.

However, Brown also received significant criticism–particularly on the right–for juxtaposing her indictment with the killings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile, and the fatal attacks on five Dallas police officers last week.

If Brown is convicted of all of the charges levied against her, she could face a hefty sentence, up to 300 years total.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Congresswoman Corrine Brown to Fight Long List of Federal Charges appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

CNN’s Anderson Cooper Grills Florida Attorney General

Anderson Cooper got up in Florida AG Pam Bondi’s face about her perceived hypocrisy following the Orlando shooting. Bondi certainly had her feathers ruffled and was very much unable to explain herself when Cooper asked why she claimed to be a champion for gay and lesbians even though her Twitter feed was littered with posts supporting animal rights, and she argued against gay marriage in court. Woof!

.@andersoncooper grills Florida AG Pam Bondi over gay rights record https://t.co/KYvuZ7srCP https://t.co/pGTkx0KVkN

— CNN (@CNN) June 14, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: June 15, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Orlando gunman Omar Mateen’s wife feared he would do something drastic and violent when he left their home on Saturday night, but he assured her he was just going to meet his friends. Authorities are now investigating how much 30-year old Noor Zahi Salman actually knew about her husband’s plans to attack the gay nightclub Pulse. Whether she will face any criminal charges is still unclear.

Both “Scoped Out” Orlando Locations

According to recent reports, Mateen had his wife drive him to Pulse nightclub in Orlando earlier in June to “scope it out.” They lived two hours away, in Port St. Lucie. They also looked into other locations, such as Disney World and the shopping complex Disney Springs. Salman was also with Mateen when he bought ammunition and a holster. Investigators said it’s unclear whether she knew of his eventual intentions at the time, though an anonymous law enforcement source told Reuters that she did. She could face criminal charges as early as Wednesday.

Gay Pride, Ramadan, and Solidarity After Orlando… https://t.co/VX4UwUW2m1 pic.twitter.com/w9Bk3heK2H

— LGBT NYC (@lgbtnyc015) June 15, 2016

Responding to speculation over whether or not Mateen was secretly gay, his father Seddique Mateen said that his son’s marriage was good and that if he were gay his wife of three and a half years would have known about it. He also said that Mateen was really upset when he once saw two men kissing. However, regulars at Pulse nightclub said Mateen came there frequently to meet men.

Mateen was married twice, and his ex-wife described their five-month marriage in 2009 as violent and abusive, calling him bipolar and emotionally disturbed. He would beat her, pull her hair, and keep her from seeing her family. She also told TIME that he had some behaviors that “most straight men don’t”, such as spending a long time in front of the mirror and “little movements with his body.”

ISIS Twitter accounts hacked to show support for gay pride message https://t.co/m42lYrURSK pic.twitter.com/rig116zlHt

— Dennis Jansen (@dennisjansen) June 15, 2016

A Complicated Picture

The motive for the shootings is still unclear. Mateen pledged allegiance to ISIS when he called 911 during the attack at Pulse, but according to authorities he was self-radicalized over the Internet and there are no signs of a connection to the organization. Opinions about his personal life differ, with his father calling him homophobic, and his ex-wife thought he wasn’t “totally straight.” Neighbors described him as a completely normal man, while gay men he met at Pulse said he was “strange.”

The mass shooting in Orlando is the largest in US history and killed 49 people and leaving 53 injured. Even though FBI investigated the shooter in 2013 and 2014, he was legally able to buy weapons and ammunition. He was killed after a three-hour standoff with police.

Read Law Street’s original post about the Pulse attack here.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Orlando Shooter’s Wife Knew About Attack, Could Face Charges appeared first on Law Street.

It was a very dark weekend for Orlando, Florida. On Friday night, singer Christina Grimmie was shot to death following her concert, after which the gunman took his own life. Police have now identified the man as Kevin James Loibl, 27, but his motives are still unknown.

Grimmie opened for the band Before You Exit at the Plaza Live in Orlando, and then spent some time meeting fans and writing autographs. That’s when Loibl seized his opportunity and shot her with a small handgun. Grimmie’s brother immediately rushed to tackle the shooter to the ground, which prevented more people from being harmed, said the Orlando police in a statement. Loibl then shot himself. Grimmie later died in the hospital from her injuries.

OPD can confirm 27 year old Kevin James Loibl, suspect who shot Christina Grimmie, is from St Petersburg, FL pic.twitter.com/iN6RUi3VRx

— Orlando Police (@OrlandoPolice) June 11, 2016

Why Loibl shot Grimmie is still a mystery and the police have been searching his computer and phone to try and determine whether they knew each other, or if he had any other reason to want her dead. What we do know is that he lived in St. Petersburg, but traveled the two hours to Orlando carrying two handguns and a big hunting knife, just to kill Grimmie, and was planning on returning home afterwards. Reports say he went by public transportation, and that he had no previous criminal record.

This is a note posted to the door of Loibl’s family home in St. Petersburg:

Here is the note on the door of home where Kevin Loibl lived. #ChristinaGrimmie @FOX13News pic.twitter.com/dMDqtfELcb

— Evan Lambert FOX 13 (@EvanLambertTV) June 11, 2016

Twenty-two-year-old Grimmie had her breakthrough in the sixth season of the “Voice” that aired on NBC two years ago. She was coached by Maroon 5’s Adam Levine, who has offered to pay for the funeral. Social media was filled with tributes to Grimmie by Levine and others in the music industry over the weekend.

Behati and I are absolutely devastated and heartbroken by Christina Grimmie’s death. Our hearts go out to her family pic.twitter.com/y4OMkm0uXu

— Adam Levine (@adamlevine) June 11, 2016

Before You Exit, the band she was touring with, tweeted this message:

Today we lost an angel, sister, and a beloved friend. #RipChristina pic.twitter.com/EkwTKsaLFr

— Before You Exit⇞ (@beforeyouexit) June 11, 2016

NBC’s Carson Daly is the host of “The Voice” and told TODAY: “Christina really was, she was special. She would walk in a room and have an infectious laugh. She was determined; she was confident. But she was so incredibly sweet.”

My heart is absolutely broken. I miss you Christina pic.twitter.com/KWGwZZlj4t

— Selena Gomez (@selenagomez) June 11, 2016

Grimmie was a personal friend of Selena Gomez and her family. Gomez’s stepdad, who was also Grimmie’s manager, started a fundraiser to help Grimmie’s family out and has so far raised over $120,000.

Grimmie’s killing was followed early Sunday morning by the deadliest mass shooting in American history at a gay nightclub, also in Orlando.

See Law Street’s piece on whether mass shootings could actually lead to looser gun laws.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Identifies Gunman Who Killed Singer Christina Grimmie appeared first on Law Street.

Last night, in a tragic turn of events, more than 50 people were killed and more than 50 others wounded in a late night shooting and hostage situation in Orlando, Florida. Now considered the deadliest mass shooting in American history, the tragedy took place in a gay Orlando nightclub called Pulse.

Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer has now declared a state of emergency in the city. The shooter has been identified as Omar Mateen, 29, of Port St. Lucie, which is roughly 12o miles from Orlando. He was killed by police. He brought multiple weapons into the club, including an AR-15 and a handgun–Orlando’s police chief John Mina said that: “it appears he was organized and well-prepared.”

It is unclear at this point exactly what Mateen’s motivation was, but sources are reporting that he swore ISIS alliance.

As of right now, many survivors are being treated at local hospitals, and there is an urgent need for blood donations in the area.

County fire officials @Local2057IAFF say Orlando has a “urgent need” for blood donations following mass shooting pic.twitter.com/IdTQCPoWk7

— BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) June 12, 2016

June is pride month in the United States, and pride celebrations occurred in Los Angeles, Washington D.C., Boston, Detroit, Philadelphia, and other cities this weekend. Many of those events took some time to recognize last night’s victims–it was announced that the LA Pride Parade today began with a moment of silence for the victims in Orlando.

D.C.’s Capital Pride Festival also held a moment of silence.

From the US Capitol,our thoughts are with the people of Orlando. 1pm moment of silence at today’s Pride Concert. pic.twitter.com/ct4Y4uxQ69

— Capital Pride (@CapitalPrideDC) June 12, 2016

Some of the pride celebrations this weekend, like the one in Philadelphia, announced that they will be adding additional security to the venues.

The FBI and other officials have warned that a lengthy investigation into the shooting a the Orlando nightclub will be conducted–more details are sure to come as the investigation proceeds.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Horrific Orlando Nightclub Shooting Leaves More than 50 Dead appeared first on Law Street.

Plastic bags have been demonized by the environmental movement for years. They are considered to be wasteful and unnecessary–why opt for plastic when you could have a reusable grocery bag? Yet within the battle to end the use of plastic bags, there is a camp that often goes unnoticed–animal rights activists. In coastal communities, plastic bags pose a major threat to marine life as animals  can get trapped inside of them and injure themselves. Plastic bags are often mistaken for jellyfish by sea turtles, who harm themselves by eating the bags, and large swaths of plastic bags floating on the ocean’s surface block the sunlight that algae and plankton need to survive.

California and Hawaii have already banned large retail stores from using plastic bags, and activists have now set their sights on Florida. Floridian cities are currently not allowed to control the sale of plastic bags but there are half a dozen online petitions to either ban them entirely or to initiate taxes on plastic bags. Officials from Miami Beach have mentioned several times that they would like to have a bag ban but cannot under Florida law as it stands today. A representative from Miami Beach sponsored a bill to ban plastic bags in certain regions of the state last year, but the bill has yet to get off the ground. Take a look at where plastic bags have been banned and what these laws signify for the potential bag ban in Florida.

Bans in California and Hawaii

In 2015, Hawaii banned the use of plastic bags in grocery stores across the state, encouraging shoppers to choose paper or to bring their own reusable bags from home. Hawaii’s ban came not from the state government but from the county level, as each of the four counties decided separately to enact a ban. Unfortunately, there was a small loophole in the ban that allowed thick plastic bags to be considered “reusable,” which means that the ban is often more theoretical than realistic. There are also exceptions for restaurants, pharmacies, and dry cleaning operations, which are still allowed to use plastic bags for their products. Hawaii’s bag ban, though viewed as well intentioned and unprecedented, has come under fire for not enforcing a drop in plastic use across all sectors of the community.

Meanwhile in California, activists spent years lobbying for a plastic bag ban and thought they had secured a law that would go into effect in the summer of 2016. However, after major pressure from the plastics lobby, the ban has been pushed back–citizens will vote on it during a referendum this coming November. According to NPR, a poll conducted late last year by the University of Southern California and The Los Angeles Times  found that California voters plan to uphold the bag ban by a margin of 59 to 34 percent. Yet in the months before the November referendum, any number of roadblocks could emerge to enacting the ban. Plastic bag manufacturers in other states have a strong interest in retaining the California market and have committed funding to lobbyists looking to further stall the bag ban.

Opposition

It is not only plastics lobbyists who stand against the ban though. San Jose resident Don Williams created the website stopthebagban.com because he considers it an “eco-fad” that inconveniences the public and doesn’t make a substantial contribution to conservation efforts. Although Hawaii and California have led the effort to implement state wide bag bans, their efforts have been stymied to the point that the bans may never have the impact that they were designed to. Plastic bags continue to pile up in landfills–and in the case of these coastal communities, ocean fills. Massive floating islands of garbage have built up in the center of major oceans, leaching toxins into the sea and poisoning sea life. Ocean currents move the plastic bags around the world, spreading pollution and endangering animals across the globe. The British Antarctic Survey reported that it found plastic bags as far south as the Falkland Islands and as far north as Spitzbergen, an island inside the Arctic Circle.

Banning Bags in Florida?

Although individual cities in various states have banned plastic bags, Florida state law prohibits individual cities from doing so. However, as of this January, cities along the Treasure Coast region with less than 100,000 residents are allowed to experiment with plastic bag control. Multiple cities in the region have signed up for a two year pilot program designed to decrease the use of bags, the first such program to emerge in the state. The Florida Retail Association has stated that a bag ban would not be practical. General counsel Samantha Padgett argued that:

‘Millions of visitors come to Florida each year. They are going to purchase items and they have to have some means of carrying those items.’ Reusable bags collect germs. And paper bags ‘can be very inconvenient for consumers on a rainy day.’

Proponents of the bag ban also have latched onto the tourism argument, claiming that when Florida’s famous beaches are covered in litter and the flora and fauna are suffering from being choked by plastic bags, no one will consider Florida to be worth visiting. North Shore Hawaii Turtle Tours is one of a dozen businesses that asks visitors to support the bag ban. The Florida Keys have attempted to get citizens to phase out plastic bags without legislation by launching the “Got Your Bags?” campaign, which asks Florida Keys residents to carry biodegradable and reusable bags with them every time they go shopping. Florida Keys Wildlife Rescue has gone so far as to call plastic bags a “cancer.” According to a study in the Journal of Environmental Research,

About 44 percent of all seabirds eat plastic fragments; 267 marine species (sea turtles, seabirds, marine mammals, and fish) are affected by plastic garbage. From Planet Ark, about 100,000 whales, seals, turtles, and other marine animals are killed by plastic bags each year worldwide. These numbers do not include the land-based victims; even cows have been known to eat plastic bags. Dead and surviving fish and animals, now laced with chemicals from eating plastic, transfer those chemicals to the food chain when other animals (including humans) eat them or their products.

In Cedar Key, volunteers pick up plastic bags off the beach and deposit them in dog curbing stations, so that dog owners can reuse them to pick up after their pets. This practice does not eliminate plastic bags but it does make sure that they are more than single use objects. Creative methods of reusing and recycling are important for communities hoping to limit littering but they do not provide an effective solution to the effects of plastic bags on wildlife. Without a significant reduction in plastic bag use, Floridian animals remain will remain in danger for the foreseeable future.

Conclusion

Although coastal and island communities have the greatest incentive to ban bags because of the potential harm to their wildlife, multiple landlocked states have also expressed interest in a bag ban. In Arizona, Missouri, Idaho, Indiana, Wisconsin and Utah, several Republican lawmakers have moved to block regulation of plastic bags because of the groundswell of support for bag bans. Grassroots movements to decrease or eliminate use of plastic bags operate in all fifty states but coastal communities are particularly crucial battlegrounds. Plastic bags are not simply artifacts of unsightly littering. They also harm sea creatures, block flood control systems and breed mosquitoes. Past bans on plastic bags have been partially successful at best, largely due to the difficulty of monitoring and enforcing the ban on a state-wide level.

Banning plastic bags is a challenging task but that does not mean it is not worthwhile, nor does it mean that there is not a sizable portion of the population that supports the ban. As the United States becomes more aware of its environmental footprint and actively seeks to create useful conservation laws, cities should be granted the autonomy to make their own laws regarding bag bans. Building a consensus on the local and regional level will make it easier to construct bag bans on the state level–perhaps eventually we could even graduate to a national ban. For the moment, states like Florida that prevent communities from cutting down on plastic are only harming themselves, setting up their cities for increased pollution and endangering indigenous wildlife.

Resources

Aljazeera America: Miami’s Plastic Vice: Bagging the Ban on Bag Bans

Huffington Post: Loophole Undermines Hawaii’s Historic Plastic Bag Ban

HuffingtonPost: This Is How Your Plastic Bag Ends Up In Massive Ocean Garbage Patches

Tree Hugger: Hawaii’s Plastic Bag Ban Goes into Effect, But…

NPR: California Plastic Bag Referendum Could Spark Environmental Showdown

TC Palm: Treasure Coast Communities May be Able to Ban Plastic Bags

The Miami Herald: South Florida Officials Seek Help Controlling Plastic Bags

New York Magazine: The Fight Over Plastic Bags Is About a Lot More Than How to Get Groceries Home

Florida Keys Wildlife Rescue: Plastic–A Cancer in Our Environment

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Ban the Bag: Getting Plastic out of Coastal Communities appeared first on Law Street.

Jamie Gilt is not having a great month: the Florida mom and pro-gun activist, who was shot by her four-year-old son on March 9, now may be facing charges for allowing her son access to firearms. Police are recommending that Gilt face a misdemeanor charge, which could carry a sentence of up to 180 days. Ironically, the same day that the incident took place, Gilt had bragged on Facebook that her son “gets jacked up to target shoot,” according to The Washington Post.

The shooting occurred while Gilt was driving, when her loaded gun slid out from underneath the front seat into the backseat where her son Lane was sitting. To add to Gilt’s bad luck, Lane had also apparently just learned how to unbuckle himself out of his booster seat, so he was able to pick up the gun and shoot it through the seat into his mother’s back.

Her Facebook page, “Jamie Gilt for Gun Sense,” has since been taken down, but was apparently flooded with criticism after the incident went public. Her posts included “pro-gun messages, Second Amendment memes, and posts supporting the NRA, as well as photos of her posing with weapons.” Her Twitter account also appears to have been deactivated.

Jamie Gilt bragged about how her son gets “pumped” about guns …

Her 4 yr old shot her in the back.

* sigh * pic.twitter.com/Qg7Iww0lJg

— SuperSoulSistah (@ctv556) March 9, 2016

Under Florida law, it is a second degree misdemeanor if a firearm is not safely stored, and a minor is able to gain access to it as a result. Gilt’s gun was loaded and unholstered under the front seat, which authorities allege could be a violation of this law.

What may be the biggest irony here: the woman who was a strong advocate for gun rights can now be an example for why stricter gun control measures are beneficial.

Mariam Jaffery

Mariam was an Executive Assistant at Law Street Media and a native of Northern Virginia. She has a B.A. in International Affairs with a minor in Business Administration from George Washington University. Contact Mariam at mjaffery@lawstreetmedia.com.

The post Pro-Gun Activist Shot By 4-Year-Old Son to Face Charges appeared first on Law Street.

The crazy case between Hulk Hogan and Gawker has finally reached a decision–and Hogan has emerged victorious. A jury awarded the famous professional wrestler $115 million after a two week trial, but just six hours of deliberations.

Hulk Hogan sued Gawker after the media company released a sex tape of Hogan and the wife of a former friend of his. Hogan claimed that Gawker violated his privacy by releasing the tape, and that they didn’t reach out to him, or the woman in the tape, Heather Cole, before releasing it publicly on the site in an article entitled: “Even for a Minute, Watching Hulk Hogan Have Sex in a Canopy Bed Is Not Safe for Work but Watch It Anyway.” To read the full details of the case, check out our previous coverage here.

Really, the argument on the part of Hogan’s lawyer came down to privacy, and whether or not the video that Gawker published was actually “newsworthy.” But Gawker’s lawyers argued that this came down to First Amendment rights. Gawker’s attorney, Michael Sullivan, stated his concern that this case would open up a dangerous door for public figures to sue media companies. According to CNN:

Sullivan warned that Hogan’s lawsuit could have a chilling effect on free press if ‘powerful celebrities, politicians and public figures would use our courts to punish people.’ ‘We will all be worse off as a result,’ he said.

Before the ruling came out this evening, Eric Goldman, co-director of Santa Clara University’s High Tech Law Institute spoke to Fusion about the case and stated:

Right now, there’s an ‘anything goes’ mentality when it comes to publishing information about celebrities. If Gawker loses, we might begin to see some rethinking of that mentality. If Gawker wins, I think it will further embolden online publishers that anything related to celebrities is fair game.

Given that the six jurors sided with Hogan, and Gawker did lose, that first consideration may be true. However, it seems like Gawker’s lawyers are going to appeal the case–as Gawker founder Nick Denton read from a written statement:

Given key evidence and the most important witness were both improperly withheld from this jury, we all knew the appeals court will need to resolve the case. … That’s why we feel very positive about the appeal that we have already begun preparing, as we expect to win this case ultimately.

Given the high price tag and high profile nature of this case, the appeal will be one to watch.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Hulk Hogan Wins Gawker Lawsuit: How Will this Affect Freedom of the Press? appeared first on Law Street.

What does this Florida teenager advertising his medical services while sporting a lab coat and stethoscope not have? A medical degree.

Malachi A. Love-Robinson, an 18-year-old, even had his own medical office in West Palm Beach, Florida.

Officials arrested Love-Robinson Tuesday after the Palm Beach Narcotics Task Force (PBNTF) and the Florida Department of Health investigated complaints that the “doctor” was practicing medicine without a license, according to a statement released by the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office.

Just because you saw a season of Grey’s Anatomy doesn’t mean you could practice medicine. https://t.co/tw8QUXjtsj pic.twitter.com/dCBZX8CYCU

— PBSO (@PBCountySheriff) February 16, 2016

The sheriff’s office also said that Love-Robinson had been investigated previously and was cited by the Department of Health for practicing medicine without a license this past October. According to Brad Dalton, the spokesman for the Florida Department of Health, Love-Robinson was worked at New Birth New Life, a treatment office specializing in addiction recovery, in Boynton Beach, Fla. Practicing medicine without a license is considered a third-degree felony in Florida.

The police were apparently tipped off by a member of the public who told the authorities that “a person who was portraying himself as a 25-year-old doctor was actually an 18-year-old,” Brad Dalton told the New York Times. According to his profile on HealthGrades.com, which has since been taken down, he was listed as a 25-year-old.

Love-Robinson posted bail on Wednesday and on Thursday he told ABC News, “I’m not portraying as an M.D. I never said I’ve gone to school to be an M.D.” He also claims that he has a Ph.D., but would not say where it is from or what field it is in.

The statement from the sheriff’s office says that Love-Robinson “performed a physical exam on an undercover agent and offered medical advice.” The point in time when Love-Robinson crossed the line to provide medical care and advice was when police were able to intervene, Dalton told CNN.

According to New Birth New Life’s website, Love-Robinson is listed as having not only a Ph.D. but also two certifications: HHP-C, which is a holistic health practitioner certification, and AMP-C, which is unclear.

There are two other employees listed, an operations director and a program director. The program director, Sandra J. White, is titled “Dr.,” but it is unclear if that title stems from the honorary doctorate of divinity that she received according to her bio on the NBNL website, or if from an educational institution.

The bio for Michelle L. Newsome, the operations director, says, “[Newsome] is looking forward to many years here at NBNL Medical Center and hopes to enjoy each and every one of them.”

Love-Robinson was also accused of forging and cashing stolen checks from an 86-year-old woman in January and was charged with Grand Theft, Uttering a Forgery, and Naturopath without a License, according to an update posted to the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office Facebook page.

The elderly women reportedly filed a forgery and fraud report after she was notified that her bank account had no money in it. “The victim obtained copies of her checks and learned that three had been forged and cashed by Dr. Love-Robinson without her consent or knowledge,” the post said.

Love-Robinson disagrees with the police and is unhappy that he was forced to close down his practice following the accusations. “I’m not trying to hurt people,” he told the New York Times. “I’m just a young black guy who opened up a practice who is trying to do some good in the community. If that is a negative thing, we have a lot more work to do in the community than to single out me.”

Julia Bryant

Julia Bryant is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street from Howard County, Maryland. She is a junior at the University of Maryland, College Park, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Economics. You can contact Julia at JBryant@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Florida Teen Still Not a Doctor, But Still Pretending appeared first on Law Street.

Have you ever gotten one of those texts from Facebook, letting you know it’s the birthday of some person you probably haven’t talked to since high school? They can be incredibly annoying, and more importantly, some people who receive them don’t even remember consenting to those kinds of reminders from the social media giant. Well those pesky texts have now put Facebook on the receiving end of a class action lawsuit brought primarily by a Florida man who claims that the company violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Colin Brickman claims that he received texts from Facebook, alerting him to a friend’s birthday. The text then invited him to write on his friend’s timeline or “reply with 1 to post ‘Happy Birthday!” While that sounds straightforward enough, Brickman is arguing that this action violates the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, because it is a telemarketing message that could increase Facebook’s revenue by causing more people to interact with the site. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act requires that any messages of that nature can only be sent to people who have previously consented to receiving them. Currently, you can expressly opt out of the texts in the “settings” part of Facebook–Brickman argues that he did exactly that, but still received the unwanted message.

Brickman would like Facebook to stop sending the messages, and he would also like $1,500 for each message that he (and others who were affected) received. This is consistent with the law, which states that “consumers can seek $500 per violation or $1,500 if they can show the violation was willful.” Fortune also pointed out that there is precedent for deciding in favor of the message receivers in a case like this:

In the last year, Western Union  agreed to pay $8.5 million to resolve a class action over unsolicited text messages while Uber and Yahoo are currently in court over similar lawsuits. The Federal Communications Commission has also become more aggressive about text-based marketing, posting a notice last year to remind consumers that unauthorized texts are illegal except in the case of an emergency.

Brickman’s lawsuit is obviously still in its early stages, but while this all gets sorted out, keep an eye on your phone to see if you get any  unwanted birthday texts from Facebook. If you do, Facebook could end up paying for them, big time.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Facebook Sued Over Annoying Birthday Texts appeared first on Law Street.

In an 8-1 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that part of the process used to confer death sentences in the State of Florida violates the Sixth Amendment on Tuesday. The ruling focuses on the state’s use of a judge, rather than a jury, to make the final determination of a death sentence and does not weigh in on the constitutionality of death sentences in general.

“The Sixth Amendment requires a jury, not a judge, to find each fact necessary to impose a sentence of death. A jury’s mere recommendation is not enough,” wrote Justice Sotomayor in her majority opinion. The case, Hurst v. Florida, involves Timothy Lee Hurst’s conviction for the murder of his co-worker Cynthia Harrison in 1998. The state of Florida has a unique sentencing procedure for death penalty cases, which Sotomayor argues is in violation of the Sixth Amendment.

In Florida, the maximum sentence for someone convicted of just a capital felony is life in prison. But, a death sentence may be given to a capital felon only after an additional sentencing proceeding. This process, which the Supreme Court refers to as “hybrid” sentencing, puts the final decision in the hands of the judge after a jury gives an “advisory verdict.” Although the jury provides the verdict, it does not give the factual basis for its sentencing recommendation, instead, the judge is tasked with providing the legal justification for a death sentence. Justice Sotomayor argues that under the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees the “right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury,” the Florida system is unconstitutional.

Much of the reasoning in the Hurst v. Florida case comes from the court’s ruling in Ring v. Arizona back in 2002. The previous Arizona sentencing system is very similar to the structure that the court stuck down in Florida, making Sotomayor’s opinion a pretty straightforward interpretation of court precedent. The Arizona sentencing process ultimately put the burden on a judge to determine whether the presence of aggravating factors justify the death penalty. The court ruled that doing so violated the Sixth Amendment and largely applied the same justification to the ruling in Hurst v. Florida.

So what does this mean going forward? In light of the ruling, two primary questions remain. First, what does this mean for all of the inmates currently on death row? And second, what changes will the state need to make to issue death sentences in the future? As Think Progress points out, the Ring V. Arizona decision did not retroactively affect prisoners who received death sentences prior to the Ring ruling. In a subsequent decision, Schriro v. Summerlin, the Supreme Court ruled that the precedent set by Ring does not apply retroactively to other Arizona inmates because it amounted to a procedural change in the law, not a substantive one. Based on that precedent, the court’s recent ruling in Hurst will likely not affect previous cases.

However, there is some evidence to suggest that the ruling may, in fact, be retroactive. As NPR notes, retroactivity is also a matter of state law and the Florida Supreme Court uses a more generous application of retroactivity than most states. It is important to note that Florida has the second highest number of inmates currently on death row, making the question of retroactivity particularly important for the state.

In the wake of the ruling, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi issued the following statement:

In light of today’s United States Supreme Court decision holding Florida’s capital sentencing procedure unconstitutional, the state will need to make changes to its death-sentencing statutes. I will work with state lawmakers this legislative session to ensure that those changes comply with the Court’s latest decision. The impact of the Court’s ruling on existing death sentences will need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Based on Bondi’s statement, there is some possibility that the ruling could apply retroactively, but it seems clear that Florida will need to amend or pass a new law in order to issue future death sentences.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Supreme Court Deems Florida Death Penalty Sentencing Unconstitutional appeared first on Law Street.

It may be the happiest place on earth, but it’s also one that needs serious security. Officials at Disney World just announced that it’s upping both visible and behind-the-scenes security measures, and other theme parks nationwide are taking similar actions.

One of the most visible new measures added to the Disney World parks located in Orlando, Florida will be metal detectors. Guests won’t be allowed to bring toy guns, including squirt guns, inside, and Disney is also stopping the sale of such products. For example, the Pirates of the Caribbean theme shop used to sell plastic guns–those will be removed from the shelves. The parks will also no longer allow anyone over the age of 14 to walk around in costumes or masks (besides, of course, employees.) Disney World has also beefed up security overall–placing additional law enforcement officials within the parks, and using dogs on patrol. Disneyland, located in California, is also upping its security. 

Disney isn’t alone in instituting new security measures. SeaWorld has also begun using metal detectors to screen entering guests, and Universal Studios is testing wand detectors. Officials at Disney and Universal have said that the new security features weren’t sparked by the actions of the San Bernardino shooters, or any other threat of terror. In fact, Universal spokesman Tom Schroder told the Orland Sentinal:

We want our guests to feel safe when they come here. We’ve long used metal detection for special events, such as Halloween Horror Nights. This test is a natural progression for us as we study best practices for security in today’s world.

Disney and Sea World spokespeople echoed similar sentiments.

However, these announcements do come right after a statement from the Department of Homeland Security that instructed Americans to expect more security and police presence at big gathering locations, stating it was: “especially concerned that terrorist-inspired individuals and homegrown violent extremists may be encouraged or inspired to target public events or places.”

It makes sense that Disney World, SeaWorld, and Universal are instituting more robust security features, and it doesn’t look like any of these new features will really affect guests’ experiences. But if anything they’re a sad reminder of the violence–particularly gun violence–that has become increasingly commonplace in the United States.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Disney World Announces an Increase in Security Features appeared first on Law Street.

Jeb Bush was once viewed as a serious potential contender for the Republican presidential nomination. But his campaign has languished in recent months, especially after some truly lackluster debate performances. So, today, Bush launched a revamp, with a new slogan “Jeb can fix it.” But will it work, or is Bush’s campaign already as good as dead?

There have been a lot of signs lately that Bush’s campaign isn’t doing well. Polls aren’t looking too good for Bush–a recent NBC poll last week had him at 5 percent nationally, behind Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio. In Florida, his home state, he comes in at 4th, according to a ViewPoint Florida poll.

On the organizational front, Bush also isn’t doing so hot. Last week, the news broke that Bush’s campaign was slashing its budget across the board due to money struggles. The campaign is removing senior staff from the payroll and downsizing office space. Overall, the campaign is attempting to cut payroll by 40 percent and the overall budget (with some exceptions) by 45 percent. Combine these polling and payroll issues with the fact that Bush had yet another less-than-stellar performance at the most recent debate, and he’s not looking so good.

It’s in this context that Bush’s team is attempting to revamp his campaign strategy. In a press conference today he spoke about his new vision. Bush explained that the advice he’s gotten from critics ranges from the aesthetic, such ditching his glasses, to the strategic, such as being more passionate. But, as Bush stated:

But I have learned two important things from my time serving the people of Florida: One, I can’t be someone I’m not. And, two, getting things done isn’t about yelling into a camera, or regurgitating sound bites free of substance.

His speech also included some pretty unsubtle references to two of the candidates polling ahead of him–Donald Trump and fellow Floridian Marco Rubio. Clearly talking about Trump, he stated that you can’t just tell Congress they’re fired and then go to commercial break. In a more veiled reference seemingly to the language Rubio has been using in his campaign,  Bush stated:

The challenges we face as a nation are too great to roll the dice on another presidential experiment. To trust the rhetoric of reform over a record of reform.

Bush also unveiled the new theme of his campaign: “Jeb can fix it.” However, as often happens on the internet, there have already been plenty of riffs about the new slogan.

♪♫ Jeb the Builder ♪♫ ♪♫ Can he fix it? ♪♫ ♪♫ Jeb the Builder ♪♫ ♪♫♪♫ No ♪♫♪♫ #JebCanFixIt pic.twitter.com/UDnBK312sp

— Ponta [¬º-°]¬ (@typicalfeminist) November 2, 2015

The “it” in “Jeb can fix it” apparently does not refer to campaign slogans. — Ronan Farrow (@RonanFarrow) November 2, 2015

Oh Lord. This is just pathetic & sad now. ‘Jeb Can Fix It’ sounds like a book for preschoolers. Feeling second hand embarrassment #facepalm

— jennifer (@jenilynn1001) November 2, 2015

Jeb Can Fix It. pic.twitter.com/rTuSWMa7dN — Jeff Tiedrich (@jefftiedrich) November 2, 2015

So with this revamp, Bush has gotten a little bit of extra attention–although not necessarily the kind of attention he wants. We’ll have to see if Bush can “fix” his campaign, but if things keep heading the same direction for him poll-wise, and cash-wise, it’s looking unlikely. 

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Can Jeb Actually Fix it?: Bush Looks to Revamp His Struggling Campaign appeared first on Law Street.

A Florida newspaper is really pissed with Senator Marco Rubio.

In a scorching op-ed published Tuesday evening, the Sun Sentinel’s Editorial Board accused Rubio of “ripping off voters” with his constant absences in Congress. Rubio, who is currently seeking the Republican presidential nomination, has missed more votes than any other senator this year. The Sentinel blasted Rubio saying,

Your job is to represent Floridians in the Senate. Either do your job, Sen. Rubio, or resign it.

The op-ed comes in response to Rubio’s interview with CNN Sunday, where he justified missing roughly one third of Senate votes this year by saying, “I’m not missing votes because I’m on vacation. I’m running for president so that the votes they take in the Senate are actually meaningful again.” Rubio went on to explain,

If there is a vote where my vote is going to make a difference or an issue of major national significance and importance, we’d do everything possible to be there. But I am going to miss votes, I’m running for president…When I miss a vote, it’s not because I’m out playing golf. We’re out campaigning for the future of America where I believe I can make more of a difference as president than I could as a senator.

Watch Rubio’s CNN Interview Below

The Sentinel’s editorial board’s response:

Sorry, senator, but Floridians sent you to Washington to do a job. We’ve got serious problems with clogged highways, eroding beaches, flat Social Security checks and people who want to shut down the government.

If you hate your job, senator, follow the honorable lead of House Speaker John Boehner and resign it.

It got harsher when they wrote,

Let us elect someone who wants to be there and earn an honest dollar for an honest day’s work. Don’t leave us without one of our two representatives in the Senate for the next 15 months or so.

Then they accused him out for essentially defrauded tax payers with his salary saying,

You are paid $174,000 per year to represent us, to fight for us, to solve our problems. Plus you take a $10,000 federal subsidy — declined by some in the Senate — to participate in one of the Obamacare health plans, though you are a big critic of Obamacare.

You are ripping us off, senator.

And they do have a point. According to a tally by Politico, Senators Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders have been able to juggle both their senatorial duties and presidential campaigns, missing only seven and four votes respectively. Rubio on the other hand has shown an unmistakable unwillingness to help govern his state my missing staggering total of 59 votes. But to be fair Senators Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham aren’t too far behind him with absences from votes totaling 57 and 39.

Even though the Florida newspaper is hardly the first to point out Rubio’s poor attendance record, its critique probably stung the most. At a time when campaign debate rhetoric relies so heavily on politicians showboating and examples of how candidates were able to “revolutionize” their states with their policies, having constituents publicly rebuke a contender is a huge political blow.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Florida Newspaper to Marco Rubio: “Do Your Job or Resign it” appeared first on Law Street.

Whitney Marie Beall, 23, from Lakeland, Florida, was arrested after she live-streamed video of herself driving drunk this weekend. She used Periscope, a relatively new app that allows users to live stream videos. In the video, she narrates her predicament–she’s lost, has a flat tire, and is most importantly, incredibly intoxicated. Other Periscope users began reporting her to the police, and she was quickly arrested for drunk driving.

The videos of Beall are upsetting–she’s clearly drunk, and she’s reporting her state to her followers. She tells viewers she’s running a red light, says “driving drunk is not cool,” doesn’t appear to know where she is at various points and asks viewers for directions, and talks about driving over the speed limit. At one point she also wonders aloud if she’ll get a DUI, and says that she doesn’t think she will. Most of the video is dominated by Beall’s whiny musings about what direction she’s supposed to be driving in, and talking about how drunk she is. Many other Periscope users also implored Beall to stop driving, although it’s clear from the video that she’s not paying attention and isn’t listening to those pleas.

Check out some the videos below–each are about 10 minutes long and do contain NSFW language:

But the most important part of the videos ended up being the fact that she showed viewers shots from outside her windshield. Those looks, as blurry as they were, allowed people who were watching Beall’s streaming to get an approximate read on where she was, and call the police to stop her before she seriously injured herself or others.

Although the police in Lakeland don’t have access to an official Periscope account,  Sergeant Gary Gross, spokesperson for the department explained: “Luckily, one of our younger officers was able to figure it out.”

When police found her, she drove over a curb. Then she (very unsurprisingly) completely failed her sobriety test. She was arrested and booked with a very much deserved DUI.

Given Periscopes relative newness–it was only released about six months ago–it’s understandable that the Lakeland Police Department didn’t know what it was. But Beall’s case is just one example of the ways in which social media is changing law enforcement practices. After all, there have by now been plenty of cases of people being arrested based on their social media use. For example, Nicholas Wig, 26, of St. Paul, Minnesota, made headlines last year when he forgot to log off Facebook after breaking into a home and was subsequently arrested. There have also been many incidences of thieves being apprehended after taking pictures on a stolen phone, tablet, or computer. As the relationship that technology has with law enforcement continues to evolve, Periscope is just another new tool.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Drunk Driver in Florida Caught via Periscope App appeared first on Law Street.

If you’re looking for a weird political story today, look no further than Floridian Senatorial candidate Sol Invictus. He’s currently making headlines all around the country for his past behavior, particularly an admission that he once sacrificed a goat and drank its blood. While Invictus is a Libertarian candidate who doesn’t stand much of a chance, stories about his past exploits have gone viral, creating an entertaining respite from the doldrum and depressing nature of the 2016 primaries.

Sol Invictus (not his birth name) is a 32-year-old lawyer in Orlando, Florida. He’s running for the Senate seat that is being vacated by current Republican Presidential contender Senator Marco Rubio. He practices Thelema, a pagan religion established in the early 20th century by English philosopher and magician Aleister Crowley. In the name of Thelema, Invictus once: “walked from central Florida to the Mojave Desert and spent a week fasting and praying, at times thinking he wouldn’t survive. In a pagan ritual to give thanks when he returned home, he killed a goat and drank its blood.”

Invictus acknowledges this fact, but doesn’t think it’s too big of a deal, saying:

I did sacrifice a goat. I know that’s probably a quibble in the mind of most Americans. I sacrificed an animal to the god of the wilderness … Yes, I drank the goat’s blood.

Invictus’s past was brought to light by the chair of the Florida Libertarian Party, Adrian Wyllie, who stepped down in response to Invictus’s candidacy. When he stepped down, Wiley posted a lengthy status on Facebook denouncing Invictus and his beliefs. In addition to the whole goat-killing thing, he also pointed out that Invictus once wrote in a memo to colleagues “I have prophesied for years that I was born for a Great War; that if I did not witness the coming of the Second American Civil War, I would begin it myself” and that he is supported by white supremacists and neo-Nazis.

Wyllie stepped down because while the Libertarian party in Florida isn’t supporting Invictus, many of its top officials haven’t outright condemned him either. Wyllie disagrees with that tactic, and explained in his Facebook post:

The majority of the LPF Executive Committee believed I should remain silent, and simply allow the primary election process to play out. That is something I was unwilling to do. While no one on the Executive Committee openly supported Mr. Invictus, only a few had the conviction to stand openly against him.

I strongly believe that we must ensure that these violent ideologies are not associated with the Libertarian Party in any way. Libertarians should always be the first to rise up against hatred, subjugation, and violence.

Since, I could not in good conscience remain silent about this man or his followers, I had no choice but to resign.

Invictus, for his part, has accused Wyllie of lying and telling half-truths, but appears to be forging ahead in his quest to become Florida’s next senator. While he doesn’t stand much of a chance, his candidacy is sure to be one to watch.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Sol Invictus: The Florida Senate Candidate Who Once Sacrificed a Goat appeared first on Law Street.

Okay. I can’t believe I am about to say this. I don’t care if someone takes your $5 but does not give you your weed, you just cannot call the cops to complain about being stiffed. If you do, you will get in trouble. And if my admittedly limited knowledge of pot prices is accurate, you will get in trouble over some very poor quality marijuana.

(Before I continue with this story, I have a confession to make. Whenever I do not have a good story lined up for the week, I just Google ‘weird legal stories Florida.’ It never disappoints. Now back to this week’s weird Florida story … )

Courtesy of Giphy.

I’ve Been Robbed!

Daneshia Heller, a 19-year-old Florida resident, had an emergency. She had just been robbed. When she went over to a man’s house to buy some pot, she had expected to receive said pot in exchange for the $5 she had given him.

Unfortunately, the man allegedly took the money but didn’t give anything back. Heller did what any irrational person would do. She called 911.

“He got my money, and I want my drugs. Can you send an officer?” she asked the operator.

A Wish Come True

You know how if you find a genie and you make a wish it is going to come true in a way you never expected? Like how in the Geico commercial a million bucks gets granted as a million male deer (aka bucks)?

Courtesy of Giphy.

Well think of this 911 operator as Heller’s genie in a bottle. Heller was granted her wish: a cop did come to the scene of the alleged crime. Only, the cop didn’t arrive for precisely the reason Heller had wanted him.

You see, drugs are illegal in Florida, both in buying and selling. Which means if you call up and admit you are trying to buy some, especially if you dial 911 to do it, you will probably get in a little trouble yourself.

Taking Some Flakka

If this had been the only thing to happen, though, then maybe this story would not have been so bad. However, when the cops arrived, they saw an angry Heller talking to herself. This aroused their suspicion.

When they checked her person, they found a white substance in one of her pockets. As it turned out, it was Flakka, a psychosis-inducing drug.

The Legal Consequences

After the substance was found, Heller was taken into custody and charged with the following:

• Drug possession
• Misusing the 911 system
• Violating parole from an earlier, unrelated charge

Moral of the Story

As with any good story, there are a few key takeaways:

1. Don’t be a tattletale (especially don’t tattle on your potential drug dealer);
2. Don’t call 911 unless it is actually an emergency;
3. If you call the cops about a theft, make sure you hide your drugs before they get there; and,
4. Just don’t do drugs in general.

This may all seem like a lot to ask, but I promise you they are all good ideas if you do not want to get arrested and be talked about here.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Woman Calls 911 When She Doesn’t Get Her Drugs, Gets Arrested appeared first on Law Street.

Within the past few years there have been multiple cases of athletes putting their hands on women and suffering the consequences. Baltimore Raven’s running back Ray Rice and Texas Tech football player Nigel Bethel II both recently assaulted women and were dismissed from their teams. But most recently, Florida State University’s Quarterback De’Andre Johnson has made the news after an altercation with a young woman at a bar.

On June 24th at a night club called “Yiannis,” 19-year-old Johnson was caught on video shoving past a woman–a 21-year-old FSU student–waiting in line for her drink as he made his way to the front of the bar. The two then began to argue and the woman proceeded to hit him in the face. Johnson grabbed her arm and punched her across the left side of her face.

According to the Tallahassee Police Department incident report, the woman had bruises near her left eye, swelling of the left cheek and upper lip, and a small cut near the bridge of her nose. Jose Baez, Johnson’s well-known criminal defense and trial attorney stated on Monday:

While it is clear from the video that De’Andre Johnson was not the initial aggressor, his family wants to take the lead in helping him learn and grow from this experience. He is currently participating in community service and faith-based programs focused on battered women, substance abuse and the empowerment of children…De’Andre is extremely embarrassed by this situation and would like to express his heartfelt apologies to everyone, including those who were directly affected, Coach Fisher and his teammates, the entire Florida State University community, as well as his family and friends.

The Florida State Seminoles head coach Jimbo Fisher announced that Johnson had been suspended indefinitely from the FSU football program on June 25th. This week, just hours after the state’s attorney’s office released the video, Coach Fisher dismissed the freshman quarterback from the team. Johnson, who was named Florida’s “Mr. Football” as a senior at First Coast High School in Jacksonville was charged with misdemeanor battery. He turned himself in to Tallahassee police on June 30th and was released on a $500 bond. According to FSU’s athletics policy, if a student-athlete is charged with a misdemeanor or felony, or convicted of a misdemeanor offense, the department makes a decision on discipline on a case-by-case basis.

This is not the first time an FSU football player has been in the headlines due to trouble off the field. Jameis Winston, the former Florida State University quarterback-turned-top NFL draft pick, was accused of rape in 2012. Winston claimed the charges were false and they were eventually dropped. It does not seem that Johnson will be as lucky as Winston was.

While this might seem like a straightforward case of yet another instance of violence from a promising young football player, there is another thing worth noting–a double standard. Although Johnson was obviously very much in the wrong, the woman who hit him has not yet been charged. I have always been a firm believer that no man should ever put his hands on a woman, but I am also a believer that no woman should put her hands on a man, and I’m not alone.

I think De’andre Johnson should be kicked out of FSU and charged with battery, but the woman (clearly the aggressor) should be charged too..

— Marcus Aurelius (@marcusjordandoe) July 7, 2015

Everyone deserves to be punished if they behave inappropriately and violently. The student who was hit should be charged for hitting him as well–regardless of the high profile nature of this case, respect should still be key. Obviously, Johnson’s behavior was completely over the line here; by putting his hands on the woman he lost the respect of many and a promising future. Violence is never the answer–that’s a lesson worth repeating again and again.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post FSU Quarterback Pays the Price for Bar Brawl with Young Woman appeared first on Law Street.

Florida has so many moronic laws that it could almost take up an entire post by itself.

The popular college spring break destination features some rather entertaining laws, for example one prohibiting committing “unnatural acts” with another person. Gotta love those vague terms! Furthermore, unmarried couples may not commit “lewd” acts and live together in the same residence.

Lewd acts? Define, please.

If you wish to get around via a swamp buggy, a very popular mode of transportation in Florida, be aware that they are not included in the state’s definition of “motor vehicle,” and are thus not regulated.

Some lawmaker must have gotten sick of the lack of consistency regarding the direction that doors open, as they decided to make it a law that all doors open outward. I’m not sure if this law applies to airport bathrooms, but I always thought that it was irritating that they open inward when you are trying to close it around your suitcase once inside.

Even parents who are driven to the brink of insanity by their children’s actions may not sell their kiddos in Florida. Pigs can be confined in cages in Florida unless they are pregnant, in which case the law requires them to roam free.

Watch your mouth in Mississippi, where you could be fined up to $100 for using “profane language” in public places. And if someone is disturbing your spiritual experience in church, go ahead and arrest him or her. There, private citizens may personally arrest any person who disturbs a church service.

There are tons of laws relating to sexual relations, illegitimate children, and other similar topics in Mississippi. For starters, if someone is a parent to two illegitimate children, that person can go to jail for at least one month. Living together while not married or having sex with someone who is not your spouse results in a fine of $500 and/or six months in prison. Unnatural intercourse (whatever that even means), if both parties voluntarily participate, results in a maximum sentence of ten years and $10,000. Lastly on the sex topic, it is not legal to teach others what polygamy is.

Phew, those two states were a doozy, and we still have two more to go! Moving on to Alabama….

It’s a bit sad that this law had to be created, since it seems like a pretty commonsense thing to never do, but Alabama officially banned incestuous marriages. Another one that confuses me as to why it needs to actually be written into law is that driving blindfolded is illegal.

If you plan to attend a bear-wrestling match in Alabama you’ll have to change your plans as they are strictly prohibited. Also, beware that impersonating a person of the clergy is against the law, as is maiming yourself to get out of duty or to obtain alms. People whose preferred pastime is playing Dominoes will have to come up with an alternative game for Sundays as playing that particular game on that particular day is illegal.

As is the case with Florida, Georgia has almost enough dumb laws to warrant an entirely separate post, so I’ll try to keep it concise. Do you have a life goal to live on a boat in Georgia? Too bad. You cannot live on a boat for more than 30 days during the year. No getting kinky on boats there either, as sex toys are banned.

Not for 30 days in Georgia, you’re not

In Acworth, Georgia there must be mass amounts of leaves covering the ground during the Fall months, as residents there are required by law to own a rake. Athens-Clarke County takes the cake for the strangest laws in the state, though. There, adult bookstores may not sell alcohol. Didn’t think that was generally a place people flock to for booze, but what do I know. I also wasn’t aware of anyone venturing to a massage business for his liquor, but Athens-Clarke County felt the need to ban that as well so who knows. Yeah, lots of weird stuff with alcohol. It is also illegal to sell two beers for a single price as a deal. For example, “a bar can’t run a two Bud Lights for $5 special.”

There are some bizarre curfew laws in Athens-Clarke, where one may not read a book out loud in public after 2:45 AM and persons under 16 may not play pinball after 11:00 PM. Bummer for them, because 11:00 PM is prime pinball time.

Marisa Mostek

Marisa Mostek loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dumbest Laws of the United States: Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia & Florida appeared first on Law Street.

ICYMI, check out the Best of the Week from Law Street, including banned beach drinking in Florida, vaginal probes at colleges, and a look at America’s public health spending.

#1 Beach Drinking Banned at This Popular Spring Break Destination

Spring break is a college rite of passage synonymous with beaches, bikini-clad babes, and binge drinking. However, it’s no secret that excessive alcohol consumption can lend itself to a dangerous environment for these vacationers, including reckless behavior, violence, and sexual assault. No one knows these kinds of dangers better than the residents of the spring break capital of the world, Panama City Beach, which is why their city council members have voted to make a change next year by banning beach drinking during spring break. Read full article here.

#2 Lawsuit Claims Valencia College Exams Included Vaginal Probes

Two female students from Valencia College studying medical diagnostics have recently filed a lawsuit claiming that their classwork at the school crossed a very serious line. The suit alleges that they were forced to endure invasive vaginal exams in front of all of their classmates. Read full article here.

#3 Are We Spending Enough on Public Health?

Treating people when they’re already sick is like beating back invaders who have already breached your defenses. In either scenario, prevention through good defense saves money, time, and lives. But when it comes to boosting our nation’s wellness defenses through public health spending, America falls short. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Spring break is a college rite of passage synonymous with beaches, bikini-clad babes, and binge drinking. However, it’s no secret that excessive alcohol consumption can lend itself to a dangerous environment for these vacationers, including reckless behavior, violence, and sexual assault. No one knows these kinds of dangers better than the residents of the spring break capital of the world, Panama City Beach, which is why their city council members have voted to make a change next year by banning beach drinking during spring break.

Panama City Beach bans #springbreak drinking. Should others follow? http://t.co/DLZCjfJ6BR pic.twitter.com/D9lHTh9ONn

— The News-Press (@TheNewsPress) May 14, 2015

According to the News Herald, the Panama City Beach City Council voted last week to ban drinking all together on the beach next March despite its expected negative effect on business owners. The measure has been deemed a much-needed crackdown on out of control spring break partying that has negatively impacted the city.

Case in point, this year seven people were shot and wounded at house party. Then in April, police released a censored video of girl passed out on the Florida beach getting gang raped in broad daylight while crowds of bystanders watched. Even though most of the girl’s body had been blurred, a young woman watching the video recognized her tattoos and contacted authorities. The girl in the video was believed to have been drugged before the assault occurred. What’s even more disturbing is this isn’t the first time something like that incident has happened there. Bay County Sheriff Frank McKeithen said they’ve recovered a number of videos similar in nature. Ruth Corley, spokeswoman for the sheriff’s office, commented on the incident via social media saying,

We have been able to find video of girls, incoherent and passed out, and almost like they are drugged, being assaulted on the beaches of Panama City in front of a bunch of people standing around.

This move is in addition to 17 other measures approved last year to tone down the city’s Spring Break celebrations. These changes are expected to cause a dramatic drop in revenue for the $200 million-plus economy that the tourism provides, but owners see it as worth the risk while hoping for an increase in more family-friendly tourists.

As someone who’s personally made the 800-something mile pilgrimage there from my college town of Athens, Ohio, with a group of my best friends, I can tell you that I’m not at all surprised by how out of control it has gotten there. Much of what I thought were spring break myths were proved realities during my short stay there. Even though this initiative will likely anger prospective spring breakers, working to prevent occurrences of violence and sexual assault is much more important.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Beach Drinking Banned at This Popular Spring Break Destination appeared first on Law Street.

Two female students from Valencia College studying medical diagnostics have recently filed a lawsuit claiming that their classwork at the school crossed a very serious line. The suit alleges that they were forced to endure invasive vaginal exams in front of all of their classmates.

The lawsuit, which was filed Thursday in Orlando, Florida, targets both the college and three of its instructors, Maureen Bugnacki, Linda Shaheen, and Barbara Ball. Both students, who were identified only as Jane Doe I and Jane Doe II, claim they were forced to submit to the examination of their sexual organs via a transvaginal ultrasound “under threat of having their grades reduced or of being blacklisted by future employers” reports CNN.

A transvaginal ultrasound is a procedure used to check for pregnancy, fertility, or other reproductive problems that involves inserting a probe directly into a woman’s vagina. The lawsuit describes the plaintiffs’ experience with the procedure as,

A student would place a condom over the probe and then apply generous amounts of lubrication to the probe. In some cases, the student would have to sexually ‘stimulate’ plaintiffs in order to facilitate inserting the probe into plaintiffs’ vaginas.

The plaintiffs claimed that they were forced to endure these exams weekly and without any privacy in full view of instructors and other students. The lawsuit also alleges that in one instance one of the defendants, Barbara Ball, made inappropriate comments to one of the students undergoing a probe telling her she was “‘sexy’ and should be an ‘escort girl’ (prostitute).”

Peer examinations are actually quite common when studying in the the medical field as they are a way for students to better understand the procedures they will eventually perform on real patients. The lawsuit states that Valencia College had used a second year student nicknamed the “TransVag Queen” to describe the procedure to new students during an orientation for the program. The lawsuit states,

[She] explained the Medical Diagnostic Sonography Program’s faculty believed that students should undergo invasive transvaginal ultrasound procedures in order to become better sonography technicians. Valencia positioned these transvaginal probes as voluntary, but its actual policy and practice was that they were not.

It’s important to remember that this is a pending lawsuit and the defendants haven’t been found guilty. But if these women’s allegations are in fact true then what happened to them is absolutely disgusting and almost definitely qualifies as sexual assault. Sexual assault has unfortunately become a permanent fixture on college campuses that has been increasingly highlighted by the media in several high profile rape cases. However, it’s almost inconceivable to think of it happening in full display of an entire classroom at the hands of an instructor. This may very well turn into a case where the actual details are are difficult to come by, but nevertheless these allegations should be taken very seriously.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Lawsuit Claims Valencia College Exams Included Vaginal Probes appeared first on Law Street.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) just announced that they’re not playing nice with climate change-deniers anymore. FEMA has officially proclaimed that unless states create plans that consider how to combat climate change, they may not be eligible for disaster preparedness funds from the agency.

The new FEMA guidelines acknowledge the problems that have come or may develop from climate changes, including things like more intense storms, heat waves, drought, and flooding. Given that all of those are situations in which states often turn to FEMA for funding and assistance, the agency is asking that when making their disaster preparedness plans, states “assess vulnerability, identify a strategy to guide decisions and investments, and implement actions that will reduce risk, including impacts from a changing climate.”

It’s important to note that this change won’t affect how much aid FEMA will give to states affected by natural disasters such as earthquakes, storms, and hurricanes. That’s called disaster relief, and it’s not part of this change. Rather, if states don’t provide adequate hazard-mitigation plans that acknowledge climate change and its effects, it will withhold the funds for that disaster preparedness. These funds are used for things like training and purchasing equipment. Overall, FEMA gives out grants of this sort that total about $1 billion each year.

This creates a big political problem for some of America’s most visible and prominent Republican governors, many of whom have long either advocated that climate change is not a product of human activity, or that it’s simply not happening. Deniers who are now on the chopping block include Governors Rick Scott (Florida), Bobby Jindal (Louisiana), Chris Christie (New Jersey), Greg Abbott (Texas), and Pat McCrory (North Carolina).

Jindal and Christie have, at the very least, been floated in talks about possible 2016 Republican contenders. Ironically, Louisiana gets the most disaster preparedness money and New Jersey comes in at number three, so Jindal and Christie, as well as the other Republican governors who deny climate change, are faced with an interesting catch-22. They can either sign off on plans that comply with FEMA regulations and lose some political clout among the conservatives they may have to woo in a presidential primary, or refuse to acknowledge climate change and lose funding that their states probably need.

This policy shift comes amid many debates happening around the country over how states should individually handle climate change. There are allegations that in Florida, for example, there’s an “unofficial policy” to not use the words climate change, even when discussing the phenomenon and its effects.

No matter what, this is certainly a bold move on FEMA’s part, and shows that politics can’t always take the front seat when it comes to safety. FEMA is making a move that it thinks will help mitigate the results of climate change–if it ruffles a few political feathers in the meantime, so be it.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post FEMA to States: Recognize Climate Change or Lose Funding appeared first on Law Street.

We may have six more weeks of winter, but we have an infinite amount of weird arrests from all corners of the United States. This week’s highlights include an alligator killer in Florida and a pants-less DUI in Pennsylvania. Enjoy the top Weird Arrests of the Week.

[SlideDeck2 id=33838 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

The huge influx of snow in the Northeastern part of the United States didn’t stop this week’s weird arrest nominees from doing some truly stupid stuff. Check out the slideshow to learn about the top weird arrests of this week.

[SlideDeck2 id=33410 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

College alone these days is very expensive. Now, add grad school on to that, and I don’t care what you are going to make in the profession in which you were just trained, you are going to be in a whole lot of debt when you get out of school. Then, you have to go through the whole resume, interview process. And let’s face it, that is no fun. Which is why I think the teenager in the following story has the right idea: just skip the schooling portion of job placement. And while you are at it, just skip through the whole application process too. How do you do that? Just show up to the place you want to work, and blend in. Probably no one will ask you if you are supposed to be there.

Courtesy of Giphy.

To learn more, let’s examine St. Mary’s Medical Center in, of course, Florida–because that is where all these stories happen. A young doctor was recently escorted out of the building by security because, well he wasn’t actually a doctor so much as a teenage boy wearing a doctor’s coat.

Ok. Well, he tried and didn’t succeed. The way security is these days and the importance of safe hospitals means you couldn’t get away with such a scam for very long.  I mean, like in this story, the kid only got away with posing as a doctor for about 20 or 30…days. That is right. A month.

To be fair to the hospital, he didn’t actually work with patients in his month on staff. In fact, it was when he stepped up his game and actually went into an exam room, with a stethoscope around his neck and a mask on his face, and introduced himself as Doctor Robinson (and didn’t follow it with “I’m not a doctor, I only play one on TV”), that he got caught.

One of the real doctors noticed him and thought something wasn’t right. So he called security, who was surprised that the kid was faking it–as they had seen him around the last few weeks and thought he belonged there.

Here is the thing about this story that makes me feel a little bad about making fun of it: the kid, according to his mother, had an illness for which he had stopped taking medication. And I cannot joke about that. However, here is the part that make me feel perfectly fine joking about it: we know the kid’s excuse for doing this. What was the hospital’s excuse for not catching this kid faster? That I can make fun of.  And that is probably a big part of why the center will not be pressing charges.

This story has been told far and wide, and there is a good chance you have already heard about it. So you might be asking yourself just why I didn’t make that one obvious connection that everyone is making. And I will tell you why. Because everyone is making it, and I want to be a little more unique than that. So I will not say a word. I’ll just leave you with this picture, which will say a thousand words for me:

Courtesy of FanPop.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Doctor Who? Teen Tricks Hospital For an Entire Month appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

Remember when Neil Patrick Harris played Doogie Howser, M.D in the early 90s? A teenager who was so brilliant that he had gone through medical school and was practicing medicine by age 14, but also went through two occurrences of pediatric cancer.

Recently a 17-year-old boy in Florida posed as a doctor for about a month without anyone even noticing. According to reports, a patient at St. Mary’s Medical Center in West Palm Beach informed staff that a juvenile was dressed in a lab coat and was inside an OB/GYN exam room. The young man was not in the exam room alone, he was with a patient and another doctor. My first question is why did this other doctor allow him in the room? Shouldn’t the real doctor know the other doctors in the department? If I were that patient I would feel really violated and consider suing the hospital.

I’ve spent my fair share of time with doctors and whenever one has someone tag along at an appointment, he introduces me and explains why the other doctor is in the room with us. It’s usually an intern or a new doctor to the department who is being trained to work with patients. This was not one of those instances, this was no Doogie Howser!

The mother of the young man posing as a doctor states that her son is under the care of a doctor but is not taking his medication; his illness is undisclosed.

Police in West Palm Beach have opted not to charge the young man with anything. Not much information can be released due to the boy’s age and I am sure there is a great reason for not charging him but I would certainly have an issue with that hospital.

What’s even more interesting is that another 17 year old, Matthew Scheidt, was charged and found guilty of impersonating a physician’s assistant and practicing medicine without a license back in 2012, also in Florida. That teen was convicted and faces up to 25 years in prison.

In both situations the teenage boys were said to have mental illness, so why did one get off scot-free and the other didn’t?

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Florida Teen Who Pretended to Be a Doctor Won’t Face Charges appeared first on Law Street.

I have never owned a business. Truthfully, unless it is a business consisting of only me as an employee, I have no interest in owning one; however, there are some basic tenets  that all business owners should follow. For example, have a solid business plan; make sure to know, understand, and follow all applicable employment laws; and never, ever, ever slap your employees with a bearded dragon, especially if you have a video surveillance system set up (though, admittedly, that last one is pretty hard to follow when a dragon is sitting right next to you and an employee is being a sass mouth).

What? You ask. Why in the world are you telling me not to slap people with dragons? You say. That is such an obvious mistake that nobody would do it! You yell. I hate to tell you but you are dead wrong. I can say that people who assume nobody would ever use a dragon to slap another human are wrong all thanks to Benjamin Siegel. So thank you, Siegel, for your contribution to the ridiculousness that I so love to share with others.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Let’s talk a little about this interesting case. It all started (allegedly, of course) when this business-savvy pet store owner decided it would be a good idea to put a bearded dragon in his mouth, swing it around, throw it in the air, and then use it like an eighteenth century dueling glove (in other words, he slapped his employees with it).

Now, if you think this story cannot get weirder, you would once again be mistaken. You see, this is not the first time that Siegel’s store has made the news. A couple of years ago, it rose to fame as that place that held a cockroach-eating contest where the winner choked to death on bug parts. Yes, you read that correctly.

So what is being done to protect cockroaches, dragons, and people from the strange hands (and mouth) of Mr. Siegel? He was taken into custody and now faces charges of battery and animal cruelty. His attorney says he wants to hear all the facts before he comments. I assume this is just in case Mr. Siegel has a good reason for his action; however, short of ‘it wasn’t me,’ which, since it was on video, would be hard to prove, I don’t know that I will buy any excuses here.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dragon Tails: Bearded Dragon Slapping Leads to Legal Woes appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

Earlier this week a 15-year-old girl and her 11-year-old sister were involved in a shooting at their rural Florida home. The older girl fatally shot her brother while he slept.

My first question when reading about this was, where are the parents? I bet you are wondering, too. Well the father is a truck driver who had to work from Sunday until Tuesday. That makes sense, so then where was the mother? She apparently went with her husband, leaving their 16-year-old son in charge of the household. I’m sorry, that doesn’t sound like good parenting to begin with. I would not let my children be supervised by my 16-year-old son, I would have a babysitter come or maybe only one parent should’ve gone. Perhaps the one with the job? I don’t see why the mom felt the need to leave her children. Not only did these parents decide to leave their son in charge of these girls, but also their three-year-old daughter. That’s a lot of responsibility for a teenager, and not the best idea on the parents’ part.

Reports claim that the boy locked his 15-year-old sister in her room and then fell asleep. The girl talked her 11-year-old sister into letting her out as he slept. Once freed from her room she headed into her parents’ bedroom where she knew they kept a gun; however, this young girl did not just walk through the door into the parents’ bedroom, oh no, she had to go to the outside of the house with a knife and remove the air conditioning unit that was installed in the bedroom window in order to get in, as they apparently had locked their bedroom door before they left.

The girl headed straight to the location where her parents kept their pistol, loaded it, and went into the room where her brother slept, pulling the trigger. The scary part is that the 15 year old knew what she was doing and told her 11-year-old sister to hide in a closet before she killed their brother.  After shooting her brother she buried her head in a pillow before returning to the living room to find her three-year-old sister trying to wake up her dead brother. Upon seeing this, the two older girls fled the house, leaving the three year old to fend for herself next to their dead brother. It was only after the 11 year old called a friend for a ride that police were able to find the girls.

The parents were notified and have admitted to locking up the 15 year old for up to 20 consecutive days in her bedroom for “misbehaving.” Through police reports and interviews it has also been discovered that the 15 year old had a single blanket and a bucket to use the bathroom when she was locked up.

Things make a bit more sense when you realize how neglectful and irresponsible the parents were. It’s hard to know what possibly happened to lead to being locked in the bedroom. Did the brother beat his sister before locking her in her bedroom? She could have just snapped and felt like she needed to protect herself and her siblings. Although I understand that, I feel like it was also premeditated. She knew where the gun was located, that it needed to be loaded, and to protect her little sister from seeing what was about to happen.

The 15- and 11-year-old girls are being held at a juvenile detention center while a prosecutor decides whether they should be tried as adults or not. The parents are also facing charges of child neglect and failing to supervise.

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Young Florida Sisters Held in Fatal Shooting of Older Brother appeared first on Law Street.

Prince Andrew, Duke of York, is a member of British royalty and currently fifth in the line of succession to the throne. He’s the third child of Queen Elizabeth II, and has long been the source of frustration for the royals. His actions regularly provide fodder for the tabloids, but the most recent scandal involving the Prince may go further than just making the royal family look bad. He was just named in a lawsuit filed in Florida that alleges he had sex with an underage girl.

Prince Andrew really has been a familiar face in the tabloids. His relationship with ex-wife Sarah Ferguson has faced plenty of scandal–especially when her constant debt problems are taken into account. At one point he was accused of accepting a gift from a Libyan gun smuggler. He took a $5,000 helicopter ride for 50 miles. He’s been tied to shady people multiple times, including the corrupt president of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev.

But one particularly dark mark on Prince Andrew’s biography has been his friendship with American businessman Jeffrey Epstein, who pleaded guilty to soliciting sex from an underage girl in 2008. The FBI allegedly linked him to about 40 other young women, many of whom were minors. In 2011, Epstein’s friendship with the Prince came under scrutiny after the media took pictures of the men together. There were many rumors that Prince Andrew was involved in inappropriate behavior at Epstein’s house. A 2011 Vanity Fair article stated:

According to a sworn deposition by Juan Alessi, a former employee at Epstein’s Palm Beach estate, Andrew attended naked pool parties and was treated to massages by a harem of adolescent girls.

There were also rumors that Prince Andrew had sexual contact with an underage girl who had been groomed as a prostitute by Epstein. The girl in question was 17 years old at the time and now lives in Australia. She claims to have been sexually exploited by Epstein beginning at the age of 15.

While there is a lot still unclear about Prince Andrew’s involvement with Epstein’s victims, what we do know is that there is now a civil suit against the United States government with regard to the way that federal prosecutors handled Epstein’s case. The suit argues that when the Florida prosecutors worked out a plea deal with Epstein, they violated victims’ rights laws by not talking to Epstein’s victims about the deal. Those victims’ lawyers claim that Epstein got an easy deal from the prosecution–pleading guilty to just one charge–because of his wealth and connections.

It is within the parameters of this lawsuit that Prince Andrew was named, after two of Epstein’s other victims joined the two who originally filed the suit. It’s important to note that no legal action is being taken against Prince Andrew, rather this suit just names him as part of the plaintiffs’ collection of evidence that Epstein basically organized a sex trafficking ring of underage women for his wealthy friends. He has denied the allegations.

Prince Andrew wasn’t the only famous man mentioned in these court documents. Alan Dershowitz, a well known, former Harvard Law professor and criminal defense attorney, was also named. He has also completely denied the allegations, saying:

I’m planning to file disbarment charges against the two lawyers who signed this petition without even checking the manifests of airplanes or travel itineraries, et cetera. I’m also challenging the young woman and the lawyers to level those charges against me outside of the courtroom, so that I can sue them for defamation…Finally, I’m challenging the woman to file criminal charges against me because the filing of false criminal charges is a crime.

This case is still ongoing. It will be interesting to see if Dershowitz follows through on his legal threats, or if Prince Andrew ends up playing a larger part. For right now though, it’s only the U.S. government that is facing legal action for its handling of the case.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Prince Andrew Accused of Sex With Minor in American Lawsuit appeared first on Law Street.

It’s Christmas time. And that means it is the best time of the year to go shopping. No crowded stores, no long lines, no fighting over a pair of on-sale shoes that I want to buy someone–definitely not myself, though, all my Christmas shopping is for my loved ones–with a lady who also wants to buy those shoes for someone–definitely not herself. Oh wait! That doesn’t sound like any Christmas shopping that I have ever done. Mine sounds more like this story (which took place in January 2011 not at Christmas, but which stills sounds like something that would happen at Christmas).

Frank Maio saw what my sisters would tell you was Princess Parking out in front of a Deerfield Beach shoe store. (Princess Parking, as defined by Urban Dictionary, is “just like rock star parking or prime parking; when one finds the perfect parking spot, right next to or in front of the entrance to wherever he or she is going.”) But when he went to claim the spot, something horrible occurred: Clausel Pierre pulled into the spot first!

Now, we all have experienced and/or caused this event. When it happens to me, I yell things I am not proud of yelling and fume about it for hours while plotting a revenge that I have absolutely no intention of actually enacting as big as I talk. So imagine how much I cheered when I heard what Maio did to handle this situation.

Courtesy of Giphy.

He asked Pierre to move. Tough, right? I wouldn’t have the guts to confront the guy at all; however, that actually was not the end of it. Pierre said no. I mean, he claimed something along the lines of it wasn’t reserved and he got there first and blah blah blah a whole lot of stuff that might have been true but certainly did not get Maio the royal parking spot he felt he deserved. So then he had to go a step farther.

Did I happen to mention that Maio was an off-duty cop who was at the shoe store to do some moonlighting as a security guard? Well, that is exactly what was happening here. And believe me, this cop was not afraid to use his power for his own gain. Park in the spot he wanted? Well, do not think he would be too mature to arrest you for that. Don’t believe me? Ask Pierre. Because yes, he was arrested for parking in the spot this police officer wanted.

Pierre was so confused that he was being arrested, that he called 911. You can listen to a recording of the call below. According to Pierre, the officer not only arrested him, he roughed him up a bit too.

Pierre has been fighting the charges against him (including battery against law enforcement and resisting arrest) for two years and finally he had some success! The charges were dropped (since apparently a judge realized that Maio’s statements over the last couple of years were conflicting); however, Pierre was not throwing a party over his victory. He said he’d been hurt and he wanted payback. So he recently initiated a lawsuit.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Will he win? I don’t know. But I do know that this whole thing has taught me a lesson: when someone takes a spot I think belongs to me, it might seem like a good idea to fight for it, after all, it is the principal of the thing, but if I am still fighting for it years later, it might have been an even better idea to just park a couple of spots down. Oh. And if I ever become a cop, I am going to do my best not to arrest people on trumped up charges no matter how tempting it might be to arrest the person who got in front of me at the grocery store with 500 million items when I only had like two and then wouldn’t let me cut–but I am digressing, because really, abuse of power only comes back to sue you in the long run.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Off-Duty Cop Arrests Man for Taking Parking Spot appeared first on Law Street.

TGITFWAOTW–you know that phrase, right? “Thank God it’s Time for Weird Arrests of the Week,” of course! Also, it’s Friday, which is always a good thing. Enjoy!

[SlideDeck2 id=28812 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

I hope everyone had an awesome Halloween weekend! I spent the weekend in Chicago where I was surprised to see many homeless people sitting in front of some of the most expensive shops on Michigan Avenue. Houston certainly has homeless people too, but nothing like what I saw in Chicago, where I felt like we were pretty much stepping over people who were at their rock bottom. My boyfriend has a kind heart and on several occasions this weekend gave food to the homeless, and I thought that was really sweet. So I found it really ironic when I read the news that two pastors and a 90-year-old man were charged with feeding the homeless in Ft. Lauderdale.

Arnold Abbott has been feeding homeless people in Ft. Lauderdale for nearly 20 years! He heads a group called Love Thy Neighbor and was only able to get out three or four meals of the 300 that he had prepared for the day before the cops shut him down. Abbott, Rev. Mark Sims of St. Mary Magdalene Episcopal Church in Coral Springs, and Rev. Dwayne Black, pastor of the Sanctuary Church in Ft. Lauderdale, were each cited for willfully violating a city ordinance. Police issued them notices to appear in court where they could be asked to explain their actions. Explain their actions. Why do good people have to all of a sudden explain the actions of giving a helping hand to the less fortunate? Is this the kind of world we want to live in? I know I don’t!

Everyone gets down on their luck at some point and some have it worse than others, but what’s wrong with these people wanting to help the homeless? There is a large number of homeless in the Ft. Lauderdale area, which is why something should be done about that issue. Perhaps the city council should consider creating more shelters instead of taking everything away from them, including the ordinance it passed last Spring banning homeless people from having any possessions in public. They are homeless, where are they suppose to have the few things that they own? I get that the homeless population may be growing in that city, but punishing people who are already hard on their luck is just counterproductive.

Cleaning up your city shouldn’t involve punishing those who are down on their luck and then punishing other people for trying to help.

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Pastors and Elderly Man Cited for Feeding Homeless in Ft. Lauderdale appeared first on Law Street.

Here’s my Public Service Announcement of the day, and it’s going out to our politicians: everyone hates you. Seriously. President Obama, you have an approval rating around 40 percent. Governors, some of you are doing OK, but some of you really suck. Congress — you people are currently clocking in at roughly 14 percent. Really, you are all screwed, Americans really, really hate you. The question is, do you even know that?

In light of what happened last night, I’ve got to imagine that at least a few of you haven’t gotten the memo, particularly those of you running for Governor in Florida. For those of you that haven’t seen Fangate, a.k.a. Governor Rick Scott’s really weird mental breakdown a.k.a a trio of debate moderators wishing they were anywhere else, here it is.

Politicians. This, this right here is why people hate you so much.

Let’s break this down. First of all, Charlie Crist, stop being so into your fan. I get that it’s Florida, which is basically a giant swamp. I get that feeling warm while public speaking is pretty much the worst thing ever. I too easily get overheated, and it’s gross. But never in my life have I looked so proud of a fan. And that’s exactly how Crist looks — really proud of himself and this weird fan attachment he has. He’s obviously loving this. Scott is being a whiny little baby, and he gets to call him out on it, but he still comes across as creepy and really into a fan that’s aimed at…his knees? New campaign slogan: Charlie Crist, vote for me, my knees are nice and cool.

And then there’s Rick Scott who is throwing a temper tantrum worthy of a four year old. I get that they decided the rules of the debate beforehand, and Crist broke one. But is that a real reason to not walk out on stage for a debate? The fan literally has no effect on you Rick Scott, this isn’t a political version of “The Butterfly Effect.”

So back to why people hate you two, and politicians in general. You are running for office to be the Governor of our fourth most populous state. You would be directly in charge of policies that affect just shy of 20 million people. Florida has serious problems when it comes to crime, education, health care, and immigration. Then there are all the issues that a Florida governor would have to deal with that are not necessarily currently affecting Florida, but in a fully globalized world are still relevant: the spread of Ebola, sending troops to war, natural disasters, trade. And here, the two top contenders for this job are fighting like children over a fan.

This is why so many of us hate politicians. How can you relate to a single mom who goes to a minimum wage job with a fever because she needs to provide for her kid when you can’t deal with having your fan off for a few hours? How can you relate to a young man who is shot for holding an ice tea and a bag of skittles when your privilege allows you to prolong walking out on stage as long as you want because your opponent brought an accessory you don’t approve of? How can you talk about personal responsibility when you can’t even compromise with your opponent about something as innocuous as a fan?

Politicians, this is why everyone hates you. Because you’re out of touch asshats.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Politicians: We All Hate You appeared first on Law Street.

With the long weekend coming up, you’ll have some extra time to laugh about the weird, stupid, and ill-advised things that people try to do that end with a trip to the police station. To get you started, check out the slideshow below of the five weirdest arrests this week:

[SlideDeck2 id=26400 ress=1]

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Socrate76 via Wikimedia]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

It’s Friday, which means that yet again we’ve had a week full of weird arrests. From stupid criminals, to equally stupid cops, it’s been a wild week!

[SlideDeck2 id=26091 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

It’s officially October, which means that next month is election month, which means that shit is officially getting weird! Now, the Republican party has in recent years had a hard time connecting with a few groups of voters — namely women, young people, and minorities. In response, they’ve tried to switch some things up, and I do applaud them for that. But they might want to refine their plan a little more, because some of these ads created by Republican groups have just been plain weird. Without further ado, here are the three Republican ads I’ve seen in the past few weeks that have made me scratch my head.

Republicans are People Too

I don’t even fully count this one as any sort of political ad, but rather a…Public Service Announcement?

This spot is literally just a reminder to be nicer to Republicans. Which is nice I guess, but I feel like if the Republican party is at the point where it needs to remind potential voters that it’s composed of humans, the phrase “losing battle” may apply. The group that posted this video on YouTube was called “Republicans are People Too” and posted it with the disclosure:

It seems like it’s okay to say mean things about someone just because they’re Republican. That isn’t right. Before you write another mean post about Republicans, remember Republicans are people, too.

In a super awkward turn of events, it turns out that the “Republicans” in the video are actually stock photos. Which means I’m left with some terribly pressing question: do real Republicans actually use Macs???

Overall, this spot was a nice attempt at creating polite political discourse, but it came across a bit odd and sort of like aliens trying to communicate after observing Earth for just a few weeks.

Break up With Barack Obama

Americans for Shared Prosperity released this weird and creepy exercise in sexism a couple weeks ago.

First of all, why does he have to be her boyfriend? The message is perfectly fine! This spot is saying that she doesn’t like Obama anymore because he’s been bad for foreign policy and the economy and those are incredibly valid arguments! Why does it have to be framed like he’s an abusive boyfriend? It’s just distracting from the actual point of the ad!

To be fair, this isn’t a new tactic, during the 2012 elections, Lena Dunham starred in a weird Obama ad that compared voting for the first time to losing your virginity, and it was similarly weird and creepy.

I get that it’s supposed to be provocative or go viral or something, but it’s just weird. Also it makes it seem like you shouldn’t vote if you aren’t 100 percent sure about a candidate, which is not how democracy works.

But I digress. According to the head of Americans for Shared Prosperity, John Jordan, the goal of the ad was “to communicate with women voters in a way that outside groups and campaigns haven’t. The purpose of this is to treat women voters more like adults.” With all due respect Mr. Jordan, if you’d like to treat me like an adult, talk to me about the issues. Don’t make a creepy ad pretending that the president is my abusive boyfriend.

Say Yes to the Candidate

This ad is hands down my favorite, though. Similar to the ad above, it tries to relate to young female voters through something we can understand — DRESSES!!! Created by the College Republican National Committee for use by Rick Scott in the Florida gubernatorial race, it creates a metaphor between the candidates and dresses, say yes to the dress style.

Gag.

This is the one that has hit the news over the last few days, but the CRNC also made others for tough races, with just different candidates/facts inserted in.

There’s a big disconnect here with these three ads. The first tries to convince me that I need to realize that the Republican Party has a ton of diversity, but the next two try to target me, as a young woman, with apparently the only two things I’m interested in and can understand — boys and pretty dresses.

It is genuinely good that the Republican Party has realized that it needs to do something to win over the type of voters who have traditionally not voted for them. I hope it ends up leading to higher levels of discourse, compromise, and understanding. But these kind of ads are not the way to do it.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Ryan Heaney via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Republicans May Be ‘People Too,’ But They Sure Make Narrowminded Ads appeared first on Law Street.

To blog about such a controversial topic like the use and possession of guns in the United States is something I want to tread carefully with. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion surrounding the debate, but this week I could not help but question the legality of guns when coming across two particular cases.

On Thursday, Don Spirit killed his six grandchildren, aged from three months to 10 years old, and his daughter before turning the gun on himself. Spirit, whose case has been described as a murder-suicide, was someone who had already been involved in the criminal justice system. According to Fox:

In 2001, Spirit pleaded guilty to a charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, after he fatally shot his 8-year-old son in the head in a hunting accident. Spirit, who also was convicted in 1998 for felony possession of marijuana, was sentenced to three years in prison for the shooting.

The details of the investigation are still in the very early stages, so it is hard to understand the motive — if there was one — the facts surrounding Spirit’s mental health, and his relationship with the victims. Aside from knowing these facts, I cannot help but wonder how Spirit even managed to have a gun after being convicted of a shooting in 2001? Gun accessibility legislation for ex-convicts really needs to be reconsidered in light of this case.

What I feel a lot of people fail to recognize is that the most common method of suicide in the United States is through the use of guns. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in 2011 there were 39,518 deaths by suicide. An overwhelming amount of these deaths (19,990) were the result of firearms.  If we are a country that aims to protect our citizens and the rights of others, surely we should look out for ourselves just as much? If we have such easy accessibility to the weapons of our choice that could end our lives, should we not reconsider the laws surrounding them? Do not get me wrong, I am more than aware that the black market for firearms is an ever-growing underground business, but if we cannot efficiently manage the legal selling and keeping of licensed handguns, we have no hope to stop the illegal sales and handlings.

My point needs to be extended to the safety of those living with others who have access to guns. On the same day as the tragic deaths resulting from Spirit’s heinous act, a fifth grade boy was arrested in Michigan after being found to have stolen his grandfather’s pistol. Not only was the boy found with the gun, but he had also created a list of names in the back of his homework book of people he allegedly planned to harm. As a result of this discovery, the boy has been suspended from school for ten days, and could face possible expulsion. Again, this could be my criminological thinking coming out, but I cannot help but wonder whether this punishment will actually solve the problem of what the boy intended to do? I certainly do not think he should be given jail time, or any formal sentence, but I do think that he needs to be aware of just how serious his actions were. Why? Because if he is not aware of it, what is to stop him doing it all over again, and just being more careful.

I fear that in a culture where are part of normality, when conflict arises in such intense situations, sometimes the only resolution seems to be in the form of violence via the use of weapons. I personally do not think this reflects on the attitudes and actions of those involved in this violence, I think it is the instinct that they have been taught their entire lives, to protect themselves in an extremely lethal way. In order to enact firmer laws that protect our safety, we have to start working on understanding the reason for such laws. As someone who is British, and not used to the debate on the use of guns, one of the main things I have come to realize is that it is a right for US citizens to own a gun, and by restricting this right through legislation, essentially the country contradicts all it stands for. As hard as it is to stand back from what an entire population believes in, more awareness needs to be raised toward the consequences of guns, not just for now, but for the future.

—

Hannah Kaye (@HannahSKaye) is originally from London, now living in New York. Recently graduated with an MA in criminal justice from John Jay College. Strong contenders for things she is most passionate about are bagels and cupcakes.

Featured image courtesy of [Auraelius via Flickr]

Hannah Kaye

Hannah Kaye is originally from London, now living in New York. Recently graduated with an MA in criminal justice from John Jay College. Strong contenders for things she is most passionate about are bagels and cupcakes. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Two More Disturbing Gun Cases Beg the Question When Will We Change? appeared first on Law Street.

A Florida judge has ordered the state to redraw its congressional districts by August 15th, in order to comply with the state’s Fair Districts Constitutional Amendment. This is a ruling that the Democrats have pushed for, because they feel that the state map has been drawn to give the GOP an advantage. But there is an unlikely group working against this change from within the Democratic Party–the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC).

The Florida Constitution states that no district shall be drawn with the intention of giving favor or disfavor to a particular political party. The law also states that districts shall not be drawn with the intent of denying equal opportunity to racial minorities to participate in the political process. Last month, a judge ruled that politics were taken into consideration for the drawing of two districts and that these districts made a “mockery” of the constitutional amendment. The districts that were ruled unconstitutional are the Fifth and the Tenth and can be seen below:

Thanks WtxlTV!

The judge, Terry Lewis, ruled that these two districts are drawn to divide up the Orlando area, and to connect African American voters from the Orlando and Jacksonville areas in order to favor the GOP. Lewis gave the GOP until August 15th to submit a new map for consideration, at which point he will decide whether to delay the 2014 midterm election in Florida in order to allow the new map to be implemented, or to wait until 2016 to implement the changed map. The Democratic Party backed this suit and is pushing for the districts to be implemented for the 2014 election. Democrats currently have 10 of the 27 seats in Florida, and could stand to gain a couple seats if the map is redrawn. But the CBC, made up entirely of Democrats, is against overturning the current map.

Marcia Fudge, the chairwoman of the CBC, sent a strongly worded letter to Steve Israel, head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). Fudge wrote, “per our prior discussion, we are extremely disturbed by the DCCC’s efforts to dismantle CBC districts in states that have historically proven to be difficult to elect minority members.” Her issue is that Florida’s Fifth District is represented by CBC member Congresswoman Corrine Brown, and the redistricting effort might cause her to lose her seat. This may seem a bit odd, as Democrats stand to gain seats overall with a new map, but the Fifth District is an example of packing. Packing is a form of gerrymandering where a certain group or party is packed as much as possible into one district, in order to make sure there voting power only impacts on district. In the case of Florida’s Fifth, Republicans packed African Americans from Jacksonville and Orlando together, to make sure their votes would only impact a district that would go Democrat anyways. Because of the way the Fifth is currently drawn, it is no surprise the Democratic Party nominated an African American candidate that went on to win. But if the map is redrawn and the African American voters in the Fifth are divided, it will may result in more white Democrats being elected, and Brown could lose her seat. This would occur because the Fifth currently has a majority of African American voters, but if the Orlando and Jacksonville parts of the district are split, Brown’s district will change. So while the Democratic Party stands to gain seats, the CBC has to contend with possibly losing a member.

This issue is a reflection of what is fundamentally wrong with our election system. A minority group is actually advocating to keep a district that was gerrymandered by the opposing political party. That being said, were the Fifth to be divided, it is by no means certain Brown would lose her seat. But the CBC is opposing the change because they feel like African Americans are already underrepresented in Congress. Perhaps this whole issue–a judge forcing the redrawing of a map, considering delaying a election, and the CBC opposing a change that would benefit its own party–is evidence that we need election reform that would fairly represent all Americans. We need to stop allowing mapmakers to decide who Americans are going to be represented by.

—

Matt DeWilde (@matt_dewilde25) is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Jaxport via Flickr]

Matt DeWilde

Matt DeWilde is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Redrawing the Map: Florida’s Congressional Mess appeared first on Law Street.

Lynching, torture, and deliberately planned hate crimes bring to mind antiquated racist and religious extremist groups like the infamous Ku Klux Klan. Tragically, these groups are not things of the past. In fact, many of them remain at large in the United States. The radical religious ideologies of these groups drive their members to commit and justify heinous crimes. Most sources agree on a loose definition of religious extremism as people who commit, promote, or support purposely hurtful, violent, or destructive acts against others for what they deem to be religious reasons. A substantial number of these Christian, Islamic, and Jewish groups still operate via bases in the United States.

Recently, a Florida police department shockingly discovered a former officer’s connection to the notorious KKK. Though the number of Klan members has dwindled to about 500, they still exist in the form of smaller sects throughout the states.

Determining which of the modern Christian extremist groups contains the most members is almost unfeasible due to the shroud of secrecy under which they conduct their operations. For example, the activities of the Christian terrorist group, the Phineas Priesthood are often impossible to attribute to its members. Phineas Priests, who desire a North America that is entirely Christian and white, differ from other white supremacist groups in that they hold no meetings. To become a member, one must commit ‘Phineas acts,’ which are violent acts against non-whites.

Click here to see our infographic on religious extremist groups

Another extremist group identifying itself as Christian is the Sheriff’s Posse Comitatus. Specifically, this group targets employees of the IRS and FBI, claiming that they violate the rights of Americans. Posse members were much more active during the 70s and 80s than they are today. During those years, the group’s membership was estimated somewhere between 12 and 15 thousand. In the late 1980s, the popularity of the Posse’s ideology declined dramatically. One of its leaders, James Wickstrom, attempted to bring the Posse back to life in the 1990s, though he emphasized the racist aspects of the Posse’s ideology to the near-exclusion of the rest of the group’s principles.

Islamist extremist groups today receive arguably the most media attention. Many of these groups have bases in the Middle East as well as a myriad of countries around the globe. For example, both Al-Fuqra and Al-Qaeda operate in the United States as well as abroad. Al-Qaeda, possibly the most notorious terrorist group, devastated the world with its 2001 attack on the World Trade Center in New York. Recently, however, some argue that the newly formed ISIS in Iraq will usurp the position of most prominent religious extremist group, although it does not currently operate in the United States.

The Jewish extremist group the Jewish Defense League flourished until recently. Now, the only prominent Jewish terrorist group operating in the United States is Nation of Yaweh, though its activities diminished significantly following the death of its founder and leader in 2007.

Aum Shinrikyo, also known as Aleph, is a group primarily based in Japan that cannot be associated with one single religion. Members adhere to Christian, Buddhist, and Islamic ideals among others. Despite its presence in the United States, the group has performed no notable attacks in North America; however, members have committed multiple heinous acts in Japan, including the sarin attack of a Tokyo subway in 2005.

The United States and its allies are not standing idly by as the threat of extreme terrorism driven by religious ideologies grows, yet combating these groups can be difficult due to the important role of religious freedom in America. As stated by journalist Neil J. Kressel, “many political leaders, for example, have argued that religiously motivated evil always represents a corruption of true religion…We should…start with the assumption that ethical and reasonable people – whether religious, agnostic, or atheistic – will typically disdain and reject destructive violence and intolerance perpetrated in the name of religious faith or other ideologies.”

Various countries worldwide devote significant time and resources to CVE, or countering violent terrorism. CVE efforts began in the United States as a response to the growing threat on its turf of Muslim extremist groups. One of the main ways the U.S. tries to combat religious extremism is to reduce sympathy and support for its causes.

The FBI’s website extensively explains the core goal of the new U.S. strategy as outlined in a 2011 White House document, “Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States.” The goal of the FBI and other law enforcement agencies is “to prevent violent extremists and their supporters from inspiring, radicalizing, financing, or recruiting individuals or groups in the United States to commit acts of violence.” The document emphasizes the plans of the United States to focus on combating extremism in three areas. First, the government plans to provide support and education to local communities that may be targeted by violent extremists. It also plans to build up “government and law enforcement expertise for preventing violent extremism” and counter extremist propaganda.

With continued efforts from world leaders and citizens, perhaps someday the world can be free of these acts of extreme violence in the name of religion.

—

Marisa Mostek (@MarisaJ44) loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured Image Courtesy of [Ras67 via wikipedia.org]

Marisa Mostek

Marisa Mostek loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Violence in the Name Of Religion appeared first on Law Street.

Parents don’t have the luxury of choosing where they are when their babies drop the bomb. When nature calls, mothers and fathers alike run to restrooms to change dirty diapers, soothing both their babies and the ears of the public. But fathers across the nation have long been frustrated by the lack of changing tables in men’s restrooms. Lawmakers across the country are finally starting to right this wrong.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 90 percent of fathers who live with children under the age of five change diapers. When a father goes to change his baby’s diaper at the pizza place in town, he’s forced to either struggle on a dirty bathroom floor or balance the baby on his lap. He has a right to be frustrated, because if he was a she, it probably wouldn’t be such a struggle.

Currently there is no federal or state legislation mandating gender-based accessibility to changing tables. But as equality in parenting increases, we may need to make some changes. California State Senators Lois Wolk and Ricardo Lara support legislation to require adequate baby diaper changing stations in public restrooms, regardless of gender. Bills 1350 and 1358 recently passed out of the California Senate Transportation and Housing Committee with bipartisan support.

Bill Breakdown

If they pass the California Assembly, the bills would go into effect on January 1, 2015. Senate Bill 1350, backed by Lara, mandates that public accommodations that undertake substantial renovations (exceeding $10,000) or install new restrooms assure open access to baby changing stations regardless of restroom gender assignment.

Senator Wolk supports the more stringent bill, 1358. Under this legislation, all public accommodations would require “…mandatory building standards for the installation of baby diaper changing accommodations in restroom facilities…” This bill would create a ripple effect by making more baby changing stations available to modern families.

This isn’t the first time a region has tried to create equality for men on diaper-duty. Pittsburgh City Councilor Natalia Rudiak proposed a bill in July 2013 that would require all city-owned buildings and facilities to offer baby changing stations for both men and women. In response to those opposed to the bill, Rudiak said the stations were fairly low-cost and would not require extensive construction.

Likewise, in July 2013, Miami-Dade County, Florida passed the Baby-Diaper Changing Accommodations Ordinance, which requires all businesses to provide baby changing stations in men’s, women’s, and unisex restrooms. Businesses in violation of the ordinance must pay a Civil Penalty of $500. The efforts of these Pittsburgh and Miami-Dade legislators are just some of the first in an effort to make parenting easier for both moms and dads.

Diaper Dads

Fathers across the nation are pleased by these new efforts. Several daddy bloggers track restrooms with diaper changing stations in restaurants, movie theaters, businesses, and other public buildings. One blogger who calls himself  “daddydoinwork,” called on his fellow fathers to publicize the lack of changing tables in men’s restrooms in order to create change.

The Pew Research Center conducted a study in 2013 and discovered that there are more than 2.6 million single fathers in the United States. The number of fathers who act as primary caregivers is increasing–especially as our modern society becomes more accepting of single parenting and homosexual parenting. Furthermore, the trend of stay-at-home-dads is rising–they comprise a total 3.5 percent of married couples with children in which one parent works full-time.

Our ever-changing society requires complimentary progress in our public facilities. This is no grand task–baby changing tables are easily installed and low-cost. If fathers were given more opportunities to easily change their babies’ diapers, establishments would better fulfill their responsibilities to serve the public’s needs. Businesses should also follow the lead–help out our diaper duty dads, and maybe they’ll leave a nice tip.

—

Natasha Paulmeno (@natashapaulmeno)

Featured image courtesy of [Tex Batmart via Flickr]

Natasha Paulmeno

Natasha Paulmeno is an aspiring PR professional studying at the University of Maryland. She is learning to speak Spanish fluently through travel, music, and school. In her spare time she enjoys Bachata music, playing with her dog, and exploring social media trends. Contact Natasha at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A Good but Stinky Step for Parenting Equality appeared first on Law Street.

Army dismissal, felony conviction, homelessness, law degree? While certainly unconventional, that is the path that Desmond Meade took to obtain his law degree from Florida International University. After graduating high school in 1985, Meade pursued a career in the United States Army, which ended after he was caught stealing liquor while stationed in Hawaii. He returned to Miami, and was convicted of several drug charges as a result of living the fast-paced life of a celebrity bodyguard. In 1995, his mother passed away and shortly after, his family home was foreclosed. In 2001, Meade was sentenced and served 15 years in prison for possession of a firearm as a felon. After his early release, he found himself homeless on the streets of Miami. According to Mead in an interview The Miami Times, “when you’re homeless, there’s a harsh emotional aspect, no one really cared one way or another if you lived or if you died.” It was at this point that he realized that he needed to do something drastic to make positive changes in his life.

Meade turned his life around and completed the Chapman Partnership drug treatment program, a program specifically designed to help the homeless through their recovery. After he successfully completed the program, he graduated summa cum laude in paralegal studies from Miami-Dade Community College’s North Campus in 2010. He then took the next step, and enrolled in Florida International University Law School, from which he just graduated this past May.

Now, at the age of 46, Meade stands proud and with a newfound purpose in life. He is using his personal experiences to drive him in his work. He said, “I realized all the pain and suffering I went through all my life became worthwhile when I used it to help someone else, I realized that was my purpose — to help those less fortunate.” Meade is now the director of Lifelines to Healing Campaign, a PICO United program that aims to address and end the root causes of violence in cities across the country. In addition, Meade is working with the program to end mass incarceration in Florida.

However, there is still one thing standing in his way: Florida state law prohibits convicted felons from practicing law. So while Meade spent the past three years taking classes to prepare him for practicing law in Florida, he is unable to do so. Rather than move to another state where convicted felons are free to practice law, Meade is prepared to stay and fight for change in his home state. He says, “I’m going to stay here. I’m going to fight. What I went through to get where I am today, I have no choice but to have faith.”

This raises an interesting question–should convicted felons be allowed to practice law? Nearly every state has rules about getting a license to practice law, most of which make it nearly impossible for convicted felons to get their license. According to James Hirby at The Law Dictionary, “the person to be licensed must have objective evidence that he or she is a person of good moral character, complete rehabilitation, and a member of the community” in order to get their license to practice law. Many feel that a felony conviction is a direct contradiction to these qualities, which is why in most states–such as Florida, where Meade resides–convicted felons are barred from getting their license to practice.

While there is certainly a strong argument for this rule, not every convicted felon has bad moral character. States like Florida should have processes that make it possible for convicted felons to redeem themselves in a way and be allowed to practice law so long as they can pass the bar and follow the guidelines like everybody else. For example, in the state of Washington, convicted felons that wish to take the bar exam must go before the state bar’s ethics and morality committee and argue why they are fit to practice law. While there is certainly a high standard when arguing before the committee, this process makes it possible for convicted felons to get a second chance. People do change, and like Meade, they grow and learn from the mistakes that they have made.  While it is too soon to say whether or not Meade’s actions will have any effect on Florida law, he has already been an inspiration to people everywhere. He has shown that no matter where you come from, you can accomplish your goals with hard work and perseverance.

—

Brittany Alzfan (@BrittanyAlzfan) is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [ACLU of Southern California via Flickr]

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post From Felon to Lawyer: The Inspiring Story of Desmond Meade appeared first on Law Street.

After a botched execution in Oklahoma rose questions about the cruelty of the death penalty last month, capital punishment is in the news again this week. The Supreme Court has ruled a Florida law unconstitutional that barred the execution of any prisoner with an IQ less than 70, after the case was heard in March. The law was intended to prevent inhumane treatment of those prisoners, but the Justices who voted to strike down the law stated that a strict IQ cut off did not take into account inherent issues with IQ tests. The ruling was 5-4, with the more liberal side of the court voting to overturn Florida’s law. The perennial swing vote, Justice Anthony Kennedy swung to their side.

The problem with such an inflexible law is that it allowed some prisoners, who fell just above the 70 point threshold, to be executed. IQ tests are not even close to absolute–there is a margin of error that needs to be taken into account. Someone with an IQ of 71 could have the same mental capacities as someone who receives an IQ test of 69. Florida’s law doesn’t recognize that. There is also the fact that IQ can vary over time. When you reach your 50s or 60s, your score will usually go down by a point or two. There’s also the problem that our IQ scores, as a society, have changed over time. Every decade, our average IQ scores go up by about 3 points. Finally, there’s the matter of education–people who had more access to education may score higher on an IQ test, even if their mental abilities are the same as another with less education. The benchmark of “70” means little to nothing, other than an arbitrary number used to decide the future of some prisoners.

Many US states that still allow capital punishment have some sort of IQ or capability requirement in order to sentence a prisoner to death. However, most of those states take a holistic look at prisoners, incorporating psychological assessments and recognizing the margin of error that is present in an IQ test. Florida was one of the few with a purely numerical cutoff, but the others with similar laws will also be forced to reevaluate their policies. The other states are Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, and Washington. Although Kansas’s death penalty hasn’t actually been used in half a century, and Washington may be moving towards abolishing theirs.

The case that made it to the Supreme Court involved a man named Freddie L. Hall. He has been in prison since 1978, when he was convicted of murdering a 21-year-old woman who was pregnant. His execution has been hanging in the balance due to his borderline IQ scores. He has taken nine IQ tests over roughly the last 50 years. On those tests, he has scored anywhere from low 60s to 80. His most recent tests have hovered right around that 70 benchmark–a few over and a few under. However, not all of his tests have been deemed admissible in court and the one that was used in his most recent hearing had a score of 71. That means that Hall was just one point about the 70 cutoff, even though there’s no evidence to suggest that he consistently could score above 70. Throughout Hall’s entire life, his doctors had classified him as mentally disabled based not just on IQ scores but on other tests and on their analysis.

As a result of the rule regarding Hall, and the changes that the nine aforementioned states will have to make, there are a few prisoners who may get another chance at appealing the ruling that put them on death row.

This is a great step towards a recognition that IQ tests have not, for a long time, been conclusive, and that something as serious as the death penalty needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis whenever possible.

[New Republic]

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Biologycorner via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post IQ Requirements for Death Penalty to Change Due to SCOTUS Ruling appeared first on Law Street.

In trying to impress at my job, I’ve noticed a shift in priorities. Gone are the days where I have time to do back-to-back classes at my gym and then go for a run. Instead, I spend much of my free time thinking about work or working. #worklifebalance

I still try to eat healthily, but the reality is that when I’m stressed out I become a garbage disposal. It’s not pretty and I’m not proud of it. For years, I’ve relied on my metabolism to get me through these binges. At the ripe age of 27 (almost 28…sheesh), my body is rebelling. My body is a traitor.

The treasonous activity started about two weeks ago, when I walked into my apartment from work. There are lots of mirrors in my place (I’m vain), and as I passed one in the entryway to my bedroom I peripherally noticed that my stomach entered the room before I did.

Okay, so maybe I’ve been “too busy” to go to the gym.  Maybe I’ve discovered a delicious pizza place that delivers to my apartment.  Maybe I thought calories, much like the moon landing, were fictitious.*

Whatever the case, I am getting perilously close to chunky town, and I have worked too hard to go back! Correct: I’ve forgotten where I came from!

I’ve started a new regimen though, so salvation isn’t too far (hopefully).  Once I came to terms with my fledgling obesity, I decided to make Michelle Obama proud and get fit!

I’m back to working out before work, which means waking up before the sun rises. Ugh. I’ve also started a meal delivery plan, which I plan to use for the next three to four months. Double ugh (Yes I recognize that these steps are extreme, but I’m the #ManInMiami, there is pressure here!).

I guess the moral of this story is the pursuit of greatness at work has tipped the work-life balance scales, which resulted in a ten-pound weight gain and the unfortunate protrusion of my stomach.

Please note that I’m going to be a very unhappy camper for the next few months. Why, you ask?

*the moon landing is totally real!

—

Peter Davidson is a recent graduate of law school who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Tweet him @PeterDavidsonII

Featured image courtesy of  [Alan Cleaver via Wikipedia]; As always, .gifs from RealityTVgifs

Peter Davidson II

Peter Davidson is a recent law school graduate who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Contact Peter at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post These Pounds Aren’t Loyal appeared first on Law Street.

Whether its for spring break, summer vacation, or anything in between, Florida remains a top destination for vacationers in the U.S. Miami is perhaps one of the most frequented cities for this reason. Miami is a great city to vacation in for twenty somethings: not only are there beaches, but Miami boasts one of the best night life scenes in the country. It’s no surprise that the city attracts a variety of people. But whether you are planning a trip to Miami or even considering a move to this Florida city, it’s important to know what laws are on the books in order to have a fun but safe time there.

Drinking Laws

When you’re going to Florida to vacation and you’re 21 or older, odds are you would be interested in consuming alcoholic beverages. Here are some things you might want to know about Miami’s alcohol policy:

• There is an open container law on the books. Miami maybe a party town, but it certainly isn’t NOLA. Getting caught with an open container could result in a fine of 50 dollars. According to the Miami News Times, this regulation isn’t very heavily enforced. But unless you want to lose some money, it’s better to finish up that drink inside.
• Purchasing alcohol: In most counties of Florida, the sale of alcohol on Sunday is prohibited. However, in Miami-Dade county, liquor stores are allowed to remain open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. You can therefore buy alcohol at any time if you are of age, but stay safe!

The Beach

Miami is famous for its coastline, and a visit to Miami isn’t complete without spending some time relaxing by the ocean. Here are some important things you should know about the use of Miami’s beaches:

• The beach does close. Miami Beach is closed from 12 AM to 5 AM. And this law will be enforced. So if you were planning on taking a dip in the middle of the night, you’d better make other arrangements.
• There are also specific hours when a life guard is on duty. Miami beaches’ hours happen to be from 9:30AM to 6PM. While the beach is open during times when no lifeguard is present, it is highly advised that beach goers swim when a lifeguard is on duty.
• It should also be known that cans of any kind, alcoholic or otherwise, are prohibited on the beach. Styrofoam containers are also unlawful to have with you while on the beach. The Miami News Times noted that individual had been given a fifty dollar fine for the possession of a Diet Coke can and a styrofoam container while on the beach, so this law is enforced. It may seem more economical to bring your own snacks and beverages to the beach, but treat yourself to a lunch in a cafe instead.

Pets

Moving to the area and have a pet or looking to get one? Make sure you don’t violate these rules:

• In Miami Dade County, pets must not be chained or tethered outside without you present. This means you can’t keep your dog tied to a pole while you eat lunch in a restaurant. So if you’re running errands or meeting friends for a meal, keep Fido at home.
• Dogs have to wear tags at all times and must be registered yearly.
• You cannot take your pet on a bus or train without the animal being kept in a cage or carrier.

Florida State-Wide Laws

Miami residents and visitors should also respect state-wide laws. Miami-goers should be considerate of these laws as well, including:

• No texting while driving. A new law took effect in October that outlaws texting while operating a vehicle, making Florida the 41st state with this law on the books.
• Concealed weapons: Florida is a unique state in that it allows concealed weapons to be carried with a license. This isn’t to say that you should go to Florida to carry around a gun for fun, but rather it’s a warning to stay extra careful.

There are many other laws to take note of while traveling or moving to Miami, Florida, but this is a starting guide. Miami is a great city, and knowing the laws of the city and state of Florida can help you to have a fun and risk-free visit.

[Miami News Times] [Legal Beer] [Miami Beach] [Miami Dade] [Miami Herald]

—

Sarah Helden (@shelden430)

Featured Image Courtesy of [Marc Averette via Wikipedia]

Sarah Helden

Sarah Helden is a graduate of The George Washington University and a student at the London School of Economics. She was formerly an intern at Law Street Media. Contact Sarah at staff@LawStreetmedia.com.

The post Traveling to Miami: Here Are the Legal Need to Knows appeared first on Law Street.

I’ve been gone for a minute, now I’m back with the jump off.

Where have I been?

I’ve been MIA in MIA for a couple of weeks now, which I’m sure has been devastating for some readers…right? (Editor’s note: YES!)

My job has been crazy recently! By crazy, I mean 12-hour days and weekends. It’s a lot of work, but I actually still like what I’m doing (which is a good thing). Besides, I’ve complained enough about being fun-employed; I can’t start complaining about actually having a job — then I’d sound like a bratty millennial.

This is why we all went to law school, right?  I mean, we were warned that these days would come: early mornings, long nights, busy weekends, and frequent cancellations of previously made plans.

All of this work can be overwhelming. Last Monday night I was driving home from work and called one of my friends. Rihanna* (not her real name) is a second-year associate at a big law firm in New York. Rihanna makes tons of money and works all of the time. Our conversation went something like this:

Me: “Hey, how are you? How’s work? I’m headed home after 14 hours and am so exhausted!”

Rihanna: “I’m good, just busy. I turned in three memos today and got assignments for five more. It never stops!”

Me: “I know! I mean, I’m not complaining, I like my job, but…I miss sitting on my couch doing nothing. It never happens anymore!”

Rihanna: “Correct. It won’t happen for a few more months, either. Just get used to it; you’re the newest person at your job now, but you won’t always be at the bottom. Soon you’ll be delegating your crappy work to someone else. Until then, take your vitamins and try and create some semblance of a routine.”

This was some good advice, and I’m trying my hardest to follow it exactly. I wake up obscenely early to get to the gym and eat breakfast, which usually results in (i) extra energy, and (ii) increased productivity. Jealous?

I’m now fully realizing the major lesson of law school: getting as much out of your body and brain while giving it as little rest and relaxation as possible. The delicate imbalance of physical activity (working) and mental breaks (sleeping) is perfected during the 3-4 years of law school, and by the time we’re done taking the bar we really have it down pat.

I know it won’t always be like this, and in a couple of weeks I’ll get back to sleeping 8-ish hours a night. Until then, I’ll maintain an unhealthy daily intake of caffeine (green tea!) and perhaps invest in some stay-awake pills. It worked for Jessie Spano, right?

But seriously…I’m tired.

—

Peter Davidson is a recent graduate of law school who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Tweet him @PeterDavidsonII.

Featured image courtesy of David Goehring via Flickr

.gifs courtesy of RealityTVgifs

Peter Davidson II

Peter Davidson is a recent law school graduate who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Contact Peter at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post But This Lawyer is le Tired appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome back to “Life of a Legal Post Grad,” a column which will quite soon be serving its initial purpose: describing the life of a young legal professional navigating his way through this crazy world of the law.

By “quite soon” I mean in a couple of days. I’ve been at my job for two weeks now and I already have (awesome) stories. Stay tuned. This week, though, let’s talk about this crazy-fast transition that I’m going through in my life. Mmmmmk?

To recap: 2013 was dark. Like…Disney dark. (P.S., if you don’t get the dark undertones in most Disney movies, you should set aside a few hours this weekend and rewatch your childhood favorites, because…whoa). The lone highlight of 2013 was seeing Rihanna in concert. I kept saying, “2014 has to be better.”

Well, here we are, and 2014 is covered in light, roses, bunnies, and all other things good and cute.  I may be the happiest that I’ve ever been in my adult life. Why, you ask? Because of all the ch-ch-ch-changes!

First of all, I have a legal job that I love.  It’s only been a week and a half, but everything is coming up roses so far. I work for a really cool company, I do dynamic legal work, and I work with awesome and intelligent people. Every day I’m challenged and pushed to be better, which is what I had in mind when I first entered law school. This job actually makes me want to be a lawyer, which is new and unexpected. BUT ENOUGH ABOUT THAT!

Second, the weather: let’s talk about wearing shorts and flip-flops in January. Or we can discuss reviewing contracts poolside. Entertain the notion of shifting the liability to a third party on the beach, even. All of these are now my options! Two weeks ago I lived in D.C.; the same D.C. that was shut down for two days last week because of the resurgence of the polar vortex (speaking of, that weather pattern really sucks).

The “downside” to life (just kidding! there is none!) is driving everywhere. I’m a walker. I’ve previously lived in Washington, D.C., Boston, and New York: all of these are major cities with wide-ranging public transportation systems and a walkable urban plan that renders ownership of a car unnecessary and burdensome. Friends, Florida is not like that; a car is a necessary part of life. Now I’m a commuter! Every morning I wake up, start my car, drive to Starbucks, and sit in highway traffic on my way to work (if you care, I take 95 to 195). This may seem normal to some, but I have literally never had to be so alert before 9:00 a.m. In fact, for the first few days of commuting, I drove in absolute silence with my hands resolutely placed at the 10:00 and 2:00 positions. Every five minutes I’d say out loud: “Don’t kill yourself or anyone else.” Luckily I’m more comfortable now, and it’s become less of a burden. Sometimes I even get a bit of road rage, and then I’m all:

All in all, I’m having an amazing time. I have a newfound admiration for the law — so much so that I plan on taking the Florida Bar exam this summer. I never thought I would voluntarily sit for the bar exam, but I figure if I want to make a life and career here, it’s the next logical step. More importantly, it’s what my instincts are telling me to do, and I’m still inclined to follow them. It’s worked out so far!

—

Peter Davidson is a recent graduate of law school who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Tweet him @PeterDavidsonII.

Featured image courtesy of [Sandra Cohen-Rose and Colin Rose via Flickr]

Featured .gifs courtesy of [RealityTVgifs]

Peter Davidson II

Peter Davidson is a recent law school graduate who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Contact Peter at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Times They Are a-Changin’ appeared first on Law Street.

“And when you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you to achieve it.”  – Paulo Coelho, The Alchemist

Oh hey.  What’s up?

Welcome to the January 15 edition of “Life of a Legal Post Grad.” I’ve been writing this blog for almost five months, and it has served as a capsule of what my mindset was during the tail end of 2013.  I have been anxious, tired, pissed, over it, hopeful, and many other emotions.  When I look back on this post five months from now, I will know what I was feeling: excitement.

I’ve got news.

I’m writing this from sunny south Florida, a state to which I have relocated.

You read that correctly.

I moved!

I spent much of last year talking and writing about either being totally unfulfilled and/or not following my gut.  This year, I figured I had two options: keep complaining or do something new.  I chose the latter. Why did I move?  At first the reasons were purely selfish.  I have a few friends down here, and after last week’s Polar Vortex I knew that I needed a major change.

Don’t worry, I didn’t completely shift life plans.  I have a new and awesome (legal) job, about which I am extremely excited.  We’ll talk about it another time. I have a place to stay, which is a terrible thing to call where I live.  I have a new “home,” and I am excited that it has become my home so quickly.

Living down here is completely not a part of the plan that I had for my life. The last six months of 2013 made me realize that plans frequently sink faster than you can say “you sunk my battleship!”  I embraced change and am really excited to see where this new path takes me!

Things I’ve noticed in my first 36 hours as a south Florida resident: it is much easier to be productive in cold weather.  In my first day and a half here, I have: gone to dinner, gone to breakfast, gone to lunch, dropped off forms at my new job, gone to happy hour, gone to dinner again, cracked my iPhone screen (ughhh), and watched “Vanderpump Rules.” Things I have not done in my first 36 hours here: grocery shopped, looked for a gym or yoga studio, purchased sunscreen. Oh well.  I will get to all of the important stuff in the next few days.

For now, I’m just kind of marveling at the awesomeness that is 2014.  I decided on January 2 that I was going to move down here for an extended period and figure out my life.  On January 3, I started applying to legal and non-legal jobs.  I knew that applying to jobs in this area would be difficult for many reasons, mainly: (1) I had applied to literally hundreds of jobs in D.C. and New York.  If I couldn’t find jobs in the two main legal markets, there is no way I’d find one in Miami; (2) I took the New York bar, not the Florida bar, and there is no reciprocity; and (3) I have absolutely no ties to this city, save for a few friends.  I had resigned myself to living down here and being a socialite.

Instead, I heard back from two or three jobs within days.  I had lined up interviews for when I moved down here, and I figured I’d be working somewhere by the end of the month. Here’s where it gets crazy (or cray cray, as the kids say): one of the jobs pushed my interview up a week and conducted it via Skype, then offered me the position at the end of the interview. What’s more cray cray? I accepted!

I start my new job very soon, and I’m so excited.  More importantly, I work for an AWESOME company.  I’ll talk about what I do at a later date, but trust me when I say that you will die. Not literally, but in a very figurative sense you will die. And, the job is legal! I talked so much trash for years about not wanting to be a traditional lawyer, and it turns out that’s exactly what I will be for the next few years. I may even learn to like this profession.

For all who have read this weekly column and seen the evolution of my complaints, thank you for bearing with me.  For all who had a similarly unfortunate 2013 and are looking forward to an awesome 2014, it’s coming.

Lastly, “Life of a Legal Post Grad” is about to get a lot more legal. Sorry in advance!

—

Peter Davidson is a recent graduate of law school who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Tweet him @PeterDavidsonII.

Featured image courtesy of [Timothy Wildey via Flickr]

.gifs courtesy of RealityTVgifs

Peter Davidson II

Peter Davidson is a recent law school graduate who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Contact Peter at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Surprise! You’re Hired appeared first on Law Street.

In California, an undocumented immigrant who goes to college, law school, and passes the bar now has the ability to be granted a law license.

It’s all because of a young man named Sergio C. Garcia. He was brought to the United States for the first time when he was just over a year old, and spent his childhood going back and forth from California and Mexico. He moved permanently to California at 17. He was brought by his father, who already had a green card. Garcia was approved for a green card himself by state officials, and told that he would receive one when it became available to him.

He then waited for 19 years for that green card. He put that time he waited to good use. He worked his way through college and law school, and then passed the state bar exam. Now 36, he wants to be a lawyer in the country he has called home for almost two decades. Garcia stated, “I am 36 years old. This is the home I know. This is the country I know. And this is the country I want to work for and fight for.”

When Garcia first passed the bar, there were laws in California that allowed anyone to become a lawyer who had some sort of legal standing–including a student visa or a green card. But because Garcia had never actually physically received a green card, the Justice Department claimed he didn’t qualify. And there is federal law that precludes an undocumented immigrant from being admitted to the bar. A former prosecutor with the state bar named Larry DeSha explained the position of those who did not want to admit Garcia, stating,

He can’t say he is going to fulfill his duties as attorney when one of those duties is to uphold all federal laws, when he’s here illegally. And no one can administer the oath to him knowing he’s going to be illegal the minute he puts his hand down. And the other thing is clients can’t pay him money. And any client who finds out that he is illegal has to fire him under federal law.

Garcia’s case eventually made it to the state Supreme Court. It was at that point that Gov. Jerry Brown and the California legislature passed the law allowing Garcia and those like him to receive their law licenses. This new law went into effect officially on January 1, 2014.

Yesterday, the State Supreme Court ruled that under this new law, Garcia is allowed to receive his law license and officially begin to practice law in his home state of California. The decision by the Court was unanimous. As a result of the new California law, the court wrote, “we conclude there is no state law or state public policy that would justify precluding undocumented immigrants, as a class from obtaining a law license in California.”

The decision has been praised by many. A spokesperson for California Attorney General Kamala Harris exclaimed that California’s success, “has hinged on the hard work and self-sufficiency of immigrants like Sergio.”

This California case may set a strong precedent. Similar cases are up for play in Florida and New York. This story out of California is an interesting twist in American immigration rights and law as the federal government remains essentially deadlocked.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Ed Uthman via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Welcome California’s Newest Lawyer: Sergio C. Garcia appeared first on Law Street.

The United States will be able to report a lower number of executions in 2013. Thirty-nine people were executed in nine different states, a 10% reduction from 2012. Twenty-three of those executions took place in just two states–Florida and Texas. To put this in context, in 1999, there were 98 people executed for their crimes. In addition, eighty new death sentences were handed out, which is a dramatic shift from 315 just 19 years ago.

There has also been a slow but perceptible trend of death penalty abolition on the state level. There are now 18 states and the District of Columbia that have abolished the death penalty. Six of these states have done so since 2007.

So, why? Why are we seeing a reduction in executions?

There a few different viable answers. The first is a declining availability of the drugs used in lethal injection. The vast majority of executions in the United States are done by lethal injection, although there are occasionally exceptions, and some states still allow methods such as firing squads or hanging.

But the states that intend to carry out death penalty sentences by lethal injection have run into a problem. Most of the drugs used come from European-based companies, and in 2011, the European Commission put extremely tight regulations on the import of those drugs. Some European drug companies, such as Danish-based Lundbeck which produces one of the most efficient and popular drugs for use during a lethal injection, flat out banned its use during executions. The death penalty has been abolished in all European states with the exception of Belarus.

As a result, states are scrambling to find a way to carry out lethal injections. Some states have experienced with drug cocktails, and others use untested drugs. According to Richard Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center, “the states are scrambling to find the drugs. They want to carry out these executions that they have scheduled, but they don’t have the drugs and they’re changing and trying new procedures never used before in the history of executions”. Some lawsuits have alleged that this experimentation could be considered cruel and unusual punishment and has led to stays on executions in the state of California, among others.

Another proposed reason for the drop in executions is the discovery of evidence that proves the innocence of many people who had been previously executed. Improved forensic technology and DNA testing show that trials do not always result in justice. Groups such as the Innocence Project attempt to exonerate people who have been convicted of crimes, and since 1989, there have been 311 post-conviction exonerations based on DNA evidence alone. Eighteen of those people were awaiting their executions on death row.

Finally, the trend may be attributed to a number of other reasons. Part of it may be moral–the US stands essentially alone among its allies in its use of the death penalty. Another reason may be that most violent offenders die in prison anyways, which makes prosecutors and judges less likely to push for it.

Whatever the reason for the diminished use of the death penalty over the last few years, it will be interesting to see if it sticks. If those who attribute the shift to the inability to get the appropriate medications are correct, we should see an uptick in executions as that issue is resolved. If it’s more about the moral constraints, maybe executions will continue to lessen. Either way, capital punishment in the US will change.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [CACorrections via Wikipedia]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Is the US Done With the Death Penalty? appeared first on Law Street.

I have made known how I feel about Toronto Mayor Rob Ford.  The cliff notes version is that I think he is a joke.  My colleague Annaliese wrote a pretty funny sendup of him as well.  He has been discussed ad nauseum in the media as of late, mainly for being a mess of a politician and human being.

A few hundred miles away, a different city has been talking about a different politician. Rep. Radel is a freshman congressman in the U.S. House of Representatives and represents Florida’s 19th Congressional District.  In October, he was arrested for purchasing three-and-a-half grams of cocaine from an undercover police officer. This activity, of course, is frowned upon.

Rep. Trey Radel, courtesy of U.S. Government (Office of Congressman Trey Radel) via Flickr.

Ok, I have to be honest.  I did not bat an eye when I read about Radel and his nose candy purchase.  Person in a position of power decides that, in their free time, they want to play Tony Montana; also, today ends in “Y.”  Next controversy?

I got to thinking why I was so incensed about Mayor Ford, and so indifferent regarding Rep. Radel.  Here are my findings:

Their positions

Trey Radel is in his first term as a U.S. Representative. He was sworn in ten months ago, and is at the bottom of the Congressional totem pole.  In addition, there are literally 434 other people who do  the exact same job as Rep. Radel. There is enough of a buffer that a coke binge would not stop the wheels of legislation.  However Radel’s arrest has drawn the ire of many because he recently voted to drug test recipients of public monies like food stamps and welfare (the gall!). His reasoning: if you receive government money as a public benefit, you cannot do drugs. If you receive government money as a result of a job that you are doing, drugs are okay.

Rob Ford, on the other hand, is the executive of Toronto. You know, Toronto, the largest city in Canada.  Imagine the uproar if the mayor of a city like New York said that he was really drunk when he smoked crack?  Bloomberg would never. New York would also have de Blasio’s head.  It would not fly in any major American city: not Los Angeles, not Boston, not Washington, D.C.—oh wait.  Nevermind. Additionally, a mayorship inherently has more immediate power than a member of Congress could have from their job, and the duties of a mayor’s job has a more direct effect on constituents.

Their Images

Trey Radel is a 37-year old Floridian and former news anchor. The guys is good looking. Unfortunately, that helps.  Look, this is not the first time looks have been advantageous to a politician.  He is a favorite of the tea party, hip enough to tweet, and has a young family. Finally, cocaine has a different social connotation than crack. This dates back to the Reagan Administration and the war on drugs.  Drugs are still drugs, of course, but cocaine is more widely accepted as recreational or social.

Rob Ford, on the other hand, looks like a cartoon character.  He has been a public figure long enough to have many televised gaffes that have since been turned into .gifs many times over.  Additionally, crack is embarrassing. When Whitney Houston was accused of crack cocaine use, she explicitly stated that she made too much money to ever smoke crack cocaine.  The Chapelle Show’s Tyrone Biggums character was a hilariously accurate rendering of how most people imagine users of crack cocaine. To imagine the mayor of Toronto smoking crack, then, is particularly jarring.

Rob Ford, courtesy of Shaun Merritt via Flickr.

Their Reactions

Almost a month after his arrest, Radel’s office released statements that seemed to follow the tried and true “politician in trouble” response.  He acknowledged that he had a problem and wanted to take a leave of absence from the House of Representatives.  He mentioned that he’d let himself, his family, and his constituents down. His actions immediately after the arrest made it seem like he thought that the incident would remain under the radar.  This hypothesis is bolstered by the fact that, according to reports, he did not tell senior Congressional officials until recently. In the days since the widespread dissemination of his arrest details, Radel has vowed to seek treatment for his addictions.

Rob Ford’s reaction was atypical, to say the least.  He took Bill Clinton’s “definition of ‘is’ is” and ran it sixty yards to a touchdown in the game of “most ridiculous political excuses”.  You’ll recall that the Mayor said that he never lied, but instead was asked the incorrect question, which subsequently elicited an improper response.  Had the obviously inept reporter simply asked if he’d ever smoked crack, well then the answer would have been a resounding yes.  Duh.  Why? Because it’s the truth.  THE TRUTH.  Not habitually, and not voluntarily- he was just blackout drunk.  This nonsensical response is what one would expect from a crackhead.  With Ford, the jokes right themselves.

The Aftermath

What it comes down to is the potential for redemption. In America, we love a good comeback.  This is Radel’s first public slip up, and if he is smart it will be the last.  In addition, he is not the first member of Congress to be in this position. He can make a successful political comeback, and if he plays his cards right could even run for higher office.  Oh America, you truly are the land of dreams!

Ford, on the other hand, is in uncharted territory.  His behavior since the admission of smoking crack has gotten worse, believe it or not.  I mean, the man tried to tackle someone during a vote of no confidence of the Toronto legislature. He has taken the ultimate step towards irreverence and signed on for a reality television show. There is really nowhere for him to go but down- let’s just hope he puts the pipe down.

[Washington Post] [Post] [CNN]

—

Featured image courtesy of [F l a n k e r via Wikipedia]

Peter Davidson II

Peter Davidson is a recent law school graduate who rants about news & politics and raves over the ups & downs of FUNemployment in the current legal economy. Contact Peter at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A Tale of Two Politicians appeared first on Law Street.

There’s a chance that we may see a familiar name in the news cycle in coming weeks. A woman named Zenaida Gonzalez is suing the now infamous Casey Anthony for defamation. During the 2008 investigation of the disappearance of Caylee Anthony, Casey Anthony’s two-year-old daughter, Anthony made a number of false statements about what exactly had happened to her child. One of these statements was the allegation that a nanny by the name of Zenaida “Zanny” Fernandez-Gonzalez had stolen her child while working for Anthony.

It was later determined that no nanny by the name of Zenaida Gonzalez ever worked for Anthony. During the 2011 murder trial, Zenaida Gonzalez herself testified that she had never even met or heard of Casey or Caylee Anthony. She also claimed that she had been having problems finding employment since Anthony’s false allegations hit the media. Anthony’s mother Cindy Anthony claimed that the wrong Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez had been found and asked to testify, but given the relative obscurity of the name as well as a complete lack of evidence to prove that Anthony had ever hired someone by that name, her statements were not taken seriously.

Anthony was acquitted of murder, manslaughter, and child abuse on July 5, 2011, but was found guilty of giving false statements to the police. Now Gonzalez is suing Anthony for the false statements that accused her of kidnapping a toddler she had never even met. Anthony is slated to be deposed by Gonzalez’s attorneys from the Orlando based firm Morgan & Morgan on Wednesday October 9^th. This deposition will be public.

Anthony’s attorneys have attempted to block this deposition on two grounds claiming first that they were not properly given notice to prepare and second that Gonzalez’s claims lack merit. Early last week, her attorneys filed documents asking that a judge grant a protective order so that Anthony will not have to answer questions under oath. They have also moved one step further, arguing that if she must testify, she should be able to answer questions remotely, and that the deposition should be sealed from the public.

If Anthony is forced to testify, she may have to answer questions about the disappearance of her daughter Caylee—Gonzalez’s attorneys are claiming that Anthony cannot plead the fifth to avoid incriminating herself in this case. This would be the first time that Anthony is forced to answer questions under oath.

This civil suit, or one of the other civil suits that Anthony is facing, could provide answers to questions that have never been fully answered since the disappearance of Caylee Anthony transfixed the world. Anthony is also being sued by Roy Kronk, the man who found Caylee’s body. Anthony accused him of being involved in her daughter’s death immediately after his gruesome discovery. In addition she is being sued by a non-profit called Texas Equusearch that spent resources searching for her daughter after, they claim, Anthony already knew Caylee was dead.

The situation at hand is in some ways eerily reminiscent of the 1997 OJ Simpson civil case. After Simpson was found not guilty in 1995 for the murder of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman, the families of the deceased sued him for damages and won. Certain testimony made by Simpson during his criminal trial was proved to be incorrect. While this is obviously a slightly different situation, the ability of Zenaida Gonzalez and others to compel Casey Anthony to testify in a separate civil trial may give those who knew Caylee closure, much as OJ Simpson’s case gave some closure to Brown and Goldmans’ families.

[Tampa CBS Local]

—

Featured image courtesy of [FL Gov’t PD via Wikipedia]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Casey Anthony May Be Deposed in Civil Suit appeared first on Law Street.

In June, the United States Supreme Court’s ruling struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act and as a result, revived states’ attempts to review and implement new voting laws. Florida has followed this trend behind Texas, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Alabama. Governor Rick Scott has ordered state officials to resume their aggressive effort to remove non-citizens from the voting rolls.

This effort drew a lot of criticism and mired in lawsuits from opponents who viewed this as direct attack on Hispanic and Democratic voters. The federal lawsuit was filed last year in Tampa, brought by an immigrants’ voting rights group charged that scrubbing the voter rolls would disproportionately affect minority voters. However, with the invalidation of section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, Florida is able to reinstitute the search for non-citizens on the rolls by using a federal immigration database.

Last year’s attempt at unmasking non-citizens began with a pool of 182,000 names of potential non-citizens and that was narrowed to a list of 2,600. However, of those names, most were actually citizens and the pool shrank to 198. In the end, fewer than 40 people had voted illegally.

[New York Times]

—

Featured image courtesy of [SEIU via Flickr]

Ashley Powell

Ashley Powell is a founding member of Law Street Media, and its original Lead Editor. She is a graduate of The George Washington University. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Voting Rights Act Saga: More States Review Voting Laws appeared first on Law Street.

The U.S. District Court in Tampa dismissed a lawsuit filed last year to block Florida’s voter purge program. Two naturalized citizens and a Hispanic advocacy group collaborated on a lawsuit, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund v. Detzner, which claimed that Florida needed to obtain authorization from the federal government in order to remove the names of suspected non-U.S. citizens from the voter registry.

The court determined that the lawsuit was moot after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, which invalidated Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act.  The Supreme Court’s decision eliminated the formula that allowed for the preclearance provision, which the federal government utilized to protect voters.

Florida’s voter purge uses a collection of driver’s licenses and voter registration files in order to create the initial list of voters who may not be citizens, which initially contained 180,000 names.  After comparison with more county records, Florida was able to compile a list of 2,600 registered voters who may not be citizens.  The state also has an agreement with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to use the federal immigrant database in its voter purge efforts.

The obvious issue with Florida’s voter purge program is the unintended removal of suspected non-citizens who actually are citizens, such as Murat Limage and Pamela Gomez, the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.  In an effort to prevent non-citizens from voting, which may only happen in a relatively small quantity, the state is setting itself up for more trouble if any legitimate citizens are prevented from voting at the polls because they were incorrectly removed from the registration lists.

The state says that it is looking for ‘suspected’ non-U.S. citizens in the voter registry, which leads one to wonder what basis is being used to develop such suspicions.  The most likely explanation is that Florida is unfairly targeting Hispanic voters  suspected of voting illegally.  It is completely unacceptable for the state government to use any racial or ethnic basis in order to purge voter lists, and the Supreme Court’s decision should not change the fact that Florida’s Hispanic community must be protected from any potential violations by the state.

—

Featured image courtesy of [Atomische * Tom Glebel via Flickr]

Sameer Aggarwal

Sameer Aggarwal was a founding member of Law Street Media and he is a graduate of The George Washington University. Contact Sameer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Democracy in Action: Florida Set to Resume Voter Purge appeared first on Law Street.

The George Zimmerman trial has been one of the most hotly debated topics in the news recently, and with public outrage resulting from the verdict people question whether or not the federal government will step in with charges of its own. Although it is technically possible for the government to pursue federal charges against Zimmerman for the death of Trayvon Martin, there are several challenges that federal prosecutors would face.  Because the state and federal governments are two separate spheres, the concept of double jeopardy does not apply and Zimmerman can be charged in both state and federal court for the same crime.  However, federal charges can only be filed if the state prosecution did not satisfy a significant federal interest, and if the federal government believes sufficient evidence for a conviction exists.

Federal civil rights laws were enacted to ensure proper enforcement of the law, allowing for the federal government to intervene in the event that the state left federal interests “unvindicated.” Additionally, civil rights cases are rarely prosecuted at a federal level after having already been tried in state courts, but it has happened.  The most notable example of this is the case involving the police officers accused of beating Rodney King Jr. in 1991.  All four officers were initially acquitted in state court, but the subsequent federal trial led to two convictions.  In that case, and the argument could be made for George Zimmerman as well, federal charges furthered-a government interest in bringing racially-motivated criminals to justice.

Lastly, the application of federal law to the Zimmerman case could create a problem for prosecutors.  Many laws relating to racial violence and hate crimes deal with state authority over acts committed in public areas.  Because Zimmerman was not an actor of the government nor did the altercation take place on public property, a new statute that deems any racially-motivated violence a crime would most likely be used by the prosecution.  In order for federal prosecutors to convict Zimmerman they will need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his actions were motivated by race.  Doing so would not be an easy task, as there were no witnesses and Zimmerman has previously claimed self-defense.

Although there are many challenges that prosecutors would face, federal charges are not completely out of the question, especially as public outrage continues.

[Reuters.com]

—

Featured image courtesy of [Werth Media via Flickr]

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will Zimmerman Face Federal Charges? appeared first on Law Street.