Nevada is already in the midst of a full blown marijuana “state of emergency,” as the state’s fledgling recreational market struggles to keep legal pot from flying off the shelves.

On Friday, Gov. Brian Sandoval endorsed the state of emergency, allowing state officials to adopt “emergency marijuana regulation” in order to accommodate for the unplanned pot shortage.

The 47 retail stores licensed to sell marijuana in the state began selling recreational marijuana from their stockpiles starting July 1. According to the Department of Taxation, Nevada’s marijuana sales have exceeded the industry’s original estimates–the opening weekend resulted in “well over” 40,000 transactions.

The Nevada Dispensary Association estimated that dispensaries made about $3 million in sales–with the state netting about $1 million in tax revenue–in the first four days of legalization.

Some dispensaries need new shipments of product asap, but logistical issues have thrown a major wrench in distribution. Wholesale alcohol distributors have exclusive rights to transport wholesale marijuana for the first 18 months of legal sales, but the state has issued zero distribution licenses due to legal issues, incomplete applications, and zoning laws.

“Unless the issue with distributor licensing is resolved quickly, the inability to deliver product to the retail stores will result in many of these employees losing their jobs and will cause this nascent industry to grind to a halt,”  Sandoval said in a statement.

The state tried to fix the distribution problem earlier this year by opening up the licenses to other types of businesses, but the liquor wholesalers successfully sued to keep their transport monopoly.

If left unfixed, Stephanie Klapstein, a spokesperson for the Department of Taxation, says the halt in marijuana sales will also lead to “a hole in the state’s school budget.” A 15 percent tax on the cultivation of marijuana generates revenue for schools, while the 10 percent sales tax can be used for the state’s rainy day fund.

The Nevada Tax Commission will vote on the regulations to fix the supply-chain issues on Thursday.

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 Nevada Declares Weed “State of Emergency” After Sales Exceed Expectations appeared first on Law Street.

All Cannabis in America coverage is written by Alexis Evans and Alec Siegel and brought to you by Law Street Media.

State of Weed: Watch

Nevada Prepares to Rake in the Dough Thanks to New Legal Weed Market

Starting July 1, Nevada began recreational marijuana sales. As a result, Las Vegas is expected to see a major tourism boom. An Economic and Fiscal Benefits Analysis prepared by Las Vegas-based RCG Economics in conjunction with the Marijuana Policy Group predicts that the state will actually rake in $393 million in annual sales of adult-use marijuana in 2018, and that the number will rise to a staggering $486 million by 2024. California, Maine, and Massachusetts are expected to begin recreational marijuana sales next year.

Denver Finalizes First Social Marijuana Use Program 

Denver’s top licensing official has unveiled final rules for the state’s pilot social-use program, which would allow some patrons to use marijuana in certain public settings. The four-year pilot program, the first of its kind in the nation, will allow businesses to apply for $2,000 social-use licenses to allow patrons the ability to BYOW (bring your own weed). According to the new rules, the licensing department will also no longer require businesses with consumption area permits to have customers sign waivers as they enter.

Arkansas is Now Accepting Medical Marijuana Applications

Arkansas is one step closer to offering medical marijuana to patients with select medical conditions. Prospective patients can now apply for medical marijuana cards on the state Department of Health site. Voters approved the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment last November. Applicants will need to have an email address, a written certification from their physician, and a state-issued ID to apply, and must pay a nonrefundable $50 fee. According to the Associated Press, the state Department of Health expects anywhere from 20,000 to 40,000 people to apply to use the drug.

All links are to primary sources. For more information on state laws for possessing, selling, and cultivating marijuana, click here to read “The State of Weed: Marijuana Legalization State by State.”

Law Street Cannabis Coverage

Officer Who Shot Philando Castile Says Smell of Marijuana Made Him Fear For His Life

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 Cannabis in America July 2017: Sin City Welcomes Legal Weed 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:

Teacher and Student Dead After San Bernardino School Shooting

Yesterday, a teacher and an eight-year-old student at a San Bernardino elementary school died. They were murdered by the teacher’s estranged husband, who shot her before killing himself. Another student was seriously injured. The children are believed to have been caught in the crossfire, as Cedric Anderson’s target was his estranged wife, Karen Elaine Smith. This tragedy happened just a little over a year after a radicalized Muslim couple shot and killed 14 people at San Bernardino’s Inland Regional Center.

Smith’s son described Anderson as “paranoid and possessive.” He managed to enter the school after telling staff he was just going to drop something off for Smith. San Bernardino schools increased security after the 2015 terrorist attack, but it’s hard to believe they could have stopped Anderson. “[It] is not uncommon for a spouse to be able to gain access to a school campus to meet with their other spouse,” said Police Chief Jarrod Burguan.

Police are investigating San Bernardino shooting as domestic violence incident. There’s much more that can be done to keep guns from abusers pic.twitter.com/aT6v0kj7Ds

— CAP Action Guns (@CAPActionGuns) April 10, 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 11, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

In early January, Daniel Aldape, a 46-year-old homeless man, was found dead at an intersection in Las Vegas. About a month later, 60-year-old David Dunn, also homeless, was found dead under his blankets at the same intersection. Both died of blunt trauma to the head.

And so, every evening since Dunn died, in an attempt to catch the perpetrator of these horrific murders, Las Vegas police placed a blanket-clad mannequin at the intersection, hoping the killer would strike again. On February 22, Shane Schindler did just that. As Schindler began bashing the mannequin with a hammer, police arrested him on charges of carrying a concealed weapon without a permit.

Andrew Walsh, a Las Vegas police captain involved in the mannequin sting, told the Guardian why he resorted to such an unorthodox strategy. “We used some tactics you wouldn’t normally see, but we didn’t have a lot of evidence to go by,” he said, adding that “the sidewalk or a soft patch of dirt is no place for a human being to take their last breath” and that the force “took those crimes very personally.”

Walsh said the police are still questioning Schindler, 30, and the investigation is still ongoing. Las Vegas, like other west coast cities, has an inordinate amount of homeless people living in public spaces, rather than in shelters or temporary housing. In fact, over half the Las Vegas homeless population lives on sidewalks, at parks, or in tunnels. Violence against homeless people is hardly new.

According to the National Coalition for the Homeless, there were 77 attacks against homeless people in 2015; 27 of those attacks were fatal. From 1999 to 2015, there were 1,657 reported acts of violence against homeless people, 428 of which were fatal. The perpetrators are usually teenagers and men under 30.

To Daren Richards, Schindler’s public defender, attempting to bludgeon a mannequin with a hammer is not sufficient evidence to warrant an arrest. “Our defense is that carrying a hammer in a bag is not carrying a concealed weapon under the law or all the construction workers and carpenters in this town would be arrested tomorrow,” he said. “If they’re going to charge him with something else, let’s see the charges. But as of right now all that other stuff is irrelevant.”

But Walsh, the police chief, while looking to end this gruesome killing spree, is also looking back, and mourning Aldape and Dunn. “They are the lost faces of our community,” he said.

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 Police Use Mannequin to Catch Man Suspected of Killing Homeless Men appeared first on Law Street.

If Trump loses the election tonight, he’s definitely not going down without a fight. The Republican presidential nominee has already filed a lawsuit against the state of Nevada over an early voting dispute.

The lawsuit accuses Clark County, Nevada, of keeping the polls open “two hours beyond the designated closing time” Friday night. The polling locations closed at 7 PM; however, some polling locations were kept open until 10 PM to accommodate voters waiting in line.

Nevada state law requires that voters be allowed to cast their ballots if they have entered a polling place, or are physically waiting in line to vote at the time of closing.

As it just so happens, the Las Vegas polling places targeted in the suit happen to be home to large Hispanic populations–and Hillary Clinton has a significant advantage over Donald Trump with Hispanic voters.

The Trump campaign called the extended voting times evidence of a “rigged system,” and alleged that Clark Country voting registrar Joe Gloria’s actions “very much appear to have been intentionally coordinated with Democratic activists.”

According to Business Insider, Judge Gloria Sturman denied Trump’s lawyer’s request for Gloria to preserve the names of the poll workers who permitted the late voting–mainly because he is already legally required to do so.

“I don’t get what you’re asking,” Judge Sturman told David Lee, a lawyer with the Trump campaign.

“I can’t obligate [Gloria] to do something he’s already obligated to do,” Sturman said. “This is Election Day. He has other things to be doing.”

Sturman maintained that she would not expose the poll workers to harassment and an army of Twitter trolls, especially when “they’re not here to defend themselves.”

Trump’s lawyers also requested that the votes cast after 7 PM not be “co-mingled” with the other votes, but that request was shot down as well.

While Trump may not have been successful in what very well may be his first attempt at proving voter fraud, it’s very clear that he’s steadfast in disputing the election if the results don’t swing in his favor.

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 Trump Campaign Sues Nevada For Keeping Early Voting Polls Open Late appeared first on Law Street.

Brittany Hickman was on a weekend getaway to San Diego with her coworkers in 2013, when they decided to attend a show by well-known DJ Steve Aoki at the Hard Rock Hotel. Aoki is known for stunts and antics during his shows.  During the performance, Aoki jumped from the stage onto an inflatable raft. Hickman was knocked to the ground and trapped underneath, injuring her. Hickman recently sued Hard Rock Hotel for her injuries, and the jury sided with the hotel. Yet Hickman’s case raises an important question–what responsibilities do venues have to make sure that performers don’t harm the people who come to see their shows?

The Hickman v. Hard Rock Case’s Hard Facts

During his performance Aoki put a new spin on crowd-surfing when he crowd-rafted–he jumped onto an inflatable raft being held up by the crowd. You can see it in the surveillance video:

Hickman claimed that she was right under the raft, and when he jumped he struck her head; she and others were knocked to the ground. The security guards carried her out of the crowd, and she was disoriented when she came to. According to Hickman, she later found out that in addition to being concussed, she had “broken her neck” and was lucky that she wasn’t paralyzed. According to local news coverage:

‘If I would have thrown my arms above my head or reached for something, I could have paralyzed myself,’ she said.

Hickman said she was in the hospital for three days and wasn’t allowed to work for two months.

‘I just want to be back to the way I was before,’ she said.

The jury decided 10-2 in favor of the defendant, the hotel. Hard Rock’s lawyers mostly focused on the fact that Hard Rock had no idea that Aoki was going to complete the stunt, and that Hinkman’s injuries weren’t as severe as she had claimed.

Other Audience Injury Cases

Performers are constantly looking to push boundaries during performances–cool stunts can spark publicity, especially when they’re captured by concert-goers and go viral on social media platforms. But the bigger the stunt, and the closer it gets to the audience, the more potential there can be for injury. Take R&B artist Miguel’s stunt at the Billboard Music Awards in 2013. He tried to jump from one section of the stage to the other, and kicked two women in the face. Here’s a gif of the incident:

via GIPHY

There was a lawsuit brought against Miguel in 2015 for the incident, filed by one of the women who he kicked in the face. MGM Grand Hotel, where the performance took place, was also sued.

A few years ago, a man was allegedly injured by a blue ball that flew into the audience at a Blue Man Group show in San Francisco. He sued both the Blue Man Group and the venue, the Golden Gate Theatre.

So…Who’s on the Hook?

Stunts by performers are incredibly trendy, and when they go well, they’re pretty cool. But when they go poorly, they not only can put performers at risk, but spectators as well. When they go really poorly, they can rack up serious legal and medical bills. While Hinkman’s case wasn’t successful, it’s highly doubtful that it will be the last lawsuit of its kind.

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 Hickman v. Hard Rock Cafe International: Are Venues Responsible for Performers Gone Rogue? appeared first on Law Street.

When the topic of prostitution comes up in conversation, most typically do not consider it a potential career option. Instead, we tend to think of prostitutes as young girls who are exploited and forced into prostitution by older men. The victims and villains are clearly cast. This situation is all too common and many young women around the world– and yes, even here in the United States–are kept as sex slaves.

But there are also prostitutes who choose sex work as a profession: people, and not just women, who were not forced into becoming prostitutes but chose that as their career. And then there are people in the middle. People who were coerced into prostitution by economic circumstances but not outright force. Individuals who may want to leave but have no other options to fall back on and no social services to help them.

All three of these sets of circumstances need to be dealt with. Victims who have been enslaved, people who see prostitution as their vocation, and those in the middle. Policy initiatives and laws that attempt to deal with the sex trade need to come up with a way to address the needs of these three communities. Which policies provide the best supports for all three kinds of prostitution? Is there a way to eliminate abuse while empowering free choice?

Models for Prostitution

There are several different models to choose from in crafting legal and social policy to deal with prostitution. One method is to criminalize both the purchase and sale of sex. This approach is based on the notion that individuals on both sides of the issue are criminals and immoral actors. This view of prostitution, a Victorian morality model, is the least popular. People still often have a moral problem with prostitution but generally view the relationship as one of exploitation, rejecting the view that a prostitute is just as morally guilty as a pimp.

The more popular view of prostitution is that the purchaser and the facilitator (typically called a trafficker or a pimp) are the criminals and the person being sold for sex is the victim. This innocent victim model is the view that underlies efforts to either partially or completely decriminalize prostitution while promoting “end demand” initiatives. Those who hold this view want facilitators and purchasers to be punished in a variety of ways but would not punish prostitutes themselves.

This view is encapsulated by the following clip of a “20/20” documentary on prostitution. The prostitutes interviewed are portrayed as women who were victimized and ones we should be sympathetic toward.

The third model of prostitution is one that acknowledges the existence of non-victim prostitutes, an entrepreneur model, which therefore advocates for the legalization of prostitution. This model is the most controversial because it would place prostitution on the same moral footing as other “vice” crimes, such as gambling. This would mean viewing it as something we may not personally like, but isn’t quite immoral enough to justify banning entirely. The moral stigma against prostitution is so heavily ingrained in our culture that most people reject the argument like, ‘it’s okay, it’s just like cigarettes really,’ on their face. But, the argument that prostitution isn’t as morally bad as cigarettes would not get much traction either.

Models for Policy

Recent efforts have been made in the United States to decriminalize prostitution and to push new “end demand” initiatives. Most of these efforts are actually efforts to decriminalize the sale of sex, as was done in Sweden, but keep trafficking or purchasing as punishable offenses. “End demand” initiatives seek to increase the penalties for clients who buy sex in an effort to make its purchase so costly and difficult that clients stop engaging in it. The hope is if clients do not feel that they can safely purchase sex, the industry will starve. As the demand for these services decreases, the incentive for traffickers and pimps to exploit sex workers will also dissipate.

End demand policies use a variety of instruments to make purchasing sex more difficult or costly. Fines, jail time, rehabilitation for solicitors, and good old-fashioned shaming like publishing offenders names in newspapers have all been used. But there isn’t any clear and convincing evidence that these methods actually do reduce the demand for sex work. On the contrary, there is some evidence that it may be making conditions for sex workers worse. While ending demand may free a sex worker from fear of prosecution, it keeps the pressure on clients, which may actually drive the market for sex even further into the shadows.

In Illinois, advocates of these initiatives, such as the Chicago Alliance Against Sexual Exploitation, go further in their attempts to end the demand for prostitution by trying to instill in young men the belief that buying sex is wrong. These campaigns are part of a larger sex-education plan that seeks to make commercial sex stigmatic not only for the prostitute but for potential clients as well. Legal changes are an important component, but cultural changes are also emphasized.

The biggest criticism of these efforts is that they do not help sex workers. Making it more difficult for clients to purchase sex not only affects the buyer but also the seller. One drawback for the sex worker is less time and transparency to negotiate. Because the rationale behind these policies is based on a model of prostitution involving a pimp-victim relationship, the end demand efforts don’t want to facilitate better discussions between clients and prostitutes. Some sex workers argue that these laws make their conditions less safe.

The other option is to legalize prostitution entirely. The following interview with Maggie McNeill, author of the blog The Honest Courtesan, does an excellent job of summarizing the viewpoint of those who argue that some voluntarily engage in prostitution and think it should be legalized.

The argument in favor of legalizing prostitution is best viewed as an argument in favor of the freedom to contract. It removes the moral stigma from prostitution found in both the Victorian and the end demand models and replaces them with a model of prostitution that includes those who freely choose it as a career. The entrepreneur model would argue that if a person wants to sell a sex act they should be free to do so–just as they are free to sell other personal services. There is also evidence in places where prostitution was legalized, as we saw in Rhode Island from 2003 to 2009, that the conditions for sex workers improve and violent crime is reduced.

This view does not deny that there are people, particularly women and children, who are enslaved as prostitutes. There are significant issues with the rape and abuse of prostitutes globally and in the United States, but supporters of the entrepreneurial model argue that the legal framework for combatting these abuses already exists. For example, to form a contract to commission a piece of artwork the purchaser and the buyer both need to be able to consent. Those who can’t consent because of age or mental incapacity can’t form that contract for art. Similarly, they wouldn’t be able to form that contract to sell or buy sex.

But for those concerned about violence and exploitation, to say that contract laws are enough of a tool to protect children from rape and trauma is insufficient. In fact, the most compelling criticism of this approach is that it does not do enough to combat violence. Other approaches may over-correct by disallowing voluntary prostitution, but that may be a better alternative for those whose primary goal is to end sexual violence.

The Murky Middle

There is perhaps a middle ground between the view of prostitution as pure victimhood and prostitution as the empowered entrepreneur. It’s a model that acknowledges the murky middle in which people become sex workers out of economic necessity, not through enslavement, but who may still need additional protections that are not present in other service industries should also be explored.

In contract law, a contract that is entered into because the defendant coerced the plaintiff with the threat of economic harm can be voided under the doctrine of “economic duress.” It’s a form duress that isn’t quite duress, yet may still be grounds to void a contract. However, it isn’t a very popular doctrine because it is so vague.

The court can grant relief to the plaintiff if they can show evidence of coercion or intimidation. This is not saying that the person is incapable of entering into any contract or that they would always be the victim in a contractual exchange. Rather, it merely acknowledges that in this particular contract his or her consent was not freely given and some restitution should be made.

Similarly, a middle-ground approach would acknowledge that there are contracts for sex that are entered into where both parties provide full consent. Those contracts, like the vast majority of contracts that we engage in every day with varying degrees of formality, would not need to be challenged. They may need to be regulated or taxed, like any other business, but they are not inherently void because of their subject matter.

This approach would also acknowledge that many of these contracts may be the product of coercion. In those cases, legal remedies to prosecute crimes such as rape, kidnapping, and theft should be employed. If they aren’t yet tough enough to bring violent criminals to justice, or not written in such a way to include crimes against sex workers, then they should be strengthened. Societal remedies and safety nets also need to be expanded so that sex workers who were victims of crimes can get some help, and so those who are at risk of becoming the victims of sexual slavery are prevented from becoming victims. Any change in policy, whatever the moral model it is based on, needs to include more tools for law enforcement to combat sex slavery. But supporting a vigorous effort to punish traffickers and slave traders isn’t tied to one set of policies for prostitution.

A great example of a combination approach to prostitution is how New Zealand treated the issue in 2003. According to the New Zealand’s Prostitute Collective, the sex workers of New Zealand gave input on the new laws in a push to reform local laws and policies. The results are a mixed bag of protections for sex workers, which also presuppose that there is a unique ethical concern with selling sex. For example, a sex worker cannot be compelled to have sex with a particular client and cannot have pay reduced for refusing sex with a particular client.

The law also adds in protections for sex workers under the age of 18 while borrowing from the end demand legislation ethos. It is a criminal offense for a manager or brothel owner to hire someone under the age of 18 for sex, or to pay for their services as a client. But it isn’t illegal to sell sex if you are under 18, meaning that punishment rests solely on the purchasers and traffickers.

Conclusion

The debate over how to deal with prostitution is an ongoing policy problem for everyone concerned about human trafficking. It also is an example of how moral sentiments and the way they can clash with modern interpretations of personal freedom can impact policy decisions.

Our culture makes intense moral judgments about sex workers. When we refer to someone as a “whore” it usually is not a comment on that person’s actual profession but meant as an insult. These moral judgments are unlikely to change in the near future and certainly won’t change just because a law or policy changes. But changes in policy can have a profound impact on the lives and safety of our citizens as evidenced by the dramatic change in the number of rapes in Rhode Island when prostitution was accidentally legalized. Whether they represent a true reduction in violence or a shifting of violence from a non-paid victim to a paid one is still debated. But if the goal is to craft a policy that will reduce violent crime and end sexual slavery then these various methods of doing so need to be debated on their practical merits as well as their moral implications.

Resources

Law Street Media: Prostitution: Should It Be Legalized or Criminalized?

BAYSWAN: Initiatives to “End Demand” For Prostitution Harm Women And Undermine Service Programs

GAATW: Moving Beyond Supply and Demand Catchphrases

CAASE: End Demand Illinois 

The Stranger: Sex Workers Write Open Letters To Law Makers Over End Demand Bills

The Honest Courtesan

CATW International: Ending The Demand

Hughes, Hubbard, and Reed: The Economic Duress Doctrine- A U.S. Perspective

Cato Unbound: Perverse Incentives: Sex Work And The Law

The New York Times: A Misguided Moral Crusade

The Washington Post: When Rhode Island Accidentally Legalized Prostitution Rape Decreased Sharply

The Huffington Post: 9 Things You Did Not Know About American Prostitution

The New Zealand’s Prostitute Collective: The Prostitution Reform Act 2003

Mary Kate Leahy

Mary Kate Leahy (@marykate_leahy) has a J.D. from William and Mary and a Bachelor’s in Political Science from Manhattanville College. She is also a proud graduate of Woodlands Academy of the Sacred Heart. She enjoys spending her time with her kuvasz, Finn, and tackling a never-ending list of projects. Contact Mary Kate at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Prostitution: Should The “World’s Oldest Profession” Be a Profession? appeared first on Law Street.

A federal judge has ruled that the FBI acted inappropriately in an investigation into championship poker player Paul Phua last year. The FBI conducted a search of Phua’s room without a warrant, after posing as repairmen to gain entry. Federal Judge Andrew Gordon, located in Las Vegas, determined that the FBI’s actions violated Phua’s rights to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures.

The FBI began to investigate Phua last summer after they suspected that he and his associates were illegally taking bets on the Poker World Cup. At the time of the investigation, Phua was staying at Caesar’s Palace in Las Vegas. The FBI shut off the internet to his room, then came in posing as repairmen to fix it, hoping to get a look at what was going on in the room. They wore hidden cameras on their bodies in order to get footage of the room and whatever they saw that pointed to Phua’s guilt. Phua, and others including his son, were then charged.

While some, including Phua’s son Darren, have pled guilty to the federal charges related to gambling, Phua has continued to fight the charges. This is in part because of the nature in which the FBI obtained the evidence. That argument proved convincing to Judge Gordon, who stated in his ruling:

Permitting the government to create the need for the occupant to invite a third party into his or her home would effectively allow the government to conduct warrantless searches of the vast majority of residences and hotel rooms in America. The government need only disrupt the phone, cable, Internet, or some other ‘non-essential’ service, and reasonable people will opt to invite a third party onto their property to repair it, unwittingly allowing a government agents into the most private space to view and record whatever and whomever they see.

As a result of Gordon’s ruling, the evidence that was collected in Phua’s hotel room via the FBI agents cannot be used in his trial. Prosecutors will have to figure out whether or not it’s even worth moving forward the case. They apparently do have other evidence, but it’s not as strong.

This is apparently a unique case and it could serve as a deterrent to keep the FBI from making similar searches in the future. Judge Gordon’s point is compelling. If all the FBI had to do to get into someone’s house was deceive them, they could infringe on various parties’ privacy quite easily. While Phua may or may not win his case, Gordon’s decision certainly weakens the FBI’s claims.

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 FBI Agents Conducted Unreasonable Search by Posing as Repairmen appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

Greetings from Las Vegas! As I mentioned last week, last week was my birthday so I decided to celebrate it the right way and am spending a few days in Vegas with friends. It’s been a blast so far!

I am a creature of habit and no matter how late I stay up my body and mind are still ready to get the day started at 9am despite any time zone. Part of my morning ritual is to watch Fox News just to see what’s going on in the world. Monday morning I stuck with my routine, flipped on the television and watched whatever program was being aired. In this case it was the afternoon (on the East Coast) show, Outnumbered. This show has a rotating group of hosts but the only consistent thing is that there are four women and a man sitting on a couch talking about topics of the day and not all of it is political, which I kind of enjoyed!

After a couple of segments the host for the day, Pete Hegseth, brought up the new racist claims on a fraternity at the University of California at Irvine. So the story goes that the fraternity, Phi Gamma Delta, recently had a Fiji-themed party at the end of its charity week that has offended certain people. The theme seems reasonable because apparently this particular fraternity has been called “FIJI” since the 1800s. So what’s the problem? Apparently grass skirts and coconut bras are racist in the context of a party. Yep. You can read that again but it is still going to be the same: grass skirts plus coconut bras equal RACISM!

Just hearing about this even being an issue has blown my mind. If anything Phi Gamma Delta is celebrating its nickname and a culture all at once.

I am no stranger to throwing a Hawaiian- or Fiji-themed party from time to time and have never felt like I was doing it in the context of being racist toward a specific group of people. Grass skirts and coconut bras are a certain way for the rest of the world to pay homage to that culture. Let us remember that grass skirts are a part of that culture, coconut bras are not. In fact, Western civilization added the coconut bra because we are too prudish to celebrate our bodies the way that they do. And who doesn’t love the idea of escaping to a paradise where the native people get to walk around in linen clothing by day and celebrate their heritage by night for tourists?

The claim to racism goes beyond grass skirts, coconut bras, UC Irvine, and college campuses. Racism has been a hot topic over the last few weeks. It has been shoved down our throats because of LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling and all of the comments that the sports community has contributed to the issue. Even this week Donald Sterling has been labeled a racist and a sexist by another ex-girlfriend. I’m sick of hearing about it and I am sick of thinking that everything has to be connected with race. Now, on the Donald Sterling front, that is absolutely all about race and the NBA will handle it the best way that it knows how, but to go from Donald Sterling and his extremely racial remarks to a fraternity simply throwing a party with props is ridiculous. Not everything has an ulterior motive. College is a place to celebrate and learn more about other cultures.

We have turned into a culture of political correctness and even the slightest mention of anything about another culture has become some sort of racism. The self-absorbed “everyone is out to get me because I am this” attitude needs to stop! No one is out to get you; no one is bashing your culture just because of grass skirts and coconut bras. We have been celebrating this culture for decades and never has it been an issue until today. It’s sad and it sickens me that we have to walk on eggshells for every little thing. We need stronger backbones again and to realize that not everyone is the same, not everyone is going to agree, not everyone is going to like everyone else. Not everyone is out to get you.

Maybe we should all put on our grass skirts, coconut bras, grab a Mai Tai and chill out!

—

Allison Dawson (@AllyD528) Born in Germany, raised in Mississippi and Texas. Graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University. Currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative.

Featured image courtesy of [1950sUnlimited via Flickr]

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 Chill Out, America! Everything Isn’t a Race Issue appeared first on Law Street.

Springtime in America is marked by a wonderful tradition shared by all, regardless of one’s age, gender, or socioeconomic status. I’m not talking about love or cherry blossoms — I’m talking about the NCAA college basketball tournament. If you are a sports fan or happen to work in an office, you have probably paid at least five dollars to enter a pool and pick the winners of the sixty-eight team, single-elimination competition. If you’ve ever been to Las Vegas in March, you’ve witnessed first-hand the popularity of gambling on college basketball.  March Madness is the third most popular time to travel to Sin City, behind New Years and Super Bowl weekend. But apart from office pools and Vegas trips, it may be difficult to legally bet on the college basketball tournament.

Since 1931, Nevada has sold itself to the rest of the nation as the premier destination for sports gambling, largely with the help of federal law enforcement. In 1961, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy spearheaded an effort to crack down on organized crime in America and got Congress to pass the Federal Wire Act, which penalized most interstate sports gambling.  In 1992, a broadly supported law entitled the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) banned intrastate sports betting in jurisdictions apart from Oregon, Montana, Delaware, and of course, Nevada. And in 2011, the Department of Justice released a public memorandum reiterating that online sports betting is within the scope of the Federal Wire Act and will be prosecuted. U.S. law has clearly disfavored sports betting outside of Nevada, but that may soon change.

Enter New Jersey. The Garden State has seen better days, and its officials believe the road back to those better days is paved with the revenue generated through legalized sports gambling.  This effort was kickstarted in 2009 when New Jersey State Senator Raymond Lesniak filed a lawsuit in New Jersey federal court claiming that the PASPA unconstitutionally discriminates against states by allowing some to engage in legal gambling while blocking all others. The suit was dismissed in district court, and the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit also ruled against New Jersey.  But New Jersey appealed its decision to the Supreme Court, and there are two reasons why the state has renewed hope for a favorable decision in Washington.

1. The Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudence: New Jersey’s appeal argues that the PASPA violates the equal sovereignty of New Jersey, a principle that basically says the federal government cannot discriminate among states. This principle was traditionally only evoked with regard to land and water rights, but it was recently cited by Chief Justice Roberts in Shelby County vs. Holder, the decision that struck down part of the Voting Rights Act. If the Supreme Court hears New Jersey’s case, it’s a safe bet that the briefs will cite that decision.

2. Times have changed: In addition to New Jersey, elected officials from Iowa, Missouri, and Rhode Island have either discussed or drafted joint resolutions requesting that Congress to repeal PASPA. Additionally, Nevada’s largest gambling ambassadors are more worried about gambling competition from the internet than from the East Coast and Midwest. The time may be most ripe for sports books to return, especially since our New Jersey gambling dearth will soon enlarge. How else would red-blooded Americans fill that vacuous space? With family time? Don’t bet on it.

Andrew Blancato

The post March Madness Outbreak May Not Be Quarantined to Vegas Much Longer appeared first on Law Street.