|
|
|
Judge approves tea party group's lawsuit against IRS
Press Release |
2016/01/20 21:04
|
A federal judge in Ohio has approved class-action status for a tea party group's lawsuit stemming from IRS delays in approving nonprofit status for conservative groups seeking the tax-exemption classification.
The NorCal Tea Party Patriots sued the IRS, along with workers and officials in Cincinnati and Washington, after it was revealed in 2013 that the IRS delayed approving conservative groups for the nonprofit status. The FBI investigated, but no criminal charges were filed.
The Cincinnati Enquirer reports a U.S. District Court judge in Cincinnati granted class-action status Tuesday. That means other affected groups across the country can join the case unless they opt out.
The judge also sealed the case to protect taxpayer records that might be on file with the IRS and the tea party group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court won’t hear case over grant to Planned Parenthood
Press Release |
2015/11/18 06:01
|
The Supreme Court has rejected an anti-abortion group’s bid to force disclosure of confidential Planned Parenthood and federal government records about a contract for family planning services in New Hampshire.
The justices on Monday let stand a ruling that allowed the U.S. Health and Human Services Department to withhold some documents in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by New Hampshire Right to Life.
Abortion opponents objected to a $1 million contract HHS awarded Planned Parenthood in 2011 for family planning services in New Hampshire. The move followed action by the state’s Executive Council to stop a long-standing practice of funneling federal money to the clinics. Councilors who opposed funding Planned Parenthood said they didn’t want grant money given to the organization because it provides abortions using private funds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio court: Wording of pot legalization ballot is misleading
Press Release |
2015/09/15 23:22
|
Ohio's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that part of the ballot wording describing a proposal to legalize marijuana in the state is misleading and ordered a state board to rewrite it.
Supporters of the measure, known in the fall election as Issue 3, challenged the phrasing of the ballot language and title, arguing certain descriptions were inaccurate and intentionally misleading to voters. Attorneys for the state's elections chief, a vocal opponent of the proposal, had said the nearly 500-word ballot language was fair.
In a split decision, the high court sided with the pot supporters in singling out four paragraphs of the ballot language it said "inaccurately states pertinent information and omits essential information."
The court ordered the state's Ballot Board to reconvene to replace those paragraphs about where and how retail stores can open, the amount of marijuana a person can grow and transport and the potential for additional growing facilities.
"The cumulative effect of these defects in the ballot language is fatal because the ballot language fails to properly identify the substance of the amendment, a failure that misleads voters," the court said.
The court allowed the ballot issue's title, "Grants a monopoly for the commercial production and sale of marijuana for recreational and medicinal purposes," to stand in a blow to the backers who had taken issue with the use of the word "monopoly."
Passage of Issue 3 would make Ohio a rare state to go from outlawing marijuana to allowing it for all uses in one vote.
The full text of the proposed constitutional amendment has nearly 6,600 words. It would allow anyone 21 and older to buy marijuana for medicinal or personal use and grow four plants. It creates a network of 10 authorized growing locations, some that already have attracted a celebrity-studded list of private investors, and lays out a regulatory and taxation scheme.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court sets stage for historic gay rights ruling
Press Release |
2015/01/19 22:30
|
The Supreme Court is getting back in the marriage business. The justices agreed Friday to decide a major civil rights question: whether same-sex couples have a right to marry everywhere in America under the Constitution.
The court will take up gay-rights cases that ask it to overturn bans in four states and declare for the entire nation that people can marry the partners of their choice, regardless of gender. The cases will be argued in April, and a decision is expected by late June.
The court chose not to decide this issue in 2013, even as it struck down part of a federal anti-gay marriage law that paved the way for a wave of lower court rulings across the country in favor of same-sex marriage rights.
At that time, just 12 states and the District of Columbia permitted gay and lesbian couples to wed. That number has jumped to 36, almost all because of lower court rulings.
"The country is ready for the freedom to marry today," said James Esseks, leader of the American Civil Liberties Union's same-sex marriage efforts.
The appeals before the court come from gay and lesbian plaintiffs in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. The federal appeals court that oversees those four states upheld their same-sex marriage bans in November, reversing pro-gay rights rulings of federal judges in all four states. It was the first, and so far only, appellate court to rule against same-sex marriage since the high court's 2013 decision. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Lawyer & Law Firm Websites |
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
