#Missouri Braider

[007blonded]

Hair Braiders Missouri #2023 Application #Shorts

Application Process for Missouri Hairbraiders 1. Contact Information ℹ️ Name, address, and Social Security Number 2. Employment Information Establishment 🏢 address, license 🪪 number and phone. 3. Criminal Background 🚓 List all offenses that are misdemeanors and felonies 👮🏾‍♀️ 4. Citizenship 🇺🇸 and Notarized Yes or No to a citizen and get a notary public 🖊️ to sign it. 5. ✅…

[thaonailart]

DOES AFRICAN HAIR BRAIDING REQUIRE A COSMETOLOGY LICENSE?

It might be challenging to generate the best possibilities for employment or business startup in a challenging economic climate. Offering African hair braiding services is one method that draws plenty of customers. The average nail salon products wholesale annual salary for this position, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is $27,940.

However, even if they don't use any chemicals or offer any other services, these business owners often find that they need to obtain a cosmetology license. The reason for this is that despite not using the same products, providing the same services, or receiving training from conventional beauty schools, the profession is frequently lumped in with hair stylists, barbers, and cosmetologists.

1. Is a License Required?

The laws governing the licensing requirements for cosmetology services, such as African hair braiding, are determined by the different states. So, in order to find out if you need a license, you must verify with your state. Normally, passing a state exam and completing 1600 hours of dnd fall colors cosmetology training at an approved school are needed to obtain a license. Even though this training is crucial for individuals interested in traditional cosmetology employment, those who merely want to offer natural braiding services see these requirements as a waste of time and money, especially because the majority of schools do not teach braiding techniques.

2. Where can hair braiding without a license be practiced?

Eleven states, according to Braiding Freedom, do not require natural hair braiders to have licenses. The requirements for licenses in the remaining 39 states and the District of Columbia range in length from six hours to more than 2000. The Institute of Justice has filed a number of legal actions to get the license requirements in these 39 states overturned.

According to Watchdog.org, Salamata Sylla's lawsuit against the state of Washington in June 2014 was one such instance. In response to her case, the state is implementing an earlier policy that exempts hair braiders from the need nail tech supplies wholesale for a license. A similar law exempting natural braiding from license requirements was recently approved in Texas as well. There is a major movement to abolish the license restrictions for African hair braiding, as seen by the lawsuits that are currently pending in Missouri and Arkansas. Many people could be able to take advantage of this opportunity to offer these services without attending cosmetology school.

[yanieredd]

The best part about being single is getting hair styles like this and not worrying about if your man likes it or not ☺️😂 Need a braider in KC go to @hairbyovie tell her I sent you 💛💛💛 (at Kansas City, Missouri)

[captainshimmerpants]

As a TN resident, I have three things to say:

One: This is absolute bullshit, but they’re fining people who are not licensed as natural hair braiders - which is a 300 course hour certification and huge test fee (which is ridiculous, this isn’t med school.)

Two: Very few schools actually teach natural hair, but in my area alone of TN there’s two schools that have courses for natural hair. Check your curriculum when you go to cosmetology school - it varies by state and school system, but there are some who actually teach it. For the purposes of this article, there are only 3 centers that will license you specifically as a natural hair braider in the state. It’s an extra licensure (which reference point one, is dumb).

Three: BITCHES WE HAVE REASON TO CELEBRATE!!!!!

https://tennesseestar.com/2018/03/17/onerous-licensing-law-for-hair-braiding-faces-repeal-in-tennessee-general-assembly/  <---- RECENT UPDATE

https://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2018/03/13/tennessee-has-fined-residents-nearly-100000-just-for-braiding-hair/2/      xxxxx --- Original Post so people can actually read, because the Forbes article was promoting the fact that there’s new legislation in the works to repeal the current rules, therefore NOT penalizing black salons or their hard workers. It’s a clickbait title but I feel that so many people are angry without actually reading the GOOD NEWS that’s in the actual article. 

I AM SUPER PROUD, ONE OF THE REPS IS FROM MY HOME TOWN.

“Fortunately, lawmakers may soon untangle the state’s mess of licensing red tape. On behalf of Gov. Bill Haslam, Rep. David Hawk and Sen. Mark Norris have sponsored HB 1809 and SB 2233, which would repeal the state license for natural hair stylists.”

“ The next stop for this bill is the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee, where it is scheduled to be heard on Tuesday, March 20. “ - I WANT TO BE TAGGED IN ANY UPDATE ABOUT THIS.

“Lawmakers have filed bills to repeal specialty braiding licenses in Louisiana, Minnesota, Ohio, and Oklahoma, while legislation would exempt natural hair care from cosmetology licensure in New Jersey, Missouri, Rhode Island, and Vermont.”

My state is a great state, but we have stupid old ass rules that can only be changed by people GIVING A FUCK and DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

I applaud you ladies and gents of the hair world. You work hard, and your hard work and your voices are being listened to by state legislation and both political parties are in agreement and back you up. This is an amazing day for progress because it’s freeing up so much opportunities for others.

Why in the word would you need a license just to braid hair?

[kflemhealth]

Is this really called freedom? Missouri finally passes law "allowing" black people to braid hair without requiring a 1500-hour cosmetology license

(Natural News) African-style hair braiders who conduct business in the state of Missouri are rejoicing after the passage of new legislation that no longer forces them to undergo 1,500 hours of cosmetology training, a total of none of which has anything to do with learning how to braid hair. The change comes after the Institute...

from NaturalNews.com https://ift.tt/2l6t2yZ via IFTTT

[keithrwilson]

Missouri court was wrong to allow state to license hair braiders as cosmetologists

Ndioba Niang and Tameka Stigers are professional African-style hair braiders in Missouri. When the Missouri Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners told them that they had to stop practicing their trade unless they underwent hundreds of hours of irrelevant training (and … Continue reading →

The post Missouri court was wrong to allow state to license hair braiders as cosmetologists appeared first on PLF Liberty Blog.

from Keithfeed http://ift.tt/2idNmL0

[benrleeusa]

[John K. Ross] Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Decisions

Public defender shortfalls, warrantless rental inspections, and juveniles in solitary confinement.

Please enjoy the latest edition of Short Circuit, a weekly feature from the Institute for Justice.

New on the podcast: Sciencing the heck out of Auer deference, cruel and unusual punishment of the homeless, and Pride Festival picketing. Click here for iTunes.

Pennsylvania man serves 10-year sentence for using internet to entice minor (actually an undercover officer). Some conditions of his supervised release: the installation of filtering and monitoring software on his computer and also, confusingly, a lifetime ban on computer and internet use. Third Circuit: He "cannot follow these conditions because he cannot tell what they forbid." Which violates due process. Further, a lifetime ban is more restrictive than necessary. Vacated and remanded.

Man nailed for drug crimes on New Year's Eve gets charges dismissed; a Pennsylvania court says the search violated the Fourth Amendment. After the court's decision, and three years after his arrest, he sues the arresting officer (for violating the Fourth Amendment). Third Circuit: Too late! The two-year statute of limitations runs from the time of the search, not the time of the decision invalidating it.

Faced with funding shortfall, Louisiana public defenders put noncapital defendants on months-long waitlists; defendants appear in court without counsel. Defendants sue the defenders: This is unconstitutional in a bunch of ways. Public defenders: Totally. Somebody should fund us. Louisiana Legislature (after several years of litigation): Oh all right, here's $5 mil; eliminate the waitlists. Defendants: Great, but this problem isn't going away. Fifth Circuit: "[N]o waitlists = no live case or controversy = no jurisdiction."

Texas officials order doctor to turn over patient records. (He declines, but an office manager surrenders them after being threatened with arrest.) Fifth Circuit: Though the records were potentially inculpatory, the doc can't challenge the search because he has no privacy interests at stake. Only the patients have privacy interests in the medical records, and because the doc doesn't own the clinic where he works, he doesn't have a privacy interest in the area searched (which differentiates the case from the Fifth Circuit's August decision in a similar case).

Evendale, Ohio officials pass law requiring warrantless inspections of rental properties. Landlords: Which violates the Fourth Amendment. Sixth Circuit: You don't have standing because officials haven't actually pounded on your door.

Man plans, serves as a lookout for five armed robberies of Detroit electronics stores, gets 124.5-year sentence. U.S. Supreme Court: Take another look at the sentence in light of new precedent narrowing what counts as a "crime of violence." Sixth Circuit: Sure thing. He gets 124.5 years. Robbery involves force and so is a crime of violence, as is aiding and abetting said force. (And his other arguments die many procedural deaths.)

Man who is 12 years into 24-year sentence has his conviction partially overturned (after the U.S. Supreme Court narrows what counts as a "crime of violence"). Yikes! The max sentence after the correction is just 10 years. Just resentence him to time served? No, says the Sixth Circuit (in July). If the max is 10, you can't sentence him to 12. Pick a new remedy. The dissent: As Lady Macbeth says in Act III, "What's done cannot be undone." [Editor's note: Actually, that's Act V. But Act III does say that "Things without all remedy / Should be without regard: what's done is done."] Sixth Circuit (this week, in a separate case): We decided this in July. Time-served sentences are a no-go. (The Sixth Circuit Blog has the scoop.)

Two 16-year-olds from Iowa are sent to Irma, Wisc. juvenile detention facility. Allegation: Where for months they spend 22 hours a day alone in 7-by-10-foot cells containing only a metal cot and thin mattress. They receive little to no education, are subjected to excessive force, and both attempt suicide. Seventh Circuit: No qualified immunity (yet) for Iowa official who contracted with Wisconsin officials to send the teens there.

Coles County, Ill. officials hike taxes for commercial and industrial properties in one township (by 25 and 21 percent, respectively)—but not for anywhere else in the rest of the county. An equal protection violation? No need to consider that, says the Seventh Circuit; the comity doctrine prevents us from disrupting state tax systems (so long as those systems offer adequate means of challenging tax assessments).

Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, prisoners cannot file a lawsuit challenging prison conditions until they have exhausted "such administrative remedies as are available." But how "available" are those remedies if they are described to a prisoner only in a language prison officials know he does not understand? Not "available" enough to bar this lawsuit, says the Seventh Circuit.

If you were ripped off by a couple of companies that enrolled consumers in membership-rewards programs without their consent, congratulations, you're entitled to a $20 credit to buy more stuff from them. Ninth Circuit: Your class counsel, however, is probably not entitled to $8.7 million in attorney's fees for winning you a coupon.

After President Trump pardoned controversial former sheriff Joe Arpaio, a judge dismissed his prosecution but did not vacate his conviction for criminal contempt of court. Federal prosecutors now say they will not defend the judge's ruling on appeal. Does the court have the power to appoint a special prosecutor to do the job for them? Ninth Circuit: We see no reason why not. Dissent: Prosecuting is the executive's job; you're violating the separation of powers.

Woman arrested for driving with suspended license makes bond, but Bulloch County, Ga. jail officials suspect she's in the U.S. illegally, decline to release her. Her sister calls every 15 minutes for updates, brings documents proving her citizenship to the jail, eventually contacts ICE, which tells the jail to release her. (She'd spent 26 hours in jail.) Eleventh Circuit: The Fourth Amendment requires probable cause to detain someone. Remand to the district court to assess each official's actions and determine which are responsible.

Night-shift worker: Olympia, Wash. officer tailed me as I returned to office in company vehicle and uniform (after completing repair job off site). Then he inexplicably reported a potential burglary in progress, and officers barged into the office unannounced, pointed guns, knocked me down, detained me for 45 minutes, laughed and high-fived. Officer: I didn't tail him; I just saw the office had an open door and decided to investigate. District court: Could be excessive force, but the worker's claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress can't go; the conduct alleged isn't "'utterly intolerable in a civilized society.'" (H/t: Police4aqi.)

Report: Between 1981 and 2014, black defendants in Washington state courts were 4.5 times more likely to be sentenced to death than similarly situated white defendants. Washington Supreme Court: The state's death penalty violates the state constitution because it is administered arbitrarily and in a racially biased way.

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated an abominable ruling out of the Eighth Circuit that upheld Missouri's licensing law for African-style hair braiders. The law, which has since been amended by state legislators to exempt braiders, forced braiders to spend 1,500 hours and thousands of dollars at cosmetology schools (that provide little or no instruction relevant to braiding) on pain of criminal penalties. The Eighth Circuit ruled that an occupational licensing regime that imposes a "needless, wasteful requirement" passes constitutional muster if even a small percentage of it is rationally related to any legitimate public interest. That bad precedent is no longer on the books. Read more here.

[maxwellyjordan]

Wednesday round-up

Court-watchers continue to focus on Monday’s ruling in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, in which the justices struck down the federal law that bars states from legalizing sports betting. Scott Bomboy covers the decision for Constitution Daily. For The Washington Post, Amber Phillips offers “a step-by-step rundown of key moments in the debate on gambling in America that got us to this monumental one.” For the Los Angeles Times, David Savage reports that the decision “trumpeted the independence of the states.” At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie calls it “a loss for the Trump administration,” which “would like to remove two … policies from the purview of state legislatures: the spreading legalisation of marijuana and ‘sanctuary city’ laws that partially shield undocumented immigrants from the reach of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.” At Medium, Daniel Hemel observes that “[n]ot only did the Supreme Court strike down the federal law at issue, … but it also appears to have invalidated a broad swath of congressional limitations on state tax authority. (Oh, and it also saved sanctuary cities.)” Additional commentary comes from Sam Kamin in an op-ed for The Hill, John Kindt in another Hill op-ed, Noah Feldman in an op-ed at Bloomberg, Mark Joseph Stern at Slate, and Ilya Somin at Reason’s Volokh Conspiracy blog. At Good Judgment, Ryan Adler “puts this as a win for the crowd,” noting that “forecasters held a tight range of a 75% to 80% chance that the Supreme Court would rule that Congress couldn’t prevent New Jersey from repealing its own state prohibitions on sports gambling.”

At Constitution Daily, Scott Bomboy reports that in McCoy v. Louisiana, in which the justices ruled that a defense attorney in a capital case cannot concede a defendant’s guilt to the jury over the defendant’s explicit objection, “[a]mong those submitting briefs supporting McCoy was The Criminal Bar Association Of England & Wales, which agreed with McCoy’s objections on originalist grounds rooted in English law.” In Justice Today curates analyses of the case and reactions to Monday’s decision. At The Atlantic, Garrett Epps argues that “[t]he logical result of [Justice Samuel Alito’s dissent] … would be a system where lawyers decide what is best for clients and ignore their wishes—where, in effect, a defense lawyer acts as judge and jury.”

Also at Constitution Daily, Scott Bomboy looks at Byrd v. United States, in which the court ruled on Monday that a driver can object under the Fourth Amendment to a search of a rental car even when he is not listed on the rental agreement, but “left two other questions open for a lower court to decide, about the alleged fraudulent procurement of a rental car to commit a crime and if probable cause justified the car search.” At the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Andrew Crocker hopes that the decision is “instructive to other courts, particularly those confronted with the argument that terms of service undermine users’ expectation of privacy in third party email.” At Reason’s Volokh Conspiracy blog, Orin Kerr unpacks the decision, agreeing that “[o]ne place Byrd will prove useful is in the context of e-mail privacy.”

Briefly:

At Howe on the Court, Amy Howe reports that the parties have reached a settlement in Quality Systems, Inc. v. City of Miami Fire Fighters’ and Police Officers’ Retirement Trust, a securities-law case that had “seemed like a strong candidate for a grant.”

At his eponymous blog, Ross Runkel looks at BNSF Railway Company v. Loos, in which the justices will decide next term whether a railroad’s payment to an employee for time lost from work can be taxed under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act.

At the Courthouse News Service, Barbara Leonard reports that “the Supreme Court agreed Mondayto resolve whether military widows can hold companies liable under maritime law for products that they did not make, sell or distribute,” in Air and Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries.

Lyle Denniston reports at Constitution Daily that the justices “on Monday denied review, without an explanation, of a plea by gun rights advocates for the Court to recognize a Second Amendment right to sell guns, independent of any buyer’s right of access to such weapons,” “[c]ontinuing [the court’s] pattern of refusing to clarify the gun rights that are protected by the Second Amendment.”

At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie describes Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s litigation strategy in the sex-discrimination cases she argued before the Supreme Court, chronicled in the new documentary “RBG”: “By appealing to the justices’ sense of fairness and presenting them with sympathetic male and female plaintiffs, Ms Ginsburg built America’s gender equality standards brick by brick” and “laid a foundation for cutting-edge advances in civil liberties and civil rights for LGBT Americans.”

At the National Conference of State Legislatures Blog, Lisa Soronen discusses Mount Lemmon Fire District v. Guido, in which the justices will decide next term whether the 20-employee minimum in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act applies to local subdivisions, noting that “small special districts [are] particularly vulnerable to age discrimination lawsuits.”

At the Pacific Legal Foundation, Caleb Trotter urges the justices to review “a challenge by hair braiders in Missouri to the state’s requirement that braiders be licensed as a cosmetologist or barber” and “clarify that courts must consider evidence presented in the record that counters the government’s stated rationales in cases challenging economic regulations.”

We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up.  If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!

The post Wednesday round-up appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from Law http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/05/wednesday-round-up-423/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

[mystlnewsonline]

New Post has been published on https://www.stl.news/missouri-governor-says-affair-wont-deter-him-work/68628/

Missouri governor says affair won't deter him from work

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo.  /January 16, 2018 (AP)(STL.News) — Facing new calls to resign from some fellow Republicans, Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens instead affirmed his intent Tuesday to remain on the job while seeking forgiveness for an extramarital affair that he described as a “personal mistake.”

Greitens, who has stayed out of the public eye since admitting to an affair last week, distributed a message via Facebook and email Tuesday that simultaneously apologized for his actions and asserted that some allegations against him were false and “extremely hurtful.”

“I assure you that this personal mistake will not deter us from the mission we were sent here to do,” Greitens said in the statement. “We have been, and we will, continue to work for and to fight for the people of Missouri.”

Greitens issued the statement as Republican Sen. Rob Schaaf, of St. Joseph, was calling upon him to resign during a speech on the Senate floor.

“When you ran for office, you promised that you would be a governor known for ethics and transparency,” said Schaaf, directing his comments as if Greitens was there listening. “Instead, you have defined yourself through scandal and covering things up.”

Schaaf concluded: “So governor, I’m asking you: please resign.”

State Reps. Nate Walker or Kirksville, Marsha Haefner of Oakville, Steve Cookson of Poplar Bluff and Kathie Conway of St. Charles all also called for Greitens to step down Tuesday. Several Democrats also have called for the governor’s resignation.

“For our state to continue to move forward, I think it’s time for new leadership there in the governor’s office,” Walker, an early supporter of Greitens, told The Associated Press.

Jim Bennett, Greitens’ private attorney, said the governor will not resign.

St. Louis television station KMOV reported Jan. 10 that Greitens had an affair with his St. Louis hairdresser in 2015 as he was preparing to run for governor. Greitens acknowledged the affair in a statement minutes after the report. But Bennett later denied the woman’s claim to her now ex-husband — recorded without her knowledge during a March 2015 conversation — that Greitens took a compromising photo to ensure her silence.

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner announced a criminal investigation on Thursday, citing “serious allegations” against Greitens, 43, a former Navy SEAL officer who defeated Democratic Attorney General Chris Koster in the November 2016 gubernatorial race.

The woman has declined to speak publicly, and The Associated Press is not naming her. Bennett said Greitens did not reach a financial settlement with the woman, and there is no non-disclosure agreement.

Greitens’ affair has been a disruption as Missouri lawmakers start the 2018 legislative session.

The House has delayed a vote on a Greitens-backed ethics bill limiting lobbyist gifts to lawmakers. It gave initial approval Tuesday to a bill loosening regulations on hair braiders, but not without Democratic Rep. Michael Butler taking a rhetorical jab during debate by alluding to the governor’s affair with a hairdresser.

The Senate confirmed 25 of Greitens’ appointees to various boards and commissions Tuesday. A Senate panel also went forward with a hearing on a pair of tax-cut proposals, even as Greitens canceled plans Tuesday for a tour outlining his own tax reform proposals.

Meanwhile, suburban St. Louis attorney Al Watkins provided the AP with an audio recording of a fact-finding call from Lucinda Luetkemeyer, general counsel in the governor’s office, that Watkins received about eight hours before the KMOV story.

Watkins, the attorney for the ex-husband of the woman involved in the affair, questioned the appropriateness of an attorney on the state payroll calling him about matters Greitens himself has described as private and personal.

“She was clearly calling me trying to facilitate damage control,” Watkins said of Luetkemeyer. “If it’s a private and personal matter, why is your counsel calling?”

Watkins said he turned over several hours of new audio recordings between the woman and her ex-husband to Gardner’s office. He declined to discuss what was on the recordings but called it “graphic.”

Watkins said those tapes also were provided to the FBI. The FBI has not confirmed if a federal investigation is underway.

Luetkemeyer in an email statement said that her office had heard Watkins was “shopping around” a story about Greitens but that she didn’t know whether the story involved the governor’s personal life or pertained to his official duties.

Luetkemeyer said she left her office to call Watkins and used her personal cellphone.

“Following the call, I referred the matter to the Governor’s personal counsel, and advised our official press office that further comment related to this issue should be handled by the Governor’s personal counsel,” Luetkemeyer said in her email.

Greitens is paying his own legal fees, Bennett said.

___

By DAVID A. LIEB, SUMMER BALLENTINE and JIM SALTER,  by Associated Press – published on STL.News by St. Louis Media, LLC (Z.S)

___

[007blonded]

Hair Braiders Missouri #2023 Application #Shorts

Application Process for Missouri Hairbraiders 1. Contact Information ℹ️ Name, address, and Social Security Number 2. Employment Information Establishment 🏢 address, license 🪪 number and phone. 3. Criminal Background 🚓 List all offenses that are misdemeanors and felonies 👮🏾‍♀️ 4. Citizenship 🇺🇸 and Notarized Yes or No to a citizen and get a notary public 🖊️ to sign it. 5. ✅…

[kansascitywatch]

Beauty group backs less-strict licensing for hair braiders

Missouri among 13 states requiring hair braiders to obtain some form of cosmetology license

from Top Stories http://www.kmbc.com/article/beauty-group-backs-less-strict-licensing-for-hair-braiders/12846502

from Kansas City Watch https://kansascitywatch.wordpress.com/2017/10/13/beauty-group-backs-less-strict-licensing-for-hair-braiders/

[yanieredd]

Rocking my Hair by Ovie T today 👅 @hairbyovie the best hair braider in Kansas City 💜 (at Kansas City, Missouri)

[nancyedimick]

Short Circuit: A roundup of recent federal court decisions

(Here is the latest edition of the Institute for Justice’s weekly Short Circuit newsletter, written by John Ross.)

In 2011, Virginia regulators barred a hospital from opening a neonatal intensive care unit, lest it compete with another hospital’s preexisting unit across town. This was a poor decision, and one that got the long-form journalistic treatment over at Reason last week. IJ Senior Attorney Darpana Sheth is interviewed.

Washington, D.C., lets you hang signs on lampposts for 180 days, unless they relate to an event, in which case they must be taken down within 30 days after the event. Does the law discriminate against signs with event-related content? D.C. Circuit: “The fact that District officials may look at what a poster says to determine whether it is ‘event-related’ does not render the District’s lamppost rule content-based.”

Three hospitals — one of which has a unionized workforce — merge. Unionized employees continue to receive hiring preference at unionized hospital, but, when a new position opens at the other two hospitals, nonunion employees gets first dibs. Union: That’s discrimination. National Labor Relations Board: Just so. First Circuit: But no more so than the preference for union employees at the unionized hospital.

Out-of-state motorist ticketed for speeding in Liberty, N.Y. (pop. 9,885), crosses out “Liberty” and writes “Tyranny” on payment form as well as “F— YOUR SH—Y TOWN B—-ES.” His payment is rejected, so he must appear in court — where he is arrested, charged with “aggravated harassment” of the town clerk. District court: He can sue the prosecutor who filed the charge (and who has since settled). Second Circuit: But qualified immunity for the arresting officers.

Allegation: Jersey City, N.J., police wish to break up party, tell man working as security guard to leave. He demurs but does not resist. A group of officers beat him, fracturing his skull, in front of a crowd of 100 people. District court: This goes to trial. Third Circuit: Seems about right; the officer can appeal denial of qualified immunity afterward.

Anonymous tipster sees man loading, concealing gun in high-crime area. Ranson, W.Va., police stop man, ask if he has any weapons. Man gives only a “weird look” in response. Is that reasonably suspicious enough to justify a frisk, given that concealed carry is broadly legal in the state? It is, says the Fourth Circuit, sitting en banc. (We discussed the original panel’s now-reversed decision on the podcast.)

Citizen accuses Gretna, La., city council members of accepting illegal campaign contributions. Council chairman objects. Police officer forcibly removes citizen from council meeting. Fifth Circuit: The officer is immune from First Amendment suit, as he was just following orders, but the chairman may be liable.

Allegation: Cleveland officer accuses motorist of driving on suspended license. The motorist demurs; in fact his license is not suspended. The officer drags him from his car, slams him against the windshield, arrests him. Sixth Circuit: no qualified immunity.

Over the course of a year, Detroit court officer pockets $50k tendered to him by defendants to pay outstanding civil judgments. Officer: I should get to keep 7 percent as wages and compensation. Sixth Circuit: Go directly to jail. Do not collect 7 percent.

U.S. law enforcers may not arrest drug suspects on foreign soil without the cooperation of local law enforcers, but, if agents disregard this prohibition, arrestees cannot sue them (rather they’re subject to internal discipline). Seventh Circuit: So a Nigerian senator and purported heroin trafficker (also related to the inspiration for the TV series “Orange is the New Black”) who claims the DEA attempted to abduct him cannot sue — because no private right of action.

Allegation: Rapid City, S.D.. officer employs arm bar, a grappling technique whereby one hyperextends another’s elbow (possibly snapping it backward), on father who questioned the arrest of his son too insistently. Eighth Circuit: qualified immunity.

Disbarred attorney who made his name defeating police departments in brutality lawsuits sets his sights on a new injustice — Los Angeles’ requirement that one pay a refundable fee to challenge parking tickets. Ninth Circuit: All of his arguments fail.

To settle class action, debt-collection agency agrees to pay each named plaintiff $1k, class counsel $68k — and to make a $35k donation to charity on behalf of 4 million unnamed plaintiffs, who lose right to sue in the future. Ninth Circuit: That’s a no go.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau investigates for-profit lenders created by several Native American tribes. Ninth Circuit: which is totally within the Bureau’s jurisdiction. We have consistently held that generally applicable laws apply to Native American tribes unless Congress expressly provides otherwise, and Congress did not do so here.

Allegation: At 5:30 a.m., Clayton County, Ga., SWAT officer tosses flash-bang grenade into drug suspect’s bedroom; it lands on his pregnant girlfriend, who suffers serious burns. (Police find a tenth of an ounce of pot.) Eleventh Circuit: qualified immunity.

And in en banc news, the Second Circuit — over four dissents — will not rehear an earlier panel decision that the Stored Communications Act does not apply outside the United States and cannot be used to force Microsoft to disclose customer emails stored on a server in Ireland. (Panel decision here.)

Last week, the South Dakota Senate unanimously approved a bill that would permit African-style hair braiders to work without obtaining a cosmetology license. The state requires aspiring cosmetologists to complete 2,100 hours of training and coursework (the most burdensome requirement in the country), but little, if any, of it is relevant to braiders. Should the bill become law, South Dakota would become the 21st state to free the braiders. Read more here. In related news, IJ is currently challenging the application of Missouri’s 1,500-hour cosmetology training requirement to hair braiders. Click here for more on that.

Originally Found On: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/01/30/short-circuit-a-roundup-of-recent-federal-court-decisions-40/

[wolfandpravato]

Short Circuit: A roundup of recent federal court decisions

(Here is the latest edition of the Institute for Justice’s weekly Short Circuit newsletter, written by John Ross.)

In 2011, Virginia regulators barred a hospital from opening a neonatal intensive care unit, lest it compete with another hospital’s preexisting unit across town. This was a poor decision, and one that got the long-form journalistic treatment over at Reason last week. IJ Senior Attorney Darpana Sheth is interviewed.

Washington, D.C., lets you hang signs on lampposts for 180 days, unless they relate to an event, in which case they must be taken down within 30 days after the event. Does the law discriminate against signs with event-related content? D.C. Circuit: “The fact that District officials may look at what a poster says to determine whether it is ‘event-related’ does not render the District’s lamppost rule content-based.”

Three hospitals — one of which has a unionized workforce — merge. Unionized employees continue to receive hiring preference at unionized hospital, but, when a new position opens at the other two hospitals, nonunion employees gets first dibs. Union: That’s discrimination. National Labor Relations Board: Just so. First Circuit: But no more so than the preference for union employees at the unionized hospital.

Out-of-state motorist ticketed for speeding in Liberty, N.Y. (pop. 9,885), crosses out “Liberty” and writes “Tyranny” on payment form as well as “F— YOUR SH—Y TOWN B—-ES.” His payment is rejected, so he must appear in court — where he is arrested, charged with “aggravated harassment” of the town clerk. District court: He can sue the prosecutor who filed the charge (and who has since settled). Second Circuit: But qualified immunity for the arresting officers.

Allegation: Jersey City, N.J., police wish to break up party, tell man working as security guard to leave. He demurs but does not resist. A group of officers beat him, fracturing his skull, in front of a crowd of 100 people. District court: This goes to trial. Third Circuit: Seems about right; the officer can appeal denial of qualified immunity afterward.

Anonymous tipster sees man loading, concealing gun in high-crime area. Ranson, W.Va., police stop man, ask if he has any weapons. Man gives only a “weird look” in response. Is that reasonably suspicious enough to justify a frisk, given that concealed carry is broadly legal in the state? It is, says the Fourth Circuit, sitting en banc. (We discussed the original panel’s now-reversed decision on the podcast.)

Citizen accuses Gretna, La., city council members of accepting illegal campaign contributions. Council chairman objects. Police officer forcibly removes citizen from council meeting. Fifth Circuit: The officer is immune from First Amendment suit, as he was just following orders, but the chairman may be liable.

Allegation: Cleveland officer accuses motorist of driving on suspended license. The motorist demurs; in fact his license is not suspended. The officer drags him from his car, slams him against the windshield, arrests him. Sixth Circuit: no qualified immunity.

Over the course of a year, Detroit court officer pockets $50k tendered to him by defendants to pay outstanding civil judgments. Officer: I should get to keep 7 percent as wages and compensation. Sixth Circuit: Go directly to jail. Do not collect 7 percent.

U.S. law enforcers may not arrest drug suspects on foreign soil without the cooperation of local law enforcers, but, if agents disregard this prohibition, arrestees cannot sue them (rather they’re subject to internal discipline). Seventh Circuit: So a Nigerian senator and purported heroin trafficker (also related to the inspiration for the TV series “Orange is the New Black”) who claims the DEA attempted to abduct him cannot sue — because no private right of action.

Allegation: Rapid City, S.D.. officer employs arm bar, a grappling technique whereby one hyperextends another’s elbow (possibly snapping it backward), on father who questioned the arrest of his son too insistently. Eighth Circuit: qualified immunity.

Disbarred attorney who made his name defeating police departments in brutality lawsuits sets his sights on a new injustice — Los Angeles’ requirement that one pay a refundable fee to challenge parking tickets. Ninth Circuit: All of his arguments fail.

To settle class action, debt-collection agency agrees to pay each named plaintiff $1k, class counsel $68k — and to make a $35k donation to charity on behalf of 4 million unnamed plaintiffs, who lose right to sue in the future. Ninth Circuit: That’s a no go.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau investigates for-profit lenders created by several Native American tribes. Ninth Circuit: which is totally within the Bureau’s jurisdiction. We have consistently held that generally applicable laws apply to Native American tribes unless Congress expressly provides otherwise, and Congress did not do so here.

Allegation: At 5:30 a.m., Clayton County, Ga., SWAT officer tosses flash-bang grenade into drug suspect’s bedroom; it lands on his pregnant girlfriend, who suffers serious burns. (Police find a tenth of an ounce of pot.) Eleventh Circuit: qualified immunity.

And in en banc news, the Second Circuit — over four dissents — will not rehear an earlier panel decision that the Stored Communications Act does not apply outside the United States and cannot be used to force Microsoft to disclose customer emails stored on a server in Ireland. (Panel decision here.)

Last week, the South Dakota Senate unanimously approved a bill that would permit African-style hair braiders to work without obtaining a cosmetology license. The state requires aspiring cosmetologists to complete 2,100 hours of training and coursework (the most burdensome requirement in the country), but little, if any, of it is relevant to braiders. Should the bill become law, South Dakota would become the 21st state to free the braiders. Read more here. In related news, IJ is currently challenging the application of Missouri’s 1,500-hour cosmetology training requirement to hair braiders. Click here for more on that.

Originally Found On: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/01/30/short-circuit-a-roundup-of-recent-federal-court-decisions-40/

[007blonded]

Missouri Hair Braiding License Application 2023-24

UnWeaving Missouri's Hair Braiding Application 2023-24

In this video I discuss the full Missouri Application process for Hair Braiding. #MissouriHairBraider Missouri has changed some of its horrible 😭 practices but you will need a Social Security Number to apply for a Hair Braiding Certification Registration in #Missouri. Currently the videos for your Hair Braiders Certificate are on YouTube. You no longer have to go to the Cosmetology Education…