#indiana civil rights attorneys

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Victoria Bekiempis at The Guardian:

An Ohio judge has decided that the state’s ban on most abortions was unconstitutional and could not be enforced. Judge Christian Jenkins of the Hamilton county common pleas court also granted a permanent injunction in his ruling on Thursday. Jenkins said that Ohio’s abortion prohibition flouted language in a voter-approved amendment to the state constitution that protected reproductive healthcare. “Ohio voters have spoken. The Ohio constitution now unequivocally protects the right to abortion,” Jenkins said in his ruling. Jenkins’s decision stems from a law that prohibited doctors from performing abortions after the detection of fetal cardiac or embryonic activity. This activity can be as early as six weeks into pregnancy, the Columbus Dispatch reported. While Republican lawmakers in Ohio passed this law in 2019, the legislation did not go into effect until June 2022 – when the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade.

Jenkins temporarily paused the law less than three months after it went into effect. Healthcare providers in Ohio filed suit to permanently end the legislation, as it drove patients to seek reproductive care outside of the state and imperiled several clinics. A young girl who was sexual assaulted in Columbus, Ohio, even had to travel to Indiana for abortion care, spurring still more anger over the measure. Advocates launched a ballot initiative to ensure that reproductive healthcare rights, including abortion, were protected by the state constitution. This campaign passed in November last year, winning 57% of voting Ohioans’ support, the newspaper said. “This is a momentous ruling, showing the power of Ohio’s new Reproductive Freedom Amendment in practice,” Jessie Hill, cooperating attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, said. “The six-week ban is blatantly unconstitutional and has no place in our law.”

In Ohio, Hamilton County Common Pleas Court Judge Christian Jenkins ruled that the Buckeye State’s abortion ban is unlawful due to the fact that the state’s voters last year voted to put abortion rights protections in the state’s constitution.

[whitesinhistory]

On August 7, 1930, a white mob used crowbars and hammers to break into the Grant County jail in Marion, Indiana, to lynch three young Black men who had been arrested earlier that afternoon after being accused of murdering a white man and assaulting a white woman. Thomas Shipp and Abram Smith, both 19, were severely beaten and lynched, and 16-year-old James Cameron was badly beaten but survived.

That afternoon, word of the charges against these young Black men spread, and a growing mob of angry white residents gathered outside the Grant County jail. Around 9:30 pm, the mob attempted to rush the jail and was repelled by tear gas. An hour later, members of the mob successfully barreled past the sheriff and three deputies, grabbed Mr. Shipp and Mr. Smith from their cells as they prayed, and dragged them into the street. By then, the crowd totaled between 5,000 and 10,000 people. While spectators watched and cheered, the mob beat, tortured, and hanged both men from trees in the courthouse yard, brutally murdering them without the benefit of trial or legal proof of guilt.

As the bodies of Mr. Shipp and Mr. Smith remained suspended above the crowd, members of the mob re-entered the jail and grabbed 16-year-old James Cameron, another Black youth accused of being involved in the crime. The mob beat the teenager severely and was preparing to hang him alongside the others, but when a member of the crowd intervened and said he was innocent, James was released. 

The brutalized bodies of Mr. Shipp and Mr. Smith were hanged from trees in the courthouse yard and kept there for hours as a crowd of white men, women, and children grew by the thousands. Public spectacle lynchings, in which large crowds of white people, often numbering in the thousands, gathered to witness and participate in pre-planned heinous killings that featured prolonged torture, mutilation, dismemberment and/or burning of the victim, were common during this time. When the sheriff eventually cut the ropes off the corpses, the crowd rushed forward to take parts of the men's bodies as "souvenirs" before finally dispersing.

Enraged by the lynching, the NAACP traveled to Marion to investigate and later provided the U.S. attorney general with the names of 27 people believed to have participated. Though the lynching was photographed and spectators were clearly visible, local residents claimed not to recognize anyone pictured. Charges were finally brought against the leaders of the mob, but all-white juries acquitted them despite this overwhelming evidence. In contrast, James Cameron, the Black teenager who survived, was tried for murder, convicted of being an accessory, and served four years in prison. The alleged assault victim, Mary Ball, later testified that she had not been raped.

After his release, James Cameron founded four NAACP chapters in Indiana, authored hundreds of essays on civil rights and a 1982 memoir, and on Juneteenth 1988 opened America’s Black Holocaust Museum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to document the African American Struggle. “I can forgive but I can never forget,” he was quoted as saying. “That’s why I started this museum.” Mr. Cameron was pardoned by the state of Indiana in 1993 and died in 2006.

A photograph of Mr. Shipp’s and Mr. Smith’s battered corpses hanging lifeless from a tree, with white spectators proudly standing below, remains one of the most iconic and infamous photographs of an American lynching. In 1937, an encounter with the photo inspired New York schoolteacher Abel Meeropol to write “Strange Fruit,” a haunting poem about lynching that later became a famous song recorded by Billie Holiday.

[odinsblog]

Back in 2001, Senate Bill 1 passed the Texas state legislature and banned Harris County - that's Houston - from keeping polls open late into the night, or overnight, so that shift workers could vote, while expanding early voting in rural counties. It lets the state throw away absentee ballots that don't come in with the voters drivers license number attached, without telling people that their vote hasn't been counted. It makes it a felony for any state employee to mail out an unsolicited absentee ballot. It requires election officials to do monthly purges of voting rolls, without notifying voters that they'll no longer be able to vote.

It provides new legal protections for so-called, non-partisan poll watchers.

They're actually recruiting Proud Boys down in Texas to be poll watchers, and it makes it a one year in prison offense if you try to stop them or confront them.

And it maintains the state's lack of convenient online voter registration, making it the most difficult state in the union to vote in. That was two years ago to set up Greg Abbott's election victory in the election of 2022.

Now they're coming back with a brand new piece of legislation that would allow the Republican Secretary of State to throw out all the votes in any county with over 2.7 million people, if the secretary of state believes there are any “irregularities” in the count. Now interestingly enough, the county that has Dallas has 2.6 million people and it votes Republican. The county that has Houston, which votes Democratic, has 2.7 million people. It has over 2.6 million, so in the law they made it only apply to any county with over 2.6 million people.

This is just one small piece of a much larger effort.

As the Texas Civil Rights Project noted, in just the first four years after five corrupt Republicans on the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, Texas Republicans closed 1173 polling places in mostly Black and Hispanic counties that had previously been protected by the Voting Rights Act, but none of that was enough for them.

As the Houston Chronicle noted two days ago, the effort is now to be able to throw out election results in Houston, and then say, “now the state has to have a new election that has to be paid for by the county,” or “now the county has to have a new election that has to be paid for by the county.”

And of course they want to do this because they know that special elections have very low turnout, and low turnout always favors Republicans, because the people who can most easily vote are the people who are salaried, upper middle class — white people mostly, and people who are retired. You know the aging Republicans in Texas, and you know it's pretty straightforward stuff.

Out of the 254 counties in Texas, only Harris County, only Houston was selected for this. And this is, you know, a county now that is led by people of color, as the Harris County attorney pointed out.

And Republican Secretaries of State across the nation were vigorously purging people from the polls. Over 17 million, more than 10% of America's active voters were purged off voting rolls in just the two years leading up to the 2018 elections, according to NBC News.

In North Carolina, now this again after the Voting Rights Act was gutted by five Republicans on the Supreme Court, in North Carolina 158 polling places were permanently closed in the 40 counties with the largest African-American populations leading up. This was just before the 2016 election, the Donald Trump election. This led to a 16% decline in African-American early voting in that state.

An MIT study found that nationwide, Hispanic voters wait 150% longer than white people do in line.

Black voters wait 200% longer in line.

In Indiana when then Governor Mike Pence passed a rigorous new Voter ID law, it produced an 11.5% drop in African-American voting in Indiana. This is why we didn't get President Al Gore or President Hillary Clinton. We would have gotten both of them if it wasn't for voter suppression.

Down in Florida, Jeb Bush knocked 90,000 African-Americans off the voting rolls so that his brother could win by 537 votes. Or we would have had President Al Gore, if it had been illegal for Jeb Bush to throw those people off the voting rolls.

And the same thing in 2016: an 11.5% drop in African-American voting just in Indiana, because of a law that Mike Pence passed.

Well, it was happening all over the country. By 2016, the Republican Party had really fine-tuned this voter suppression machine.

The New York Times reports in 2017 that just in Wisconsin, this is in the 2016 election, about 17,000 registered votes were turned away from the polls because of a new Voter ID law from Scott Walker.

In 2018, Greg Palace sued a number of Republican Secretaries of State and got his hands on purge lists that included 90,000 people in largely Democratic parts of Nevada, and 769,000 people in Colorado.

Keep in mind this is when Colorado was run by Republicans. 340,000 people in Georgia, and 469,000 people purged in Indiana.

In the dissent, in the Huston v. Randolph case, this was the case in 2018, where five Republicans on the Supreme Court said, “Yeah, it's fine. You can keep purging people from voting rolls.”

This was the Ohio Secretary of State, Stephen Breyer pointed out in his dissent, and I quote, “the record shows that in 2012, Ohio identified 1.5 million registered voters, nearly 20% of its 8 million registered voters as ineligible to remain on the voting rolls because they changed their residences,” and he points out that's 20% of the state's voters - who were kicked off for moving, when on any average year, about 4% of Americans move. How do these numbers come in while they just, you know, hey, Brown people, Black people, college towns, let's just purge them.

Calling the findings disturbing, the Brennan Center said, almost 4 million more names were purged in the rolls between 2014 and 2016. This led up to the Trump election.

Then between 2006 and 2008, this growth in the number of removed voters represented an increase of 33%, far outstripping growth of both total registered voters, 18%, and total population 6%.

This has been their strategy for years and years and years, to throw people off the voting rolls. Now on top of that, they're waging their culture wars, but the culture wars are not all that popular among most Americans.

—Republicans cry “Voter Fraud!” while enacting massive Voter Suppression laws

[jordanianroyals]

Authorities arrest a relative of the King of Jordan and 3 others for $1M insider-trading plot

A relative of the King of Jordan and three other men in Miami face charges of conspiring to make insider stock trades on a business acquired by one of South Florida’s major publicly held companies, MasTec

By the Associated Press, September 16, 2024

Authorities charged four men, including a relative of the King of Jordan, for conspiring to make insider stock trades on a business acquired by one of South Florida’s major publicly held companies, MasTec.

Federico Nannini, 26; his father, Mauro Nannini, 63; and two of his friends, Alejandro Thermiotis, 26; and Francisco Tonarely, 25, were arrested Friday and charged in a federal indictment with one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and 24 related offenses, The Miami Herald reported.

Thermiotis is the King of Jordan's relative. Thermiotis’ brother, Jameel, married King Abdulla’s daughter, Princess Iman, last year. The Jordanian Royal Palace did not respond to a request for comment.

According to the indictment from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, the four defendants shared confidential information within a close circle of family and friends, and used it to buy shares at a lower price and then turn a $1 million profit after the information became public.

The Securities and Exchange Commission also filed a parallel civil lawsuit against them in Miami federal court. All four had their first court appearances on Friday.

Federal authorities said the alleged scheme began in June 2022 when Federico Nannini, a consultant, began advising MasTec on its planned acquisition of Indiana-based Infrastructure and Energy Alternatives.

MasTec is an engineering and construction company based in Coral Gables, Florida, that provides infrastructure services for the energy, utility and communications industries.

Federico Nannini then started sharing the confidential information with his father, Mauro Nannini, and Thermiotis, a close friend, according to the indictment. Federico Nannini, Thermiotis and Tonarely went to Gulliver Preparatory School together in Pinecrest, Florida, a suburban village in Miami-Dade County.

Mauro Nannini bought shares in Infrastructure and Energy Alternatives the day after his son got access to the financial information about the proposed MasTec acquisition, the indictment said.

Thermiotis also passed along the insider information about the deal to Tonarely.

In a text, Tonarely wrote Thermiotis: “I want to make some money right now. … What [do] we do?” After sharing the confidential information, Thermiotis texted him: “Not a soul okay.” Tonarely responded: “Obviously. … You told me not to.” Days later, a member of Tonarely’s family signed a letter sponsoring Thermiotis’ membership at a Miami yacht club, prosecutors noted in a news release. As the MasTec acquisition progressed, Federico Nannini continued to update his father and close friend, Thermiotis, about the deal. In turn, Thermiotis continued to share the insider information with Tonarely, prosecutors said. In July 2022, Federico Nannini started worrying that the acquisition would fall through and confided in his father. Mauro Nannini sold his stock in Infrastructure and Energy Alternatives, the indictment says. But when Federico Nannini saw confidential financial paperwork saying the deal was happening after all, he texted his friend, Thermiotis: “It’s going thru. … Holy s--- bro.” Thermiotis’ response: “Don’t text. … But lfg.” Lfg means “let’s f---ing go.” With that encouraging insider information, Mauro Nannini began to buy back his position in Infrastructure and Energy Alternatives, according to the indictment. Toward the end of July, when MasTec’s acquisition of Infrastructure and Energy Alternatives was publicly announced, Mauro Nannini, Thermiotis and Tonarely sold their shares and options in the Indiana company for a profit, according to the indictment. A couple of days later, on July 27, 2022, Federico Nannini texted Thermiotis a picture of a Rolex Daytona with the message: “You wanna hook it up for the boy. I know it’s a little over budget but this is the one.” Thermiotis responded: “Haahaha yeah but give it a bit. … Prices should come down a bit on everything.”

As the MasTec acquisition progressed, Federico Nannini continued to update his father and close friend, Thermiotis, about the deal. In turn, Thermiotis continued to share the insider information with Tonarely, prosecutors said.

At one point in July 2022, when Federico Nannini became worried the acquisition would not go through, Mauro Nannini sold his IEA stock, according to the indictment.

When Federico Nannini received confidential financials that indicated the acquisition was going forward, he texted Thermiotis, who responded.

At that point, Mauro Nannini began to buy back his position in IEA stock and options, the indictment said.

When MasTec’s acquisition of IEA was reported publicly on July 25, 2022, Mauro Nannini, Thermiotis, and Tonarely all sold their shares and option contracts in IEA at a profit.

A conviction for conspiracy to commit securities fraud carries up to five years in prison, while a conviction on the related 24 securities fraud charges carries maximum penalties of 20 to 25 years imprisonment.

[accras]

"The law provides an avenue for immigrants on humanitarian parole from Ukraine to obtain driver’s licenses and identification cards. The class-action lawsuit seeks to force the Bureau of Motor Vehicles to offer the same opportunities to immigrants on humanitarian parole from other countries.

Attorneys argue in court documents that the law violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. It also creates its own immigration classifications, which is an authority reserved by the federal government, they contend.

ACLU lawyer Gavin Rose described the law in court as “a textbook example of national origin discrimination.”

Four of the five Haitian immigrants — who are all on humanitarian parole — live in rural areas without public transportation, according to court documents. They rely on others for rides to work and other everyday activities such as grocery shopping."

[reasoningdaily]

https://x.com/AfricanArchives/status/1702803593739305429?t=IEuPO-htAKpQUrQ8VMqvKw&s=09

MEET John Morton Finney

John Morton Finney was a Buffalo soldier who fought in World War 1, earned 11 degrees and practiced law until he was 106 years old. He was believed to be the longest practicing attorney in the United States.

—John Morton-Finney (June 25, 1889 January 28, 1998) was an American civil rights activist, lawyer, and educator who earned 11 academic degrees, including 5 law degrees.

—He spent most of his career as an educator and lawyer after serving from 1911 to 1914 in the U.S. Army as a member of the 24th Infantry Regiment, better known as the Buffalo soldiers, and with the American Expeditionary Forces in France during World War I.

—Morton-Finney taught languages at Fisk University in Tennessee and at Lincoln University in Missouri, before moving to Indianapolis, Indiana, where he taught in the Indianapolis Public Schools for forty-seven years.

—Morton-Finney was a member of the original faculty at Indianapolis's Crisps Attucks High School when it opened in 1927 and later became head of its foreign language department. He also taught at Shortridge High School and at other IPS schools.

—Morton-Finney was admitted as a member of the Bar of the Indiana Supreme Court in 1935, as a member of the Bar of the U.S. District Court in 1941, and was admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972.

[lboogie1906]

Buffalo Soldier Attorney John Morton-Finney (June 25, 1889 – January 28, 1998) was a civil rights activist, lawyer, and educator who earned eleven academic degrees, including five law degrees. He spent most of his career as an educator and lawyer after serving (1911-14) in the Army as a member of the 24th Infantry Regiment, known as the Buffalo Soldiers, and with the American Expeditionary Forces in France during WWI. He taught languages at Fisk University and Lincoln University in Missouri, before moving to Indianapolis, where he taught in the Indianapolis Public Schools for forty-seven years. He was a member of the original faculty at Indianapolis’s Crispus Attucks High School when it opened in 1927 and became head of its foreign language department. He taught at Shortridge High School and other IPS schools. He was admitted as a member of the Bar of the Indiana Supreme Court in 1935 and as a member of the Bar of the US District Court in 1941. He retired from practicing law on June 25, 1996, he was believed to have been the oldest practicing attorney in the US. At the time of his death, he was Indiana’s oldest veteran. He was honored with numerous honorary awards and certificates, including one from the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS in 1989, in addition to being commissioned a Kentucky Colonel (1991) by the Governor of Kentucky and named a recipient of a Sagamore of the Wabash award from the Governor of Indiana. He received distinguished alumni and graduate awards from Indiana University and was inducted into the National Bar Association Hall of Fame (1991). The Indianapolis Bar Association and Butler University present awards named in his honor and was admitted to practice before the SCOTUS in 1972. #africanhistory365 #africanexcellence

[thoughtportal]

A federal judge has blocked much of Indiana's ban on gender-affirming care for minors

June 16, 202311:28 PM ET By The Associated Press

INDIANAPOLIS — A federal judge issued an order Friday stopping an Indiana ban on puberty blockers and hormones for transgender minors from taking effect as scheduled July 1.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana sought the temporary injunction in its legal challenge of the Republican-backed law, which was enacted this spring amid a national push by GOP-led legislatures to curb LGBTQ+ rights.

The order from U.S. District Court Judge James Patrick Hanlon will allow the law's prohibition on gender-affirming surgeries to take effect. Hanlon's order also blocks provisions that would prohibit Indiana doctors from communicating with out-of-state doctors about gender-affirming care for their patients younger than 18.

The ACLU filed the lawsuit within hours after Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb signed the bill April 5. The challenge, on behalf of four youths undergoing transgender treatments and an Indiana doctor who provides such care, argued the ban would violate the U.S. Constitution's equal protection guarantees and trampled upon the rights of parents to decide medical treatment for their children.

Indiana's Republican-dominated Legislature approved the ban after contentious hearings that primarily featured testimony from vocal opponents, with many arguing the gender-affirming care lessened the risk of depression and suicide among transgender youth.

Indiana's Republican-dominated Legislature approved the ban after contentious hearings that primarily featured testimony from vocal opponents, with many arguing the gender-affirming care lessened the risk of depression and suicide among young people diagnosed with "gender dysphoria,″ or distress caused when gender identity doesn't match a person's assigned sex.

Hanlon, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, wrote that he was blocking the law from taking effect because its opponents had demonstrated potential irreparable harm to those undergoing treatment and shown "some likelihood of success" in arguments that it was unconstitutional.

The ACLU had provided "evidence of risks to minors' health and wellbeing from gender dysphoria if those treatments can no longer be provided to minors — prolonging of their dysphoria, and causing additional distress and health risks, such as depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and suicidality," Hanlon said. "While the State has identified legitimate reasons for regulation in this area, the designated evidence does not demonstrate, at least at this stage, that the extent of its regulation was closely tailored to uphold those interests."

ACLU leaders hailed the ruling as a victory in the fight "to defend the right of all trans people to be their authentic selves, free from discrimination."

"We won't rest until this unconstitutional law is struck down for good," Ken Falk, the ACLU of Indiana's legal director, said in a statement.

At least 20 GOP-led states have now enacted laws restricting or banning such medical treatments for transgender minors after Missouri's governor signed that state's bill into law last week. Lawsuits have been filed in several states against transgender treatment bans. Federal judges have also blocked enforcement of laws in Alabama and Arkansas, and Oklahoma has agreed to not enforce its ban while opponents seek a temporary court order blocking it.

Indiana bill sponsor Republican Rep. Joanna King of Middlebury said as the ban was debated that it would "protect our children from irreversible, harmful, life-altering procedures."

Republican state Attorney General Todd Rokita's office said in a statement it was disappointed in the decision but that "we will continue to fight for the children." The statement said the ruling "recognizes that the State has shown there are good reasons for regulating gender transition procedures for minors."

The office didn't say whether it would attempt to appeal the injunction before July 1. Provisions of the law that were blocked gave trans youth taking medication to transition until Dec. 31 to stop.

A top attorney for the state told Hanlon during a court hearing on Wednesday that risks from gender-affirming treatments during puberty such as future fertility, bone strength, brain development and possible reversibility had not been adequately studied by scientists.

Such factors make it within the Legislature's authority to decide "we don't want our children to be part of this grand experiment," Indiana Solicitor General Thomas Fisher said.

Though guidelines from leading authorities on gender-affirming medical care already say surgery generally should be reserved for adults, with exceptions for older teens who meet certain criteria, the Indiana law calls for an immediate ban gender-affirming surgeries.

The provisions of the law banning gender-affirming surgeries for minors in Indiana will have no immediate impact. Hanlon wrote in his ruling that no medical providers in the state perform those procedures on people younger than 18.

Representatives from Indiana University Health Riley Children's Hospital, the state's sole hospital-based gender health program, told legislators earlier this year that for patients who are minors, doctors do not perform genital surgeries or provide those surgery referrals. IU Health was not involved in the ACLU's lawsuit.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Erin Reed at Erin In The Morning:

On Tuesday, Gov. Janet Mills of Maine signed LD 227, a sanctuary bill that protects transgender and abortion providers and patients from out-of-state prosecution, into law. With this action, Maine becomes the 16th state to explicitly protect transgender and abortion care in state law from prosecution. This follows several bomb threats targeting state legislators after social media attacks from far-right anti-trans influencers such as Riley Gaines and Chaya Raichik of Libs of TikTok. An earlier version of the bill failed in committee after similar attacks in January. Undeterred, Democrats reconvened and added additional protections to the bill before it was passed into law.

The law is extensive. It asserts that gender-affirming care and reproductive health care are "legal rights" in Maine. It states that criminal and civil actions against providers and patients are not enforceable if the provision or access to that care occurred within Maine’s borders, asserting jurisdiction over those matters. It bars cooperation with out-of-state subpoenas and arrest warrants for gender-affirming care and abortion that happen within the state. It even protects doctors who provide gender-affirming care and abortion from certain adverse actions by medical boards, malpractice insurance, and other regulating entities, shielding those providers from attempts to economically harm them through out-of-state legislation designed to dissuade them from providing care.

The bill also explicitly enshrines the World Professional Association of Transgender Health’s Standards of Care, which have been the target of right-wing disinformation campaigns, into state law for the coverage of transgender healthcare.

The bill is said to be necessary due to attempts to prosecute doctors and seek information from patients across state lines. In recent months, attorneys general in other states have attempted to obtain health care data on transgender patients who traveled to obtain care. According to the United States Senate Finance Committee, attorneys general in Tennessee, Indiana, Missouri, and Texas attempted to obtain detailed medical records "to terrorize transgender teens in their states… opening the door to criminalizing women’s private reproductive health care choices." The most blatant of these attempts was from the Attorney General of Texas, who, according to the Senate Finance Committee, "sent demands to at least two non-Texas entities." 

[...] Despite these threats, legislators strengthened both the abortion and gender-affirming care provisions and pressed forward, passing the bill into law. Provisions found in the new bill include protecting people who "aid and assist" gender-affirming care and abortion, protections against court orders from other states for care obtained in Maine, and even protections against adverse actions by health insurance and malpractice insurance providers, which have been recent targets of out-of-state legislation aimed at financially discouraging doctors from providing gender-affirming care and abortion care even in states where it is legal.

Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D) signs gender-affirming care and abortion sanctuary state bill LD227 into law despite the best efforts of right-wing anti-trans extremists such as Riley Gaines, Courage Is A Habit, and Libs of TikTok who sought to thwart its passage and signature into law.

[inqorporeal]

A bit of good news for your Wednesday morning:

The lawsuit was filed by Muslim and Christian plaintiffs against Bethel Local School District near Dayton, Ohio. The suit claimed the district consulted with attorneys who advised that, under state and federal civil rights laws, a transgender student that attends a school in the district must be permitted to use the restroom of her gender identity. The school acted based on this interpretation, and indeed, Title IX and the 14th Amendment have been interpreted by various courts to apply to transgender individuals. This includes a recent decision in neighboring Indiana.

Despite the school's adherence to this interpretation, the plaintiffs falsely argued that Title IX actually prohibits transgender students from using these restrooms. They also contended that permitting transgender students in restrooms of their gender identity and including LGBTQ+ educational materials infringes on their religious liberty to have "transgender free bathrooms," a phrase taken directly from the ruling. The judge disagreed and dismissed the lawsuit on both merits and standing.

As good as it is to see most such lawsuits get smacked down like the rubbish they are --

Across the United States, a multitude of similar lawsuits are progressing through the courts. Even though the vast majority are consistently rejected, it only requires one judge in an unfavorable circuit to drastically alter the landscape of transgender rights. Anti-trans plaintiffs remain determined to find that judge. For now, however, the transgender community can celebrate another courtroom victory in a year marked by several such triumphs. This provides a glimmer of hope for the future among a year filled with harsh anti-trans legislation.

-- It still blows my fucking mind that with things as bad as they are with corporate greed tanking the economy and actual fascism on the rise, we're wasting precious judicial time whining over who gets access to necessary facilities, and thus who gets to exist in public. This is not normal. IT'S NOT NORMAL. It's people trying to wield local laws like a weapon against one or two or three individuals at a time. Fucking outrageous. Have these people nothing better to do with their time?

[beardedmrbean]

Indiana can now enforce a law banning minors from seeking gender-transitioning treatments after a federal appeals court ruled to remove a temporary injunction issued by a judge last year, which kept the ban from going into effect last summer.

A three-judge panel from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago handed down the decision on Tuesday. Two of the judges were appointed by presidents Reagan and Trump, while the third judge was appointed by President Biden.

The bill, which was signed by Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb on April 5, 2023, was set to become law on July 1, 2023, but was blocked by a judge a month prior following a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana.

U.S. District Court Judge James Patrick Hanlon issued the injunction, which halted the parts of the law prohibiting minors from accessing hormone therapies and puberty blockers, and prohibiting Indiana doctors from communicating with out-of-state doctors about transgender-related treatments for minors. The law's ban on gender-transitioning surgeries for minors was still allowed to take effect.

On Tuesday, the ACLU of Indiana issued a written statement in response to the appeals court's ruling, describing it as "heartbreaking" for transgender minors, their families and doctors.

"As we and our clients consider our next steps, we want all the transgender youth of Indiana to know this fight is far from over," the statement read. "We will continue to challenge this law until it is permanently defeated and Indiana is made a safer place to raise every family."

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita did not share those sentiments and praised the court's decision in a post on X, formerly Twitter, Tuesday evening.

"Our commonsense state law, banning dangerous and irreversible gender-transition procedures for minors, is now enforceable following the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal’s newest order. We are proud to win this fight against the radicals who continue pushing this horrific practice on our children for ideological and financial reasons," he wrote.

The ACLU of Indiana filed the lawsuit last year on behalf of four minors undergoing gender-transitioning treatments and a doctor providing such care. The organization argued that the ban violates the Constitution's equal protection guarantees and strips parents of the right to make medical decisions for their children.

The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association, among other medical groups, claim minors can safely seek gender-transitioning treatments if they are being administered properly.

Representatives from the state's only hospital-based gender health program at Riley Hospital for Children in Indianapolis told legislators last year that doctors do not perform or provide referrals for genital surgeries for minors, according to The Associated Press. The hospital was not involved in the lawsuit opposing the ban.

Twenty-two other states have also enacted laws restricting or banning gender-transitioning treatments for minors. They are: Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.

The bans are in limbo in some of those states as a federal court ruled Arkansas' ban is unconstitutional and temporary injunctions were placed on the laws in Idaho and Montana.

[theworstfoundingfathers]

Who is the worst founding father? Round 2: James Madison vs Patrick Henry

Note: Sorry another long one ahead.

James Madison Jr. (March 16, 1751 – June 28, 1836) was an American statesman, diplomat, and Founding Father. He served as the fourth president of the United States from 1809 to 1817. Madison is hailed as the "Father of the Constitution" for his pivotal role in drafting and promoting the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights.

During the early 1790s, Madison opposed the economic program and the accompanying centralization of power favored by Secretary of the Treasury Hamilton. Alongside Thomas Jefferson, he organized the Democratic–Republican Party in opposition to Hamilton's Federalist Party.

Madison was elected president in 1808. Motivated by the desire for acquiring land held by Britain, Spain, and Native Americans, and after diplomatic protests with a trade embargo failed to end British seizures of American shipped goods, he led the United States into the War of 1812. 

By treaty or through war, Native American tribes ceded 26,000,000 acres (11,000,000 ha) of land to the United States under Madison's presidency.

Upon becoming president, Madison said the federal government's duty was to convert Native Americans by the "participation of the improvements of which the human mind and manners are susceptible in a civilized state". In September 1809, Governor Harrison invited several tribes to a meeting in Fort Wayne. During the negotiations, Harrison promised large subsidies and direct payments to the tribes if they would cede the lands under discussion. Madison agreed to the Treaty of Fort Wayne, negotiated and signed by Indiana Territory's Governor Harrison. In the treaty, the American Indian tribes were compensated $5,200 ($109,122 in 2020) in goods and $500 in cash ($10,900 in 2020), with $250 in annual payments ($5,450 in 2020), in return for the cession of 3 million acres of land (approximately 12,140 square kilometers) with incentivized subsidies paid to individual tribes for exerting their influence over less cooperative tribes.

Angered by the treaty, eventually hostilities broke between Shawnee leader Tecumseh's followers and American settlers. Tensions continued to rise, leading to the Battle of Tippecanoe during a period sometimes called Tecumseh's War. Tecumseh was defeated and Indians were pushed off their tribal lands, replaced entirely by white settlers.

Madison did not believe American Indians could be fully assimilated to the values of Euro-American culture. He believed that Native Americans may have been unwilling to make "the transition from the hunter, or even the herdsman state, to the agriculture". Madison feared that Native Americans had too great an influence on the settlers they interacted with, who in his view were "irresistibly attracted by that complete liberty, that freedom from bonds, obligations, duties, that absence of care and anxiety which characterize the savage state".

When Madison moved to Washington, D.C. in 1801, he brought slaves from Montpelier. He also hired slaves from other slave holders in Washington, D.C.. During Madison's presidency, his White House slaves included John Freeman, Jennings, Sukey, Joseph Bolden, Jim, and Abram. By 1801, Madison's slave population at Montpelier was slightly over 100. During the 1820s and 1830s, Madison sold land and slaves to repay debts. In 1836, at the time of Madison's death, he owned 36 taxable slaves. Madison did not free any of his slaves either during his lifetime or in his will.





Patrick Henry (May 29, 1736 – June 6, 1799) was an American attorney, planter, politician and orator known for declaring to the Second Virginia Convention (1775): "Give me liberty, or give me death!" A Founding Father, he served as the first and sixth post-colonial Governor of Virginia, from 1776 to 1779 and from 1784 to 1786.

The actions of the national government under the Articles of Confederation made Henry fear a strong federal government, and he declined appointment as a delegate to the 1787 Constitutional Convention. He actively opposed the ratification of the United States Constitution, both fearing a powerful central government and because there was as yet no Bill of Rights.

A slaveholder throughout his adult life, he hoped to see the institution end but had no plan beyond ending the importation of slaves.

[judyccfinds]

Appellate Litigation Specialists Indiana

When it comes to navigating the complexities of the legal system, appellate litigation specialists in Indiana play a critical role in helping clients challenge unfavorable decisions. These specialists focus on appellate law, representing clients in higher courts to ensure that justice is served and that legal standards are upheld. Brownstone Law is a prominent firm in this field, offering comprehensive appellate services throughout Indiana, including major cities like Indianapolis and Fort Wayne.

Understanding Appellate Litigation

Appellate litigation refers to the process of appealing a court's decision to a higher court. Unlike trial litigation, which involves presenting evidence and witness testimonies, appellate litigation focuses on reviewing the legal proceedings of the trial court. This process aims to identify and rectify legal errors that may have impacted the outcome of the case.

Key components of appellate litigation include:

Notice of Appeal: The first step in the appellate process is filing a notice of appeal, which must be done within a specific time frame following the court's decision.

Preparation of the Record: This involves compiling all relevant documents, transcripts, and evidence presented during the trial for the appellate court's review.

Filing Briefs: Both parties submit written briefs that outline their legal arguments, with the appellant seeking to overturn the lower court's decision.

Oral Arguments: In some cases, attorneys may present oral arguments to the appellate judges, further advocating for their clients' positions.

Understanding these components is essential for clients considering an appeal, and the expertise of appellate litigation specialists in Indiana can greatly improve the chances of a successful outcome.

The Importance of Appellate Litigation Specialists

Hiring appellate litigation specialists is vital for anyone seeking to challenge a court decision. These specialists bring a wealth of knowledge and experience that is crucial for navigating the complexities of the appellate process.

Expertise in Appellate Law: Appellate litigation specialists have a deep understanding of the nuances of appellate law, court procedures, and the specific legal standards that apply in appeals. Their expertise is essential for effectively arguing cases in appellate courts.

Thorough Case Analysis: Specialists conduct comprehensive reviews of trial records, identifying potential grounds for appeal based on legal errors or newly discovered evidence. This meticulous approach ensures that no relevant detail is overlooked.

Strategic Advocacy: With a strong grasp of the appellate court's dynamics, these specialists can formulate tailored strategies to present their clients' arguments effectively. They know how to frame issues in a way that resonates with appellate judges.

Support Throughout the Process: Navigating the appellate system can be daunting. Appellate litigation specialists provide essential guidance and support, helping clients understand their options and the implications of each step in the process.

Engaging with Brownstone Law ensures clients have access to experienced appellate litigation specialists who are dedicated to achieving the best possible results.

Areas of Expertise in Appellate Litigation

At Brownstone Law, appellate litigation specialists focus on several key areas of law, enabling them to provide targeted support based on clients' specific needs. These areas include:

Civil Appeals: Specialists handle a wide range of civil cases, including contract disputes, tort claims, and employment matters. They ensure that clients' rights are protected and upheld in civil litigation.

Criminal Appeals: Representing defendants who wish to challenge their convictions, criminal appellate specialists understand the complexities of criminal law and the appeals process. They work diligently to identify legal errors that may have affected the trial outcome.

Federal Appeals: With experience in federal appellate courts, Brownstone Law's specialists provide knowledgeable representation in cases that fall under federal jurisdiction. The rules and procedures in federal appeals differ from state courts, making this expertise critical.

Complex Legal Issues: Appellate litigation specialists at Brownstone Law focus on complex issues such as antitrust laws, employment regulations, and white-collar crime. Their in-depth knowledge allows them to navigate these challenging legal landscapes effectively.

Understanding the specific areas of focus helps clients determine if Brownstone Law has the right specialists to meet their appellate needs.

The Appellate Litigation Process

The appellate litigation process involves several critical steps that must be followed meticulously. Here’s an overview of the typical process:

Notice of Appeal: The first step is filing a notice of appeal with the appropriate court. This document formally initiates the appeal and must be submitted within the stipulated timeframe, often 30 days from the decision being contested.

Preparation of the Record: The appellant's attorney arranges for the compilation of the trial record, which includes all documents, evidence, and transcripts relevant to the case. This record is crucial for the appellate court's review.

Filing Briefs: The appellant submits a brief that outlines the legal arguments for the appeal, while the appellee files a response brief defending the lower court's decision. These documents are critical in framing the issues for the appellate judges.

Oral Argument: In some cases, the appellate court may allow both parties to present oral arguments. This provides an opportunity for attorneys to clarify their points and respond to questions from the judges.

Court Decision: After reviewing the briefs and hearing oral arguments, the appellate court will issue a decision. This may affirm, reverse, or remand the case back to the lower court for further proceedings.

Being well-informed about these steps can empower clients to navigate the appellate process more effectively. The guidance of appellate litigation specialists in Indiana is invaluable during this time.

Common Grounds for Appeal

Several common grounds may warrant an appeal in both civil and criminal cases. Understanding these grounds is essential for clients considering an appeal:

Legal Errors: Mistakes made during the trial that violate the defendant's rights or misapply the law can be grounds for appeal. This includes improper jury instructions or the admission of inadmissible evidence.

Insufficient Evidence: Claims that the evidence presented at trial was inadequate to support a conviction or judgment can lead to a successful appeal.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: Allegations that the defense attorney did not provide competent representation during the trial can serve as valid grounds for an appeal.

Procedural Errors: Mistakes in the trial process, such as improper jury selection or failure to allow key evidence, can also be grounds for appeal.

Being aware of these potential grounds allows clients to better evaluate their cases and work with appellate litigation specialists to develop a solid appeal strategy.

The Benefits of Choosing Brownstone Law

When it comes to appellate litigation in Indiana, Brownstone Law offers several distinct advantages:

Comprehensive Appellate Services: The firm provides extensive appellate services across Indiana, ensuring clients receive knowledgeable representation no matter their location.

Experienced Legal Team: The attorneys at Brownstone Law have substantial experience handling both civil and criminal appeals, equipping them to address a wide range of legal issues effectively.

Rigorous Research and Advocacy: Brownstone Law employs a combination of thorough legal research and strategic advocacy, leveraging their legal team's unique skills to present compelling arguments in court.

Client-Centric Approach: The firm emphasizes personalized attention, ensuring that each client’s unique needs and circumstances are fully understood and addressed throughout the process.

For those seeking assistance with appellate litigation, connecting with Brownstone Law at (317) 793-3903 provides access to dedicated specialists ready to advocate for clients’ rights.

Conclusion: Pursuing Justice Through Appellate Litigation

The appellate litigation process can be intricate and demanding, but with the right legal representation, individuals can navigate it effectively and pursue justice. Appellate litigation specialists in Indiana are essential partners in this journey, equipped with the knowledge and experience necessary to navigate the complexities of the legal system.

Brownstone Law is committed to providing comprehensive support for clients navigating the appellate process. With a focus on rigorous research, strategic advocacy, and personalized attention, their experienced legal team is dedicated to achieving favorable outcomes.

To explore your options and connect with the appellate litigation specialists at Brownstone Law, reach out at (317) 793-3903. Your pursuit of justice begins with taking that important first step.

Here are 10 frequently asked questions (FAQs) about appellate litigation specialists in Indiana:

1. What is an appellate litigation specialist?

An appellate litigation specialist is an attorney who focuses on handling appeals in higher courts. They possess expertise in appellate law and are skilled in crafting legal arguments and analyzing trial court records.

2. When should I consider hiring an appellate litigation specialist in Indiana?

You should consider hiring an appellate litigation specialist if you believe there has been an error in your case that warrants appeal, or if you need help navigating the complex appellate process.

3. How do appellate litigation specialists differ from trial lawyers?

While trial lawyers represent clients in trial courts, appellate litigation specialists focus exclusively on the appeals process, dealing with legal briefs, oral arguments, and procedural rules specific to appellate courts.

4. What types of cases do appellate litigation specialists handle?

Appellate litigation specialists can handle various cases, including civil appeals, criminal appeals, family law appeals, and administrative law appeals.

5. How do I choose the right appellate litigation specialist in Indiana?

Look for an attorney with a strong track record in appellate cases, relevant experience, and a good reputation among peers. Consider their familiarity with Indiana appellate law and their ability to communicate complex legal concepts effectively.

6. What is the typical process for filing an appeal in Indiana?

The typical process includes filing a notice of appeal, preparing the appellate brief, possibly participating in oral arguments, and waiting for the appellate court's decision.

7. What are the key factors that can affect the outcome of an appeal?

Key factors include the strength of the legal arguments presented, the clarity and thoroughness of the appellate brief, the interpretation of laws by the appellate court, and the quality of the oral argument.

8. Are there deadlines I need to be aware of when filing an appeal in Indiana?

Yes, strict deadlines exist for filing notices of appeal and briefs. Failing to meet these deadlines can jeopardize your case, so it’s essential to work with a specialist who is familiar with these timelines.

9. What should I expect during the appellate process?

Expect to engage in thorough research and writing, prepare for possible oral arguments, and receive updates from your attorney about the status of your case. The process can take several months to a year or more, depending on the case.

10. Can I appeal a case on any grounds?

No, you can only appeal based on specific legal grounds, such as procedural errors, misinterpretation of the law, or the introduction of inadmissible evidence. An appellate litigation specialist can help identify valid grounds for appeal.

[lboogie1906]

Karen Marie Freeman-Wilson (October 24, 1960)[is an attorney, former judge, and politician who served as Indiana Attorney General (2000-01) as well as mayor of Gary, Indiana (2012-19). She has been President and CEO of the Chicago Urban League since January 2020.

She was born and raised in Gary. She earned a BA from Harvard University and a JD from Harvard Law School.

She served as judge of the Gary City Court (1995-2000),

After leaving office, she became CEO of the nonprofit National Association of Drug Court Professionals. She helped get a trial of Prometa, a treatment for methamphetamine addiction, launched in the Gary drug court. At the time Hythiam charged as much as $15,000 for treatment that was split between the prescribing physician and Hythiam despite no clinical trials or FDA approval taking place. Prometa was confirmed to be ineffective for the treatment of addiction during clinical trials. In July 2007, Hythiam Inc., the company licensing the Prometa protocol, owned by convicted fraudster Terren Peizer named her to its board of directors. Other executive posts held by her include Executive Director of the National Drug Court Institute and director of the Indiana Civil Rights Commission.

She served as legal counsel to the Gary Urban Enterprise Association (1995-2006). #africanhistory365 #africanexcellence #deltasigmatheta