U.S. v. Chappell The 4th Circuit says a former deputy sheriff who told an officer he was a deputy in an attempt to avoid a speeding ticket cannot overturn his conviction for impersonating an officer by claiming the Virginia statute at issue, Va. Code § 18.2-174, violated his First Amendment right to free speech.

Tagged with: Constitutional Criminal Practice First Amendment Freedom of Speech

Kensington Volunteer Fire Dep’t Inc. v. Kurtz A group of local volunteer fire and rescue departments cannot sue county officials on a claim the county reduced funding in retaliation for plaintiffs’ opposition to local legislation; the 4th Circuit affirms dismissal of the suit by the district court, who declined to inquire into defendants’ alleged illicit motive behind an otherwise facially valid budgetary enactment.

Tagged with: Constitutional First Amendment Municipal

North Carolina Right to Life Political Action Committee v. Leake Defendants have failed to distinguish North Carolina’s matching funds scheme for judicial elections from the scheme which was declared unconstitutional in Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, 131 S. Ct. 2806 (2011). Other than the state interests rejected in Bennett, defendants have failed to come forward with compelling state interests to justify the scheme.

Tagged with: Constitutional Elections First Amendment Judges

Minnick v. County of Currituck The county board of commissioners has policymaking authority over county personnel matters. Plaintiff has not alleged that the board of commissioners was aware of the alleged constitutional violation (i.e., that he was fired for speaking out about safety violations and for his union affiliation). Plaintiff has presented no evidence that he informed the board that he believed his termination, transfer, or other adverse employment action was retaliatory. Therefore, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the necessary involvement by the relevant final policymaking authority.

Tagged with: Civil Rights First Amendment Labor & Employment Municipal Public Employees

Lefemine, d/b/a Columbia Christians for Life v. Wideman The 4th Circuit upholds a judgment that a local sheriff’s department violated a pro-life group’s First Amendment rights when officers asked group members not to display “large, graphic signs” with aborted fetuses as part of a roadside demonstration, but the appellate court also upholds qualified immunity for defendants.

Tagged with: Civil Rights Constitutional First Amendment Free Speech Qualified Immunity

Sandhill Amusements v. State ex rel. Purdue The trial court determined that G.S. § 14-3-6.4 was constitutional, dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint for a declaration that their sweepstakes systems did not violate N.C. gaming or gambling laws, and dissolved a preliminary injunction prohibiting defendants from taking enforcement action against plaintiffs. Since Hest Technologies, Inc. v. State ex rel. Purdue [Lawyers Weekly No. 12-07-0254] declared § 14-306.4 void as unconstitutionally overbroad, we must reverse the trial court’s order.

Tagged with: Constitutional First Amendment Free Speech

Hest Technologies, Inc. v. State ex rel. Purdue G.S. § 14-306.4 does not outlaw sweepstakes, but it prohibits the sweepstakes company from revealing results via a videogame. The statute violates the sweepstakes company’s freedom of speech.

Tagged with: Constitutional First Amendment Free Speech

Ginsberg v. Board of Governors Where the university’s film studies department was looking for someone with a different area of focus, and where plaintiff was over-qualified for the position, plaintiff failed to show that comments she made – which were interpreted as pro-Palestinian liberation – were the reason she was not hired for an open professor’s position. We affirm summary judgment for defendant.

Tagged with: Constitutional First Amendment Labor & Employment

State v. Yencer The Campus Police Act’s provision of secular police protection for the benefit of the students, faculty, and staff of Davidson College, as applied to defendant’s conviction for driving while impaired, does not offend the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Defendant has failed to demonstrate that her arrest and conviction for driving while impaired were influenced by any consideration other than secular enforcement of a criminal statute, G.S. § 20-138.1.

Tagged with: Campus Police Constitutional Criminal Practice dwi First Amendment Freedom of Religion

  Legend Night Club v. Miller. (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-01-0198, 30 pp.) (Wynn, J.) No. 09-1540, Feb. 17, 2011; USDC at Baltimore (Garbis, J.) 4th Cir. Click here for the full text of the opinion. Holding: In this appeal of ...

Tagged with: Civil Rights Constitutional First Amendment