Split Supreme Court Overturns Jury Award for Wrongfully Convicted Former Death Row Inmate

Connick v. Thompson stemmed from an appeal of a $14 million jury award to an innocent man who spent 14 years on death row after prosecutors failed to turn over exculpatory evidence to his lawyers that would have prevented his conviction. This week a narrow majority of the Court exonerated Harry Connick, the former Orleans Parish District Attorney, of liability for the lack of training he provided to the prosecutors who worked in his office regarding their obligations to disclose exculpatory evidence to defendants.More than 14 years ago, John Thompson was accused of a high-profile murder. Following...

Read more »

Alliance for Justice Submits Testimony on Muslim Civil Rights

The following testimony was submitted to the United States Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights:Alliance for Justice is a national association of over 100 organizations dedicated to advancing justice and democracy. We have an unshakable belief in the right of all Americans to practice their religion without interference and that no citizen should ever be afraid to worship, establish religious communities, or speak openly about their religious precepts. Efforts to broadly demonize the Muslim religion or its adherents are contrary to the most...

Read more »

Consumers’ Ability to Hold Drug Companies Accountable for Inadequate Warnings at Stake in Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in the consolidated cases of PLIVA v. Mensing, Actavis Elizabeth, L.L.C. v. Mensing, and Actavis, Inc. v. Demahy. At stake is the ability of consumers to keep pharmaceutical companies honest about the potential danger their drugs pose. The Court must decide whether Hatch-Waxman Amendment provisions governing the labeling of generic prescription drugs preclude state claims against a pharmaceutical company for failing to adequately warn consumers about health risks.Gladys Mensing sued PLIVA for failure to warn and misrepresentation in state court...

Read more »

Senate Confirms District Court Nominee

Last night the Senate confirmed Mae D’Agostino to the Northern District of New York on a vote of 88-0. Ms. D’Agostino was the 14th judicial nominee to be confirmed during the 112th Congress, and the 76th during the Obama presidency. Forty-four nominees are still pending in the Senate, including 18 who would fill seats considered to be “judicial emergencies” by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.For the most up-to-date and comprehensive information on judicial nominations, visit the Alliance for Justice’s Judicial Selection Project webpag...

Read more »

Supreme Court Limits the Right to Sue Price Gouging Drug Companies

The Supreme Court held today in Astra USA, Inc. v. Santa Clara County, that the federal statute governing contracts between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and drug companies to provide discounted drug prices to safety-net health care providers does not allow those providers to sue the companies when prices exceed contractual caps.Federal law instructs HHS to enter into contracts with drug manufacturers to offer discounted prices for medication to “340B entities,” which include public hospitals, community health centers and other safety-net health care providers. Santa Clara...

Read more »

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Railroad Worker Safety Case

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments yesterday in CSX Transportation v. McBride. At stake in this case is the ability of railroad employees to hold their employers accountable when the employer’s negligence results in injury. The court must determine whether the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) requires proof that an employer’s negligence was the proximate cause of an employee’s injury or whether a showing that the negligence played some part in causing the injury is sufficient for liability. Robert McBride was a conductor working for the rail...

Read more »

Will the Corporate Court Deliver for Wal-Mart?

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a gender discrimination class action against the retail giant. AFJ’s Justice Watch blog has highlighted specific aspects of the case in daily installments. Today’s final installment summarizes what's at stake in the case and places it in the context of the Roberts Court’s strong pro-corporate bias.The ability of the world’s largest retailer, and largest private employer in the United States, to discriminate on a massive scale against its female employees is at stake in the biggest case of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010-11 term...

Read more »

Supreme Court Hears Campaign Finance Cases

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in the consolidated cases of Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett and McComish v. Bennett. At stake in these cases is the ability of states to combat the influence of wealthy special interests in elections.Arizona voters passed the Citizens Clean Election Act in 1998 following a set of major corruption scandals in the state legislature. The Act creates a detailed scheme under which candidates must demonstrate a certain level of support and abide by a strict set of fundraising and spending restrictions in order to receive public...

Read more »

Wal-Mart v. Dukes: The Supreme Court's Big Case Threatens the Ability to Fight Corporate Misbehavior

Tomorrow morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, which promises to be the Court's biggest case of the 2010-11 term.In today's Huffington Post, AFJ President Nan Aron discusses the merits and implications of the case:What makes this case so important for all Americans is not just the injustice done to hundreds of thousands of workers, it's the desire by Wal-Mart and the corporate powers supporting their case... to restrict the ability of the women harmed by these policies to band together as a class and fight a unified battle in court. Click here to read Nan's...

Read more »

Wal-Mart Win in Dukes Case Would Empower Corporations to Steal Wages

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a sex discrimination class action against the retail giant, on March 29. AFJ’s Justice Watch blog will highlight specific aspects of the case in daily installments between now and the date of oral arguments.Today we discuss why a denial of class certification would give Wal-Mart and other large corporations a free pass to unlawfully deny employees the wages they deserve.If the Supreme Court limits access to a class action in this case, it will enable Wal-Mart to essentially rob its women employees of fair wages without serious legal...

Read more »

Wal-Mart v. Dukes Round-Up

Tomorrow morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a sex discrimination class action against the retail giant. This is a landmark case in the fight for a fair America, and could have far-reaching implications for workers everywhere.Alliance for Justice recently issued a comprehensive report on the background, merits, and legal ramifications of the case. The report is available for download here.Additional background on Wal-Mart v. Dukes:AFJ's Wal-Mart v. Dukes Resource PageSuzette Malveaux, Harvard Law & Policy ReviewClass Actions at the Crossroads: An Answer...

Read more »

Wal-Mart v. Dukes Threatens to Undermine Class Actions as a Tool for Social Justice

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a sex discrimination class action against the retail giant, on March 29. AFJ’s Justice Watch blog will highlight specific aspects of the case in daily installments between now and the date of oral arguments. Today we discuss the important role class actions play in leveling the playing field for everyday Americans who challenge injustice in court.If the Roberts Court rules for Wal-Mart and raises the bar for maintaining a class action, the result could be devastating for enforcement of civil rights and employment discrimination...

Read more »

Wal-Mart’s Centralized Corporate Control Spreads Gender Discrimination Throughout the U.S.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a sex discrimination class action against the retail giant, on March 29. AFJ’s Justice Watch blog will highlight specific aspects of the case in daily installments between now and the date of oral arguments. Today we discuss how Wal-Mart’s centralized corporate control spreads gender discrimination from headquarters to every region of the United States.Wal-Mart argues that the plaintiffs’ theory of liability should fail because of Wal-Mart’s sheer size. The company maintains that the large number of its stores, managers, and employees...

Read more »

Shocking Statistics Demonstrate Extent of Nationwide Sexism at Wal-Mart

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a sex discrimination class action against the retail giant, on March 29. AFJ’s Justice Watch blog will highlight specific aspects of the case in daily installments between now and the date of oral arguments. Today we discuss the overwhelming statistical evidence that demonstrates the degree to which women are denied opportunities for advancement at Wal-Mart.At the time this lawsuit was filed in 2001, Wal-Mart divided the United States into 41 regions. Each region contained approximately 11 districts, and each district contained...

Read more »

Personal Stories Demonstrate Indignities Female Employees Face at Wal-Mart

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a sex discrimination class action against the retail giant, on March 29. AFJ’s Justice Watch blog will highlight specific aspects of the case in daily installments between now and the date of oral arguments. Today we highlight some of the declarations from women who described the deep-seated sexism that is pervasive among Wal-Mart managers. For example:Senior management for Sam’s Club, a Wal-Mart affiliate, often referred to female store employees during Home Office executive meetings as “Janie Qs” and “girls.” When a female...

Read more »

How “The Wal-Mart Way” Ruined Two Women’s Careers

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a sex discrimination class action against the retail giant, on March 29. AFJ’s Justice Watch blog will highlight specific aspects of the case in daily installments between now and the date of oral arguments. Today’s installment introduces the personal stories of Wal-Mart employees Betty Dukes and Edith Arana. Dukes and Arana were enthusiastic employees who suffered the effects of the company’s discriminatory practices.When Betty Dukes started at Wal-Mart, she was energetically committed to advancing within the company. She dreamed...

Read more »

Supreme Court Ruling Protects Employees who Verbally Complain About Illegal Employer Practices

The Supreme Court held yesterday in Kasten v. Saint Gobain Performance Plastics that anti-retaliation provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) apply to employees who make verbal complaints to their employers about possible violations of labor laws as well as those who make written complaints. In this case, an employee was fired after making repeated verbal complaints that the company’s practice of not allowing employees to clock in for time spent donning required protective gear was illegal.The court looked to functional considerations, stating that “an interpretation that limited the...

Read more »

Supreme Court Allows Investors’ Drug Lawsuit to go Forward

The Supreme Court held today in Matrixx Initiatives v. Siracusano that a drug company that fails to report adverse events that their products cause may still be liable to investors even if the adverse events were statistically insignificant.Matrixx Initiatives manufactured Zicam, a nasal gel used to treat colds. As early as 1999, Matrixx was aware that Zicam was causing some patients to experience severe nasal burning followed by anosmia, the permanent loss of smell. Nonetheless, the company denied clinician requests to study the issue further. To artificially inflate the price of its stock,...

Read more »

Supreme Court Arguments Address Attorney’s Fees in Civil Rights Cases

Today the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Fox v. Vice, a case with important implications for victims of civil rights violations. At stake in this case is the balance between allowing people whose civil rights are violated to seek justice in court, and protecting defendants when suits are deemed frivolous. The Court must determine whether a plaintiff in a civil rights action must pay federal statutory attorney’s fees when the plaintiff’s federal claims are deemed frivolous but the state claims are not.Ricky Fox, a candidate for police chief in Vinton, Louisiana, was the victim of an extortion...

Read more »

Senate Confirms Judicial Nominee, Processes Several Others through Committee

On Monday the Senate confirmed James Boasberg to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on a vote of 96-0. Judge Boasberg was nominated on June 17, 2010, and was reported out of committee without opposition on Dec. 1, 2010, but did not get a confirmation vote at the end of the 111th Congress. He was renominated at the beginning of the 112th Congress, and was again reported out of committee without opposition on Feb. 3, 2011.The Senate Judiciary Committee processed several nominees this week. On Wednesday, it held a hearing for Bernice Bouie Donald, nominee to the United...

Read more »

New report on Wal-Mart v. Dukes case details stakes and legal ramifications

Alliance for Justice today released a comprehensive report on the biggest case of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010-11 term. The report analyzes the stakes and legal ramifications of Wal-Mart v. Dukes, which concerns the right of as many as 1.5 million female Wal-Mart employees to hold the retail giant accountable for a pattern of discrimination that pervades every region of the giant retailer’s U.S. operations. Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for Tuesday, March 29. The report, “Wal-Mart v. Dukes: Will the Supreme Court Protect Wal-Mart’s Discrimination Against Women?” is available...

Read more »

Obama Makes Two District Court Nominations

Yesterday President Obama nominated two women to federal district court seats. Mary Geiger Lewis was nominated to the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina and Jane Margaret Triche-Milazzo was nominated to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.In announcing their nominations, President Obama said that “these women have had distinguished legal careers and I am honored to ask them to continue their work as judges on the federal bench.” Ms. Lewis is a partner at Lewis & Babcock in Columbia, South Carolina, and Ms. Triche-Milazzo is...

Read more »

Panel discussion on Equal Justice for All now available on YouTube

Last week's panel discussion on corporate influence over the federal courts is now available on YouTube. Use the playlist viewer below to watch the keynote address by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, as well as remarks by Suzette Malveaux of the Catholic University of America, Bill Luyre of AFL-CIO, and Jeffrey Rosen of the George Washington University.Malveaux, an expert on the impact of procedural mechanisms on civil rights, spoke about the legal avenues everyday Americans must have in order to hold powerful corporate interests accountable, and how those methods have been undermined. She noted that...

Read more »

A growing consensus on ethics reform

Court-watchers have been growing more and more concerned over the increasing politicization of the Supreme Court, as exemplified by recent accounts of overtly partisan activities.Leading the call for reform was a group of 135 law professors from all across the country. They sent an open letter to leaders in the US House and Senate. And two weeks ago, Alliance for Justice joined Congressman Chris Murphy to announce legislation that would bolster the Supreme Court's recusal process and make the nine justices subject to the same mandatory code of conduct that applies to every other federal judge....

Read more »

Senior judges work to take up strain on courts

Today's LA Times profiles the work being done by senior judges in the federal courts. The escalating crisis in our courts has led to a crushing caseload for many courts as the Senate has been glacially slow to debate and confirm judges to fill vacancies. Senior judges are now being called upon to work long past retirement to help manage the growing workloads.[Judge Betty] Fletcher, who turns 88 this month and relies on a walker to navigate airports and courthouse corridors, retired a dozen years ago yet still works full time, on what is known as senior status, for the U.S. 9th Circuit Court...

Read more »

Can someone explain the Walmart small store strategy, please?

I don't get it.  I guess I am not just not as smart as the folks in Bentonville.  Walmart was originally a dumpy box of a store with the interior feel of a warehouse.  It wasn't a great place to shop, although it sure was the place to buy American and cheaply, at that.  Now the stores look nicer and the products are all from China but the media says Target, which I still enjoy way, way more than a Walmart, may be cheaper.  (My wife prefers Walmart locally because of size, perceived value and the fact that our Target isn't a super store.)But that isn't the main thrust...

Read more »

I'm still alive! A thought on lawyers racing to the bottom

I know I haven't posted in three months.  I even write a farewell post, but decided not to put it up in case I changed my mind so I would then not look like a schmuck or the blogging equivalent of a pinch-drunk boxer coming back for more punishment.  I have been concentrating on work and other things in my personal life.  As to the former, you can guess what that is about.  As to the latter, well, I am not prepared to discuss that except to say it is all good and hopefully will be better as time goes on.  If things go the way I want I will eventually tell you about it.A...

Read more »

One Nominee Confirmed, Six Reported Out of Committee

Yesterday the Senate confirmed Max Cogburn, Jr. to a seat on the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina on a vote of 96-0. The confirmation vote was significant in two ways. First, the Senate has up until this point only confirmed nominees on Mondays, so having two votes in one week is a good sign. Second, Cogburn was the fourth nominee confirmed this week, the most out of any week this Congress. With 117 remaining vacancies on the federal bench the Senate needs to keep confirming at least that many nominees a week to cut into the huge backlog of vacancies.The...

Read more »

New York Times Urges Supreme Court to Hold Ashcroft Accountable

In a powerful editorial today, the New York Times urged the Supreme Court to rule against the former Attorney General in the case of Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd.The case involves the Justice Department, at the time led by Ashcroft, and its misuse of "material witness" warrants to detain American citizens without counsel, even when the government had no intention of using as witnesses in any case. Mr. Kidd was held for more than two weeks. During his detention, he was repeatedly interrogated, and treated more like a prisoner or suspect than a witness. He was never called as a witness in any cases.The...

Read more »

Equal Justice for All: Senator Whitehouse Discusses Corporate Influence on the Courts

Alliance for Justice hosted a panel discussion on the effects of pro-corporate decisions on the lives of everyday Americans. The event was opened by a keynote speech from Senator Sheldon Whitehouse.Senator Whitehouse called on all Americans to remember that the Constitution provides not just basic rights, but a mechanism to make sure that those rights cannot be trampled by wealthy and powerful interests:The jury serves as our last sanctuary, as Americans, when the forces of society may be arrayed against us: when the governor’s mansion has been bought by special interests; when lobbyists have...

Read more »