A D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that some Jan. 6 rioters received improper sentence enhancements for obstructing the congressional certification, impacting scores of prison terms, including that of convicted rioter Larry Brock. While upholding Brock's conviction, the panel ordered the removal of the enhancement, potentially affecting dozens of sentences. The ruling centers on whether the "administration of justice" enhancement should apply to the disrupted congressional proceedings, with the panel agreeing with Brock's argument that it does not extend to the unique congressional function of certifying electoral college votes. The Justice Department's upcoming Supreme Court case on the felony obstruction charge used against rioters is also highlighted.
A federal appeals court has upheld Texas' ability to enforce a total ban on emergency abortions, countering federal guidance from the Biden administration that argues such abortions are protected under a 1986 law requiring hospitals to provide stabilizing treatment in emergencies. This decision follows the Supreme Court's reversal of Roe v. Wade and continues the legal battle over abortion rights in the United States.
Mark Meadows, former White House chief of staff under Trump, is seeking a full appeals court review of a decision that denied moving his Georgia election racketeering charges to federal court. He has bolstered his legal team with Paul Clement, a former U.S. solicitor general, as the case could potentially reach the Supreme Court. Meadows aims to assert immunity in federal court to dismiss the charges, which are part of a larger prosecution effort by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, including charges against former President Trump. The 11th Circuit previously ruled that only current officials could move charges under the removal statute, a decision Meadows's expanded legal team is now challenging.
Former President Donald J. Trump's lawyers have submitted their final written argument to a federal appeals court, seeking to grant Trump immunity from charges related to his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. They argue that a long-standing tradition of not prosecuting presidents for official acts supports the claim of executive immunity and warn of potential politically motivated prosecutions against future presidents. The case, which has significant legal implications regarding the criminal liability of former presidents, is currently on hold pending the resolution of the immunity issue. The trial is scheduled to begin in early March, but Trump's legal team is attempting to delay it, potentially until after the 2024 election. The appeals court, consisting of judges appointed by both Presidents George H.W. Bush and Biden, will hear the case next week.
A federal appeals court has allowed California's Senate Bill 2, which bans firearms in most public places, to take effect while the court reviews its constitutionality. This decision overturns a lower court's ruling that had blocked the law, arguing it was unconstitutional and infringed on Second Amendment rights. The law, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, includes restrictions such as setting the minimum age for a gun license at 21 and requiring additional gun safety training. The law's future still hangs in the balance as the appeals court has yet to make a final decision on its constitutionality.
A California law that restricts gun owners from carrying firearms in many public spaces was set to go into effect on New Year's Day but faced a temporary injunction labeling it as contrary to the Second Amendment. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has put the injunction on hold, allowing the law to remain in place while further appeals are considered. The law, which was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, designates 26 types of "sensitive" places where firearms are prohibited, even for permit holders, and requires private businesses to explicitly allow concealed weapons if they choose to permit them. This development follows a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down a similar law in New York, demanding gun laws align with historical firearm regulation traditions.
Special counsel Jack Smith has filed an 80-page brief urging the appeals court to dismiss former President Donald Trump's claim of presidential immunity in his federal election interference case. Trump's lawyers argue that a president cannot be criminally prosecuted for official acts without impeachment and conviction by the Senate. However, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled that immunity does not protect Trump from the charges. The appeals court, with Judges Henderson, Childs, and Pan, will hear arguments on January 9, potentially delaying the trial set for March 4. Trump faces four counts of criminal conduct for allegedly trying to overturn his election loss and maintains his entitlement to immunity.
Federal prosecutors have urged an appeals court to dismiss former President Donald J. Trump's claim of immunity regarding charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election. The special counsel, Jack Smith, argues that no constitutional grounds exist to exempt a former president from federal criminal law, especially for actions that undermine democratic processes. The case, which raises unprecedented legal questions about presidential immunity, is on an accelerated schedule, with oral arguments set for January 9. This legal battle also has implications for the timing of the trial in relation to the 2024 election.
Special Counsel Jack Smith has contested former President Trump's claim of presidential immunity in the U.S. Court of Appeals, arguing that such immunity is dangerous, especially when the former President is accused of criminal actions aimed at overturning election results. Smith's filing emphasizes the urgency of resolving the case due to its significant implications for democracy and the presidency. The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to expedite the review of the immunity claim, allowing the appeals process to proceed first in the lower court.
A federal appeals court overturned the fraud and conspiracy convictions of two parents found guilty of participating in the Operation Varsity Blues bribery scheme, which ensnared dozens of wealthy parents who falsified their children’s credentials to gain admission to prestigious universities. The court found that the lower court had made crucial missteps in the trial of Gamal Abdelaziz and John Wilson, but upheld Wilson's conviction on tax fraud. The victory in the appellate court was striking because Wilson and Abdelaziz were the first to take their chances in front of a jury.
A federal appeals court panel has upheld the government's use of an obstruction charge against hundreds of defendants arrested in connection with the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The complex opinion appears likely to result in additional litigation and leaves questions about the future of the use of the statute. The case is likely to result in further litigation, and the Jan. 6 participants could ask the entire appeals court to review the statute’s use against Capitol riot defendants and potentially bring the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
