Government: Precedent Doesn’t Protect AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material
MADISON, Wis. — Context matters when reading precedent, and broad, surface-level language should not be expanded to every conceivable situation, the government tells the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in urging en banc or panel rehearing of a decision affirming dismissal of a charge alleging in-home possession of obscene artificial intelligence-generated child sexual abuse material.
Civil Rights Division’s Policy Affecting States’ Voter Rolls Set Aside, Vacated
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal judge in the District of Columbia set aside and vacated a policy under which the U.S. Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has been demanding voter registration lists from states, comparing those lists against citizen databases and then urging states to remove voters it deems ineligible, opining that the policy “flies in the face of duly enacted laws designed to protect Americans.”
U.S. High Court Grants Petition, Vacates Judgment In Glyphosate Cancer Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 13 granted Monsanto Co.’s petition for a writ of certiorari in a case brought by a man who says he developed cancer after exposure to the active ingredient in Roundup, vacated the judgment that followed a $28 million combined award for the man and remanded the case to a California appellate court for further consideration in light of the June 25 decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell.
U.S. High Court Grants DOGE, Others’ Petition In Mass Firing FOIA Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 13 granted a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by U.S. DOGE Service (referred to as both DOGE and USDS), then-DOGE official Elon Musk and others in the federal government seeking review for the second time of questions concerning discovery in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case regarding DOGE’s authority and role in mass firings in the federal government.
Rehearing Denied In Ruling Affirming Injunction Denial In Social Media Photo Row
NEW ORLEANS — The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 9 denied a petition for rehearing en banc of a panel’s opinion affirming a lower court order denying a woman’s motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction to prohibit her from being criminally prosecuted for a photo of a transgender politician she posted on the social media platform now known as X, with 10 judges voting against rehearing and seven voting in favor of rehearing.
Judge Dismisses Putative Class Alleging Women Were Misled About Genetic Testing
NEWARK, N.J. — Three women who allege that they and others like them each spent thousands of dollars on preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) cannot establish standing under a benefit-of-the-bargain theory, a New Jersey federal judge found, granting a motion to dismiss filed by the manufacturers of a testing product.
Judge Grants Motion For Fees In $1.8B Iraqi Telecom Arbitration Dispute
PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania federal judge on Oct. 9 granted a Dubai-based joint venture’s motion, first filed in 2021, for reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred compelling discovery during proceedings related to its enforcement of an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) award in its favor worth more than $1.8 billion against telecommunications companies and an Iraqi businessman that was confirmed in 2024 but denied the venture’s request for sanctions.
11th Circuit: Court Has Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over Homeowners’ Coverage Suit
ATLANTA — The 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rejected Georgia insureds’ argument that a lower court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to grant summary judgment in favor of their insurer in a coverage dispute over an underlying nuisance, negligence and trespass action brought by their neighbors, holding that a “live controversy persisted at all stages of” the lawsuit and that the insurer’s claims “handily” satisfied the $75,000 amount in controversy threshold under Title 28 U.S. Code Section 1332, 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Amici Ask Court To Grant Petition In N.J. Row With Kalshi Over Gambling Laws
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Amici curiae on Oct. 8 filed five briefs in support of New Jersey’s petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision that affirmed an injunction against the enforcement of New Jersey gambling laws against KalshiEX LLC, a federally regulated prediction-market exchange that allows customers to buy and sell contracts based on the outcomes of sporting events and other future occurrences, arguing from different perspectives that Congress did not use the Dodd-Frank Act to transfer regulation of sports betting from states and Native American tribes to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
Litigation Funders Tell High Court New Award Doesn’t Moot Arbitrability Dispute
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Three litigation funders on Oct. 8 filed a supplemental brief telling the U.S. Supreme Court that their petition for a writ of certiorari is not moot, despite a tribunal’s new award declining to exercise jurisdiction over an application for discovery brought against them by a German claims aggregator, and arguing that the court should still grant their petition based on the underlying jurisdictional issue, vacate the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ ruling and remand the case.
U.S. Urges Supreme Court To Review Section 11 Disclosure Standard
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an amicus curiae brief, federal government urged the U.S. Supreme Court to review a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling on Section 11(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, arguing that the appellate court erred in finding the materiality of omitted interim financial information to be sufficient without also determining whether the omission caused an affirmative statement to be misleading.