Tag: lawsuits

Florida Senator Sues State Over Anti-Marijuana Ad, Alleging Unconstitutional Use Of Taxpayer Dollars Ahead Of Legalization Vote

A Florida Democratic senator is suing the state for using taxpayer dollars to fund a recent ad that he says unconstitutionally attempts to influence voters to oppose a marijuana legalization initiative that will be on the ballot next month.

Sen. Jason Pizzo (D), who is expected to run for governor in 2026, announced on Friday that he would be seeking an injunction against the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) over the ad, which warns against driving under the influence of cannabis and then makes a contested claim that “DUI crashes increase in states with legalized marijuana, putting everyone at risk.”

Making such an assertion in an ad supported by tax dollars amounts to “political messaging” and therefore represents an unconstitutional use of appropriations authority, the senator says. The campaign behind the Florida legalization initiative has also sent cease and desist letters to 54 TV stations that have aired the public service announcement.

“For years, our state has wasted precious time, and many millions, peddling divisive and unproductive nonsense, while flouting practical solutions for critical needs,” Pizzo said.

Keep reading

‘Anti-Energy Lawfare’: Millions in Dark Money Fueling Local Climate Lawsuits Across the Country, Congressional Investigation Finds

California law firm Sher Edling received more than $3 million in unreported dark money to push high-profile climate litigation on behalf of dozens of Democratic-led cities and states, according to a Monday congressional report obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

Sher Edling, the Senate Commerce Committee and House Oversight Committee report found, received $2.9 million last year from the Collective Action Fund for Accountability, a shadowy group managed by the New Venture Fund. Because the contributions were made in 2023, the New Venture Fund, a Washington, D.C.-based dark money organization, isn’t required to disclose them until it files its next annual 990 form with the IRS in mid-November. Sher Edling also received a previously unreported check worth $235,000 in 2022 from the Tides Foundation, a grantmaking organization that wired a staggering $667 million to dozens of progressive causes in 2022, its most recent tax filings show.

The newly uncovered funds shed light on how powerful progressive interests continue to work hand in hand with Democrats to punish oil and gas companies. Sher Edling was founded in 2016 to take up risky first-of-their-kind lawsuits against the oil and gas industry, accusing the industry of causing global warming and arguing it is financially responsible for extreme weather events such as hurricanes and tornadoes.

Most of Sher Edling’s cases are working their way through state courts, even as the oil industry has pushed for them to be litigated in federal courts. If successful, the suits could force oil companies to pay billions of dollars in climate damages to local and state governments. Sher Edling would receive a large portion of that settlement money, according to its legal services contracts.

As 501(c)(3) nonprofits, the New Venture Fund and Tides Foundation aren’t legally required to disclose their donors. Together, the two groups received $1.3 billion in contributions and grants from anonymous donors in 2022 alone. As a result, it’s largely unclear who exactly employed the organizations to send grant money to Sher Edling.

Since it was founded in 2016, Sher Edling has agreed to represent dozens of states and cities in climate-related cases, including Delaware, Minnesota, Rhode Island, New Jersey, New York City, Chicago, Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Baltimore, and Honolulu. In the cases, Democratic prosecutors have argued the oil and gas industry is responsible for global warming and that it has deceived consumers about the downstream impacts of their petroleum products for decades.

Critics have blasted the litigation, labeling it a backdoor effort to bankrupt oil and gas companies and peg the industry for local emissions. Still, activists say the lawsuits are a critical part of the broader effort to curb reliance on fossil fuels and boost green energy.

Keep reading

Female, black applicants who failed Maryland State Police tests likely to receive $2.75M in back pay from discrimination suit

The Maryland Department of State Police agreed to settle a Department of Justice lawsuit to the tune of $2.75 million, which will provide back pay to female and black applicants who failed the physical fitness and written tests.

The physical fitness exam, called the Functional Fitness Assessment Test, required applicants to complete 18 push-ups in one minute, 27 sit-ups in one minute, run 1.5 miles within 15 minutes and 20 seconds, and reach approximately 1.5 inches past their toes while seated. Candidates were allowed to take the test up to three times in one year.

“The rate at which female applicants passed the FFAT at least once is statistically significantly lower than the rate at which male applicants passed the FFAT at least once; and the female applicant pass rate is less than 80% of the male applicant pass rate,” the complaint read.

The written exam, the Police Officer Selection Test, included four components: mathematics, reading comprehension, grammar, and report writing skills. To pass, candidates had to achieve an aggregate score of at least 70% on all sections combined and minimally 70% on reading comprehension, grammar, and report writing skills. There was no minimum required score for the math component. Candidates could take the test four times within a year.

The lawsuit said that roughly 91% of white and 71% of black applicants passed at least once.

The lawsuit claimed that both the FFAT and the POST, which are used by MDSP to screen trooper applicants, are “not job related or consistent with business necessity.”

The DOJ argued that MDSP’s screening “results in a disparate impact” on female and black candidates.

“MDSP’s use of the POST has disproportionately excluded African-American applicants, and its use of the FFAT has disproportionately excluded female applicants, from employment as troopers,” the lawsuit stated.

MDSP was accused of violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin.

On Wednesday, the DOJ announced that the MDSP has agreed to settle the lawsuit.

Keep reading

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger Served At Home in Latest Lawsuit that Alleges THOUSANDS of Invalid Registrations on State Voter Rolls

On September 26, Georgia citizens filed suit in Federal Court against Brad Raffensperger, Georgia Secretary of State. The plaintiffs argued that according to data from Georgia state voter rolls and U.S. Postal Service (USPS), there are many individuals who have moved out of the state, but remain registered to vote in Georgia. This violates the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).

Their suit demands that Raffensperger follow the NVRA and Georgia law to maintain accurate and timely registrations in Georgia’s voter rolls. The lawsuit seeks to enforce laws that protect Georgians’ right to vote from dilution.

The plaintiffs in the suit are William Quinn and David Cross from Georgia.

Georgia’s current voter rolls contain thousands of invalid registrations because the voters in question either permanently moved out of state and are no longer citizens of Georgia or permanently moved to a different county in Georgia from the county in which they are presently registered.

Because the Secretary of State Offices were closed due to weather, members of the plaintiff party served Secretary Raffensperger at his home with the lawsuit.

Keep reading

The Babylon Bee Strikes Back: Lawsuit Takes on California’s Anti-Satire Laws

In a world where politicians crave safe spaces from jokes, California’s latest move to suppress satire might just take the cake. California has decided that it’s time to put an end to all that pesky “political humor.” Yes, the state that brought us Hollywood is now terrified of a few biting punchlines, and naturally, satire site The Babylon Bee and outspoken attorney Kelly Chang Rickert are not having it.

The champion of online irreverence has just slapped the State of California with a lawsuit that reads less like legalese and more like a desperate plea for common sense. They’re arguing, quite reasonably, that California’s new laws—AB 2839 and AB 2655—are a massive overreach, a heavy-handed attempt to quash their First Amendment rights and kill the punchline before it even has a chance to land.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.

Keep reading

Congressman Gosar Introduces Legislation to Sue Big Pharma for Vaccine Injuries

H.R.9828 would amend the Public Health Service Act to end the liability shield for vaccine manufacturers, and for other purposes. LET’S GO!

From the Congressman Gosar’s Press Release:

Congressman Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S. (AZ-09), issued the following statement after introducing H.R. 9828, the End the Vaccine Carveout Act, a bill that would strip vaccine manufacturers of their unjust liability shields. This carveout has resulted in hundreds of billions of dollars in profits for Big Pharma while leaving tens of thousands of people without the ability to seek legal justice and compensation for injuries caused by vaccines. 

“Although federal bureaucrats and Big Pharma insist that vaccines are safe, there is an unfortunate lack of science regarding the safety of vaccines.  For example, a review of 12,000 scientific papers by the Institute of Medicine published in 2012 found that 98% of injuries studied were either caused by or may have been caused by a vaccine.  Another government study found that while vaccines caused injuries in 10 percent of cases, only one percent get reported, meaning those injured by vaccines are vastly undercounted.

Furthermore, according to the Center for Disease Control’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, nearly 20,000 Americans were reported as having been killed to date by a COVID-19 vaccine, equating to one death for every 14,000 people vaccinated, much higher than the one in a million deaths that is normally cited for dangerous vaccines.

Government bureaucrats and scientists responsible for approving vaccines are in bed with Big Pharma, often owning pharmaceutical stocks, serving as consultants and receiving lucrative contracts from pharmaceutical companies that pressure them to produce favorable results which is in direct violation of federal law.

Worse, many scientists and researchers in government agencies develop patents for vaccines that are approved by the very agencies they work for, creating a conflict of interest and raising serious questions about the impartiality of their decisions.

Under current law, it is nearly impossible to hold vaccine manufacturers liable for injuries caused by vaccines due to a 1986 law that unfairly created a special immunity carveout for Big Pharma, making it very difficult for vaccine-injured victims to win in a court of law. 

My legislation strips away current immunity provisions unfairly shielding Big Pharma from the harms caused by their products and allows those injured by vaccines to pursue a civil lawsuit in state or federal court.  Big Pharma doesn’t deserve a get-out-of-jail-free card for injuries caused by their harmful vaccines,” concluded Congressman Gosar.

This bill already has 30 co-sponsors!

Keep reading

DoJ Sues Alabama For Voter Roll Purge Program Targeting Noncitizens

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a lawsuit against the State of Alabama, accusing the state of breaking the law with its voter roll purge program that targets individuals who are—or once were—noncitizens.

The DOJ announced the legal action in a Sept. 27 press release, in which the agency contends that Alabama’s program, which targets individuals with noncitizen identification numbers, violates the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) by removing potentially eligible voters within the federally mandated 90-day “Quiet Period” before an election.

Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division said that Alabama’s actions risk disenfranchising eligible voters just weeks before a key federal election.

“As Election Day approaches, it is critical that Alabama redress voter confusion resulting from its list maintenance mailings sent in violation of federal law,” Clarke said in a statement. “The Quiet Period Provision of federal law exists to prevent eligible voters from being removed from the rolls as a result of last-minute, error-prone efforts.”

The NVRA’s Quiet Period provision prohibits states from conducting systematic voter roll purges within 90 days of a federal election to prevent errors and ensure eligible voters are not wrongfully removed.

The legal dispute centers around a program initiated by Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen that aimed to remove noncitizens registered to vote in Alabama from the state’s voter rolls.

Keep reading

Woman Sues After Being Arrested, Jailed, Tortured with Death-Metal Recordings Over Clerical Paperwork Blunder

Police refused to accept her own identification even though description didn’t match up.

A woman is suing Broward County, Florida, after law enforcement officers there arrested her for something someone else did, refusing to accept her own identification and ignoring the fact that the description of the wanted woman didn’t match.

The Institute for Justice reports the complaint against the county is on behalf of Jennifer Heath Box.

She charges authorities violated her constitutional right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, as well as due process.

The IJ explained the background:

In December 2022, Jennifer went on a cruise with family members to celebrate the news that her younger brother, Mark, had beat cancer for the second time. After a fun week aboard the Harmony of the Seas, the cruise ship returned to Port Everglades on the morning of Christmas Eve, giving Jennifer enough time to spend Christmas with her three adult children. But when Jennifer scanned her ID to get off the ship, police surrounded her and told her there was a warrant for her arrest for child endangerment out of Harris County, Texas.

The IJ reported the warrant did seek a woman named Jennifer, but it wasn’t this Jennifer. And she documented that her own children already all were adults.

“It was a really scary and confusing experience, because I’ve never had run-ins with law enforcement and I have no criminal record,” she explained. “I couldn’t believe that I could be stopped, arrested, and jailed, just because my name was similar to someone they were looking for.”

She knew the officers were wrong, so she cooperated calmly and provided police with her license and date of birth, as well as information about her children.

It didn’t matter to officers.

Keep reading

Gavin Newsom Just Signed an AI-Deepfake Ban That Could Impact Free Speech. This Is the First Lawsuit Against It.

We were waiting for California Governor Gavin Newsom to sign on the dotted line of a new controversial bill that limits speech around AI “deepfake” content that many believe could impact memes. Now that Newsom has signed the bill, the first of several lawsuits against the censorial bills can be filed.

Christopher Kohls, an online content creator known for his political satire, has filed a lawsuit against the state, challenging recent legislation aimed at regulating AI-generated content. The lawsuit seeks to strike down two California laws which Kohls claims infringe upon First Amendment rights.

Read the lawsuit here.

The controversy began when Kohls posted a satirical video parodying Vice President Kamala Harris, which quickly caught the attention of California Governor Gavin Newsom. Following the video’s viral spread, largely due to a share by Elon Musk, Governor Newsom criticized the content, leading to the swift passage of AB 2655, the “Defending Democracy from Deepfake Deception Act of 2024,” and AB 2839, related to “Elections: deceptive media in advertisements.”

Keep reading

The Intercept Sues to Release 911 Recordings From Trump Rally Shooting

The Intercept filed a lawsuit on Monday to force county officials in Pennsylvania to release 911 recordings from the July rally in which former President Donald Trump was injured in an apparent assassination attempt. Despite the public’s “compelling” interest in these materials, Butler County refuses to hand them over without a court order.

Almost two months after the July 13 shooting, questions remain about the timeline of law enforcement officials’ response and coordination, including when rally attendees first alerted them to the gunman climbing onto a nearby roof. Police from Butler Township released body camera footage showing their frantic real-time response from multiple perspectives.

But Butler County insists that releasing the 911 calls might jeopardize investigations into what happened.

“Simply put, there is no accountability without public access,” said Melissa Bevan Melewsky, media law counsel for the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association. “The county should reverse its denial so that the nation has a better understanding of what happened and can work to prevent similar attacks in the future.” 

Keep reading