petition this week

This week, we’ve highlighted proof petitions for the Supreme Court to consider, including whether the Constitution allows state courts to play a role in congressional redistricting and whether plaintiffs can go after cities when city employees violate federal protections for people with disabilities. responsibility.

North Carolina lawmakers ask judge to hear independent state legislature’s theory on merits

exist Moore v Harper, North Carolina Representative Timothy Moore asked the Supreme Court to consider the independent state legislature theory that the Constitution gives state legislatures, not state courts, the power to administer federal elections in their states. Moore emphasized that the Election Clause states that “the time, place, and manner in which elections for Senator and Representative shall be held shall be determined by the legislatures of the respective states.” Notably, unlike other constitutional clauses, Moore insists that this clause does not refer to states itself, but a government agency.

Against this backdrop, the North Carolina State Legislature last November developed a new map of congressional elections based on 2020 U.S. Census data. Rebecca Harper and other challengers have filed a lawsuit in state court to prevent the new map from taking effect, saying it violates various provisions of the North Carolina constitution and represents illegal guerrilla guerrillas. On February 4, 2022, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued a new map stating that even though the state legislature “has the responsibility to allocate North Carolina’s congressional districts…” [state] Constitutional Provisions” and “The state judiciary…has the duty to protect the citizens’ national constitutional rights. The court further concluded that the map was an unconstitutional partisan partisan. While on remand, the North Carolina Superior Court issued an order on February 23, 2022, using the findings of three court-appointed experts. of different congress maps.

Moore and other state lawmakers subsequently submitted a urgent application Ask the U.S. Supreme Court to set aside the North Carolina Supreme Court’s order to invalidate the General Assembly map, and to set aside the North Carolina Superior Court’s order to adopt a replacement map.justices rejected the request. Joined by Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, disagreecalling the doctrine of independent state legislatures “a very important and recurring issue in the Constitution,” noting that “the following judgment may require further review once a petition for writ of census is filed.” Justice Brett Kavanaugh Although agree with the decision to refuse to stay, but also statement “If the court receives an application for a mediation raising the issue, I think the court should grant the mediation… [and] After adequate briefings and oral arguments, carefully consider and decide on the issues for the next semester. Under the “rule of four,” four justices voted enough to support Moore’s petition. Currently, the map adopted by the North Carolina Superior Court is still valid for the 2022 election.

Employee’s Responsibility to City After Violating Federal Protections for Disabled Persons

exist Jones v. Detroit, Michigan, Baxter Jones asked the judge to consider whether the public entity was responsible for its employees’ violations of federal protections for people with disabilities. Jones claims that in 2014, Detroit police arrested him for disorderly conduct during protests against residential water cuts across the city. Officers then drove Jones, who was using a wheelchair, for five miles in the back of the van without adequate head room or safety restraints, eventually injuring his neck. Detroit has never charged or prosecuted Jones for misconduct or any other crime.

Jones sues Detroit in federal district court Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act Because the officer did not take care of his disability.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit confirm The district court rejected Jones’ claim on the grounds that the city could not be vicariously liable for the actions of its employees. The Sixth Circuit reached this conclusion by analogy with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, a model of later civil rights statutes in which vicarious liability was not provided.in his petition, Jones maintains, that the decision conflicts with those of the other three circuits. (in a separate View In July 2020, the Sixth Circuit ruled that these officers were entitled to qualified immunity and were not defendants in Baxter’s petition. )

these and other petition this week as follows:

Talasek v. National Oilwell Varco, LP
21-1266
question: Whether beneficiaries of employee benefit plans can Employee Retirement Income Security Act Based on misrepresentation inconsistent with the terms of the program.

MOAC Mall Holdings LLC v. Transform Holdco LLC
21-1270
question: whatever Bankruptcy Code Section 363(m) Limits the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction over any sales order or an order deemed to be “indivisible” from a waiver, even though remedies that do not affect the validity of the sale may be enacted.

Moore v Harper
21-1271
question: Can a state’s judiciary repeal a provision that “the manner in which Senators and Representatives are elected . The state judiciary has the power to make any rules it deems appropriate to ensure “fair” or “free” elections.

Jones v. Detroit, Michigan
21-1292
question: Can a public entity be vicariously liable for violations of Title II by its employees under the superior response theory Americans with Disabilities Act or Rehabilitation Act.