Showing posts with label Lawsuits. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lawsuits. Show all posts

Thursday, July 19, 2018

Four Blue States Protest Tax Reform with a Frivolous Lawsuit



Friday, June 8, 2018

DOJ says Obamacare unconstitutional, won’t defend it in Texas lawsuit



Thursday, May 24, 2018

“Facebook continued to explore and implement ways to track users’ location, to track and read their texts, to access and record their microphones on their phones, to track and monitor their usage of competitive apps on their phones, and to track and monitor their calls”



The claims of what would amount to mass surveillance are part of a lawsuit brought against the company by the former startup Six4Three, listed in legal documents filed at the superior court in San Mateo as part of a court case that has been ongoing for more than two years.

Tuesday, May 22, 2018

Tuesday, April 17, 2018

The #SanDiego County Board of Supervisors voted to oppose the #SanctuaryState laws in #California and join the federal government's lawsuit to prevent enforcement and ultimately overturn unconstitutional #SB54. AND - Lake Forest, CA voted to OPPOSE Sanctuary State law











Saturday, April 7, 2018

Pulse nightclub shooting survivors sue Google, Facebook, Twitter over ‘material support’ to ISIS



...In a lawsuit filed Wednesday in Orlando’s federal courthouse, 16 victims of the June 12, 2016 shooting -- the second deadliest in American history -- claim that the three tech giants were responsible for letting ISIS disseminate propaganda on their platforms, thus providing “material support” to the terror group, in violation of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA).

Such support, the suit alleges, let gunman Omar Mateen carry out his attack, which left 49 people dead and another 58 injured, the Orlando Sentinel reported. Mateen was killed in a shootout with responding police officers....

Wednesday, March 7, 2018

Department of Justice sues California over "sanctuary" status





















Tuesday, January 30, 2018

Democrat governors planning lawsuit to block GOP’s tax overhaul



Legal Insurrection readers will recall the California legislature’s attempt to create a special government fund as a “charity” for taxpayer donations to mitigate the loss of state and local tax (SALT) deductions in the recently passed GOP tax plans.

The politicians must have realized the approach was full of fail, so now leaders of several blue states are planning a lawsuit to block the entire overhaul package. California may join in....

Bloomberg offers a humorous and in-depth look at the Blue States’ desperation at the loss of the SALT deductions and all of their proposed solutions. The assessment of the legal experts consulted on this particular proposal is that the governors’ case is dead-on-arrival:
…[The lawsuit] is an intriguing strategy. But alas for the citizens of New York State, probably a doomed one.

I spoke to Michael Dorf, a law professor at Cornell who recently outlined the possible lines of attack that such a suit could take. For one thing, they could argue federalism, a tack that even conservative judges should find appealing. “There’s an argument that the Sixteenth Amendment does not empower the federal government to treat money that is owed to state and local governments as part of the tax base,” he said. “If you go back to the Sixteenth Amendment it’s clear that states were concerned about this at the time of the drafting.”

The problem? “The hard part there for the plaintiff states, while that was a concern for the people who adopted the Sixteenth Amendment, it’s not anywhere in the amendment.”

…Jonathan Adler, who teaches law at Case Western, was even more pungent, and succinct. While we don’t know what form the complaint will eventually take, since the states haven’t yet drafted it, “What we have seen [so far] would suggest that there is some sort of constitutional right to a SALT deduction. To state the claim is to refute it.”

Sunday, January 7, 2018

Unhappy New Year for California Gun Owners



While most of America was busy preparing to celebrate the New Year, gun owners in California were scrambling to lawfully purchase ammunition while they still could. Beginning January 1, all ammunition sales were required go through a California licensed dealer or licensed ammunition vendor.

This new requirement is one of two new ammunition laws that were passed by the California legislature or adopted by California voters in 2016. The law that took effect on January 1 will generally prohibit gun owners from bringing ammunition into the Golden State or from purchasing their ammunition online.

California adopted these new laws in spite of significant evidence that they would only burden law-abiding gun owners and do nothing to promote public safety. Most notably, the reporting of ammunition sales has already been tried -- and failed -- at the federal level....

Thursday, August 3, 2017

Media Ignores Fed Lawsuit by Dems Accusing DNC, Wasserman Schultz of Fraud - Judicial Watch



The mainstream media is conspicuously ignoring a newsworthy class-action lawsuit accusing the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Florida congresswoman—Debbie Wasserman Schultz—who chaired it of fraud for skewing the party’s primaries to benefit Hillary Clinton. The drama is playing out in a south Florida federal court where 150 Democratic voters and donors are also accusing their party and Wasserman Schultz of breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, unjust enrichment, and negligent misrepresentation for secretly helping Clinton get the presidential nomination over Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

“Despite the requirements in the Charter, and in spite of the multiple public declarations of neutrality and impartiality with respect to the Democratic primary process, the DNC was not neutral,” a 35-page complaint states. “To the contrary, the DNC was biased in favor of one candidate – Hillary Clinton (“Clinton”) – from the beginning and throughout the process. The DNC devoted its considerable resources to supporting Clinton above any of the other Democratic candidates. Through its public claims to being neutral and impartial, the DNC actively concealed its bias from its own donors as well as donors to the campaigns of Clinton’s rivals, including Bernie Sanders (“Sanders”).

The scandal broke when leaked DNC electronic mail showed that the committee favored and backed Clinton instead of Sanders during the primary. Wasserman Schultz resigned in disgrace as DNC chair, was publicly blasted by Sanders supporters and didn’t gavel in the party convention last summer in Philadelphia....

Monday, September 12, 2016

Clinton fails to respond to Benghazi lawsuit filed by victims’ parents...



...The lawsuit from Pat Smith and Charles Woods — parents of U.S. Foreign Service member Sean Smith and Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods who died in the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the American consulate — alleges that Clinton wrongfully caused their sons’ deaths. They also sued the Democratic presidential nominee for defamation and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress....

Lawnewz added that, according to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Clinton was required to respond or file for an extension 21 days after being served — and court records show a summons was issued Aug. 9. However, the outlet noted, it’s unclear if the summons was properly served or if Clinton received it.

Both Woods and Smith also claimed Clinton defamed them in statements to the media.

“During her campaign for President, Defendant Clinton has negligently, recklessly, and/or maliciously defamed Plaintiffs by either directly calling them liars, or by strongly implying that they are liars, in order to protect and enhance her public image and intimidate and emotionally harm and silence them to not speak up about the Benghazi attack on at least four separate occasions,” the complaint reads.

Monday, August 8, 2016

Hillary Clinton Sued for Wrongful Death of Benghazi Victims Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith



The complaint, claims it is highly probable, given Hillary’s history of reckless handling of classified information, that as Secretary of State Hillary sent and received information about Ambassador Christopher Stevens and thus the U.S. Department of State activities and covert operations that Woods and Smith were a part of in Benghazi, Libya. This information was compromised from the second that it left Defendant Clinton’s private e-mail server and easily found its way to foreign powers including, but not limited to Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea. As a direct result of Hillary’s reckless handling of this classified, sensitive information, Islamic terrorists were able to obtain the whereabouts of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and thus the U.S. State Department and covert and other government operations in Benghazi, Libya and subsequently orchestrate, plan, and execute the now infamous September 11, 2012 attack.

The Complaint also goes after Hillary for her lies that the terrorist attack was the result of a YouTube video. It claims that in an effort to save the re-election chances of President Barack Obama, and Hillary's own chances at winning the presidency in 2016, Hillary lied to Plaintiffs and the public saying that the Benghazi Attack was caused by Islamic reaction over an anti-Muslim YouTube video that had been posted on the internet. According to the Complaint, Hillary told this lie despite the fact that she knew immediately that this video was actually not the cause of the attack—information that she shared with the Prime Minister of Egypt and her own daughter, Chelsea Clinton. Hillary, in an attempt to save her reputation and intimidate Plaintiffs and their surviving family members into silence as she attempts to be elected President in the November 2016 election, has gone on a defamatory smear campaign to paint Plaintiffs as liars in order to discredit the Plaintiffs, who have been vocal about Hillary's dishonesty regarding the cause of the Benghazi attack, its aftermath, and the dearth of Woods and Smith.... More at the link.

Saturday, July 30, 2016

Clinton’s Comments on 60 Minutes About Private Email Server Now Used Against Her in Court



Judicial Watch says new information was gleaned from an interview with CBS’ Scott Pelley including the fact that Clinton admitted that someone recommended she set up the server. The group wants to know who that someone was. They also contend her statement provides further reasoning for why she must be deposed under oath. Clinton’s lawyers say that issue is irrelevant to the lawsuit.

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

New Undercover Video: Maryland Deputy AG Reveals Secrets In Meetings With Undercover O’Keefe Reporter



Monday, November 9, 2015

Sunday, July 12, 2015