Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Let's play a word association game. I say "Sixth Circuit." You say ...
First circuit to rule against gay marriage since Windsor. A circuit that battles the Ninth Circuit for the title of "most reversed" A circuit that is somewhere in the Midwest.
Let's see how this year fit into our mental schematic, shall we? Here are the 10 most popular Sixth Circuit blog posts for 2014:
It was the oral arguments that led to the decision that led to the circuit split which will probably lead to the Supreme Court case that will lead to equality. Dominos, in other words.
Seeing a pattern yet? After a district court judge became the first to rule against gay marriage, we outlined arguments about why the Sixth Circuit was likely to do the same. (It did, obviously.)
Judge McCree once said, when confronted with evidence of his sexual indiscretions, "there's no shame in my game." There's also no liability, it seems, when a losing party in a case tries to take the judge who knew the witness carnally to the cleaners.
It was a stupid law, one that state officials conceded was unconstitutional (see No. 2 below). In the opinion putting the law to death, a district court judge quoted one of the most popular television series of the year -- Netflix's "House of Cards."
Everyone poops. One worker does so more frequently, and with more discomfort, than your average Joe. Does her condition warrant reasonable accommodations (such as telecommuting) and the protection of law?
No surprise here: After SCOTUS granted a stay pending resolution of the Utah gay marriage appeals, the Sixth Circuit did the same for Michigan.
Eighty is the new 60; 65 is barely middle-aged; and 50 is the new 20. So why do the federal courts stick to institutionalized ageism when it comes to appointing a chief judge for each appeals court?
One of the most convoluted cases ever: A marijuana-cultivating family, which complied with state law regarding growing marijuana as caretakers, was prosecuted in federal court using evidence obtained from a state court-issued warrant that was arguably invalid under state law. Yeesh.
Ohio passed a law that barred people from making false statements with malice about candidates, effectively barring political satire. We thought it was stupid (and unconstitutional). Ohio's Attorney General Mike DeWine agreed.
How ridiculous can a case get? How about a hypocritical lawsuit supported by a comical attempt at producing scientific methodology in support a frivolous case of alleged disparate impact discrimination? Add all that up and you get a seven-page rant of a benchslap.
What was your favorite Sixth Circuit case or blog post of the year? Tweet us @FindLawLP.