I have previously written about my disagreement with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office decision to rescind federal trademark protections for the Redskins as a racially disparaging name as well as the underlying law used to strip the team of its trademark protection. The law allows for a small administrative office to effectively dictate the outcome of a long simmering societal debate over the team name. More importantly, the standard for determining what names or words are disparaging remains dangerously undefined with striking contradictions as we have previously discussed in permitted and disallowed trademarks. One of the cases that I have discussed involves an Asian-American rock band called The Slants, which was also barred by the office. Now the band has won a major victory not just for itself but also the first amendment in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. The Court struck down the part of the law allowing the denial of the registration of offensive trademarks. The case, which is likely to appealed to the Supreme Court, will have a major impact on the Redskins controversy.
Category: Constitutional Law
Saudi Arabia’s medieval legal system is back in the news with another attack on free speech and free thought. A Saudi reformist writer, Zuhair Kutbi, has been jailed for four years and banned from writing for his calls to reform the Kingdom. Kubti had called fellow intellectuals “cowards” in failing to stand up for reforms. Rather than engage Kubti in debate over its alleged racist and repressive elements, the response of the Kingdom was to jail him and ban him from writing for 15 years.
Tamsir Drammeh, a New York cabbie, has been hit with a $350 fine after he refused to allow a mother to sit in the front seat after she and her family piled into his cab at Penn Station. Drammeh reportedly said that the husband could sit in the front seat but that having a woman in the sit would violate Islamic values.
There is a rather bizarre controversy out of New York where people appear outraged by a minor municipal ceremony to swear in Brooklyn Civil Court judge Carolyn Walker-Diallo. It turns out the Walker-Diallo is a Muslim so she naturally took her oath on a Quran (Koran). One would think that the public would want the oath of office to taken over the book that the jurist considers a binding moral code or through affirmation without a religious book. Yet, many were horrified.
Continue reading “Judge Triggers Public Outcry By Taking Oath on a Quran”
President Obama once pledged that his government would be the most transparent in history — a claim that is often mocked by civil libertarians and other critics who accuse him of almost Nixonian secrecy policies and inclinations. That troubling record is playing out again before U.S District Court Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Administration continues to fight to withhold over 2,000 images of torture and abuse of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan simply because it would make the United States look bad. Ironically, there is a transparent element to this case. Few Administration have been so transparently obvious in their use of classification rule to simply bar the disclosure of information that would be embarrassing to officials or the government. Usually, the Justice Department attempts to spin a tale of some other national security rationale for non-disclosure. Here, however, there is nothing even plausible to come up with. The Obama Administration simply wants to deep six the photos because people would be really angry if they saw what the government did, including photos that are believed to be far worse than those Abu Ghraib (like the one above).
We have been discussion how England has seen the rise of calls for speech prosecutions. The trend appears to be accelerating under David Cameron. While seen across Europe, this trend has been especially pronounced free speech rights in the Westin England ( here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). In one of the most vivid examples of the decline of free speech in England, an evangelical preacher named James McConnell, 78, from Northern Ireland has been charged criminally for calling Islam “satanic.” The preacher is charged with spreading a “grossly offensive” message for what should be considered (and protected) as religious and political speech.
Continue reading “Preacher In Northern Ireland Arrested For Calling Islam Satanic In Sermon”
Below is my Sunday column in the Washington Post on Donald Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entry into the United States. Trump’s rhetoric has shocked many in his promises to unilaterally force sweeping changes regardless of Congress. Yet, Trump’s criticism of Congress and pledge to go it alone should be vaguely familiar for many. Both Obama and Trump advocate to use unilateral powers to change the immigration laws as a rejection of a “do nothing” Congress. Faced with opposition in Congress, President Obama insisted that he would order many of the very changes rejected by the legislative branch. Despite my agreement with President Obama on many of his policies, it is a dangerous and destabilizing legacy or a system based on the separation of powers. While these men may differ on their policy choices, the powers are the same. President Obama has been asserting many the powers referenced by Trump despite constitutional objections and losses in court like the Canning decision. For this reason, the objections from Obama supporters may ring a bit hollow for Trump supporters. While Trump may have coined “You’re fired” as an entertainment tag line, it was President Obama who fashioned it into a political doctrine in his rejection of Congress. This has been a role that Trump has spent years cultivating on reality shows. It is reality TV meets realpolitick. Below is the column.
Tis the season for holiday display litigation. In Sycamore, Ohio, Jasen Dixon has been cited for putting up a Nativity scene in the front of his house. Dixon’s vision however has a zombie baby that many find offensive. The citation raises serious first amendment questions in the application of a code provision barring “accessory structures” in a front yard. That seems a vague concept and one that is prone to arbitrary or capricious applications. The question is whether other, more conventional holiday displays have been allowed.
Continue reading “City Orders Removal of Ohio Man’s Zombie Nativity Scene”
In a truly shocking and facially unconstitutional plan, Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump is calling for a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslims entering the United States. The plan would violate a host of domestic and international protections, as I discussed today with the Washington Post.
The New York Daily News has a controversial front page this morning blasting politicians and others who are offering prayers while opposing to take steps to curtail gun access in this country in the wake of the latest massacre in California. It is the same message sent by President Barack Obama who appears ready to use executive authority to restrict gun sales at gun shows. The problem with calls for such action is that Congress has declined to order such changes — raising yet another potential conflict over executive overreach in our system. Moreover, the right to own firearms is now recognized as an individual right under the Second Amendment, limiting the extent to which gun ownership can be meaningfully curtailed. Absent a constitutional amendment, many of the calls for banning gun ownership would fail as unconstitutional.
Circuit Judge Jack Schramm Cox has made a rather ignoble entry into national news with a clearly unconstitutional order to the Palm Beach Post to unpublish material from its website. The act of prior restraint violates core first amendment protections and will achieve nothing since the information was part of a public filing. The utter lack of legal judgment (and knowledge) shown by Cox in this order is deeply troubling.
Continue reading “Florida Judge Issues Shocking Order For Newspaper To “Unpublish” News Story”
This evening, the United States House of Representatives filed its motion for summary judgment in its lawsuit against the unilateral actions taken by the Administration under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Three months ago, Judge Rosemary Collyer rejected a motion to dismiss the case by the Administration. The motion below seeks a final ruling on the merits of the lawsuit.
Continue reading “The House Of Representatives Files Motion For Summary Judgment In ACA Challenge”
There is a highly disturbing criminal case out of Mecosta, Michigan where Keith Wood, 39, has been charged with a felony for obstruction of justice and misdemeanor of tampering with a jury. His felonious conduct? Passing out fliers about jury nullification rights on the sidewalk of the Mecosta County courthouse. The fliers from the Fully Informed Jury Association describe juror rights that some complain are omitted by judges and prosecutors in explaining jury service before trial.
Sunni leader Kanthapuram AP Aboobacker Musalyar (head of one of the traditionalist Sunni Muslims in Kerala, India) has reportedly confirmed that worst expectations of women and civil liberties advocates in India with recent comments calling the concept of gender equality “un-Islamic” and saying that women could never equal men as “they are fit only to deliver children.” It is a chilling reminder of the intense prejudices and oppression faced by women in many traditional Islamic areas.
We have often discussed the various protests, often violent, in Islamic countries over alleged blasphemous statements or images. These usually involve depictions of Mohammad or religious symbols. In Mumbai, however, Muslim protesters found a new blasphemous symbol: the use of a piggy bank to show where ISIS gets its money to conduct worldwide terror campaigns. This is a standard illustration of a “piggy bank” to show the savings of a group or person. Yet, some took this from a different perspective.