Thompson & Horton LLP’s Post

For those following along: Here’s a summary of the decision in UR Pride v SK, 2024 SKKB 23, concerning the scope of judicial review following a government's use of the notwithstanding clause against trans kids. Link to decision included. https://lnkd.in/gBmUQQGz

Check out my new piece in The Nation: "How New Title IX Rules Leave Sexual Assault Survivors in the Lurch" https://lnkd.in/dZaDqq7P I wrote this piece following last week's release of the new Title IX regulations, which at first, appeared to propose, for the most part, beneficial and trauma-informed changes. A closer look reveals that the regulations suffer from a potentially damaging omission: They do nothing to counter the rising threat of defamation actions against Title IX complainants who give evidence under the modified form of cross-examination outlined in the new regs. When I was applying for the Truman Scholarship, my policy proposal was rooted in enshrining legal protection in this exact scenario. The new regulations pose an even larger risk in the longterm for survivors who undergo a trauma-informed Title IX adjudication/investigation process. With the new regulations proposing processes that move further away from Title IX's previous quasi-judicial practices, vulnerabilities to retaliatory lawsuits will increase.

We’re digging into the decision enjoining the Title IX rules in certain states and we’ll share more analysis soon! https://lnkd.in/eE_Q6qa7

Wednesday Title IX Final Rule Litigation Update: Four cases in suit: - State of Texas v. The United States of America (N.D.Tex) - State of Louisiana et al v. U S Dept of Education (W.D.La) - Alabama, State of et al v. Cardona (W.D.Al) (PI filed) - State of Tennessee et al v. Cardona (E.D.Ky) (PI filed) Preliminary injunctions have been filed in the Tennessee and Alabama cases, but not yet opposed, and in the Tennessee case, a motion to expedite the hearing on the PI to the week of May 28 is on file, but hasn't been ruled on yet. The Government's response to the motion to expedite argues: Plaintiffs set forth no explanation of why they require an expedited timeline, or why this Court’s default 21-day response deadline applicable to their Motion for § 705 Stay and Preliminary Injunction (“motion for preliminary injunction”) would be insufficient to meet their needs. Indeed, the Final Rule that Plaintiffs challenge will not be effective until August 1, 2024, 89 Fed. Reg. 33,474 (April 29, 2024), nearly three months from today. Moreover, the numerous issues raised in Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction will require substantial intra-agency and interagency coordination and review by the Department of Justice and the Department of Education.

Four takeaways culled from depositions in the ‘divisive concepts’ lawsuit LINK: https://lnkd.in/gPNPXusm Hashtags: #TheLegalLowdown #Discrimination #Companies Please Repost

Virginia is currently in the early voting stage for state and local elections. The outcome of the elections may also have an effect on next year's Presidential election, as Gov. Glenn Youngkin is considered to be a likely candidate, especially if Republicans do well in the fall. Youngkin has been active in his education agenda, which follows a strong push by education advocates in the GOP campaign. Local Boards of Elections, though officially nonpolitical, will have some very political campaigns this fall. #virginia #elections2023 #nationalelections #localgovernment #stategovernment #governance #educationagenda #lgbtq #censorship

This article from The Intercept provides an overview of Judicial Redistricting, describing tactics designed to limit political power on the local level, including the dismissal of prosecutors for exercising their independent professional judgment when making charging decisions. This is a good time to also highlight The Public Rights Project, an organization dedicated to defending local autonomy through litigation. https://lnkd.in/dute73ZB

https://lnkd.in/eDFMa_Nj The new Title IX Rule has been blocked in 10 states so far, with other states scrambling to comply with the laundry list of expensive requirements by the August 1 deadline. In siding with the states seeking an injunction, Chief Judge Terry Doughty summed it up well: "The logic of Title IX was sound, the execution was flawless, and the application has had stellar results for years. Therefore, the Court must ask itself, what is the driving force behind a change to such a successful and inclusive rule, and if the driving force has legitimate reasons for the change, why is the enforcement of the changes being done in such a hurried and sloppy manner?"

👮👮♀️ This year, our colleagues from OSCE Mission to Montenegro supported the "I Choose the Police" campaign, aiming to inspire high school graduates to pursue a fulfilling career in law enforcement. Learn more about this impactful initiative 👇 #YearInReview

This recent California court decision sheds light on issues surrounding implicit bias. The case involves a Black man detained by the San Diego Police Department on a concealed firearm violation, raising concerns of racial profiling. Expert testimonies and bodycam footage analysis suggest unintended racial bias may have played a role. The trial court, however, focused on whether the officer knowingly stopped a Black man, overlooking the potential influence of implicit bias. Discover the full details and implications by accessing the Daily Appellate Reports. The case underscores the significance of the Racial Justice Act, allowing defendants to seek relief from bias, whether intentional or unintentional. [Access the DAR here: https://ow.ly/SsXb50QEl4J] #ImplicitBias #RacialJusticeAct #CaliforniaLaw #LegalSystem #CourtDecision