National Roundup

West Virginia
Appeals court reverses $7M jury award in lawsuit involving crash death
CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) — An appeals court in West Virginia on Friday reversed a $7 million award in a product liability lawsuit against the Ford Motor Co. to the family of a woman who died when her Ford Mustang was involved in a fiery crash.

The West Virginia Intermediate Court of Appeals sent the case back to Kanawha County Circuit Court for a new trial.

A jury had found that Ford was 99% at fault for the 2016 death of Breanna Bumgarner and awarded the money last year to her Raleigh County family.

Court records show that Bumgarner’s 2014 Mustang was hit by a pickup truck that had crossed the center line on U.S. Route 33 near Spencer in Roane County. The Mustang caught fire and Bumgarner was trapped in the vehicle. The lawsuit also named the 16-year-old driver of the other vehicle and her parents as defendants.

The plaintiff’s attorneys had argued that the Mustang’s brake fluid reservoir was not sufficiently protected from the crash and it led to the fire. The jury found that the reservoir’s design was not safe enough in preventing leakage in the accident.

The appeals court sided with Ford’s contention that negligent design claims require proof of a reasonable alternative design for establishing the existence of a defect, and that the jury should have been properly instructed on the requirement.

Washington
Multiple security failures led to the classified documents leaks
WASHINGTON (AP) — The massive classified documents leak by an Air Force service member earlier this year was made worse by the intentional failure of multiple officials to take required action on his suspicious behavior, the Air Force inspector general reported Monday.

Massachusetts Air National Guard member Jack Teixeira is accused of leaking highly classified military documents on a social media platform.

In its investigation of the leaks, the Air Force inspector general found both security gaps where personnel had access to classified documents without supervision and instances in which Airman 1st Class Teixeira was caught violating security policies but none of the personnel who caught him took the actions necessary in response.

“Based on the preponderance of the evidence gathered during the investigation, three individuals in the unit who understood their duty to report specific information regarding A1C Teixeira’s intelligence-seeking and insider threat indicators to security officials, intentionally failed to do so,” the inspector general found.

In response, the Air Force said it took action against 15 people, ranging from relieving personnel from their positions, including command positions, to non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Teixeira, who’s 21, has been behind bars since his April arrest on charges stemming from the most consequential intelligence leak in years. He is charged under the Espionage Act with unauthorized retention and transmission of classified national defense information. He has pleaded not guilty, and no trial date has been set. Prosecutors said in a court filing last week that the two sides have not yet engaged in “substantive” plea discussions.

The documents released on social media revealed sensitive U.S. intelligence on the Russia-Ukraine war, the Middle East and an array of other topics.

Teixeira enlisted in the Air National Guard in 2019 and began around January sharing military secrets with other Discord users, authorities said — first by typing out classified documents and then sharing photographs of files that bore SECRET and TOP SECRET markings.

Teixeira worked as a cyber transport systems specialist, essentially an information technology specialist responsible for military communications networks. As such, Teixeira was part of a three-person crew that had unsupervised access at night to an open storage Top Secret-Secret Compartmentalized facility to perform maintenance inspections.

“At times, members were required to perform preventive maintenance inspections and other tasks, which required individuals to be on their own for hours, unsupervised in other parts of the facility,” the IG found. “Further, no permission controls were in place to monitor print jobs, and there were no business rules for print products. Any night shift member had ample opportunity to access (classified) sites and print a high volume of products without supervision or detection.”

Washington
Supreme Court rejects an appeal over bans on conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ children
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday refused to take up a case about whether state and local governments can enforce laws banning conversion therapy for LGBTQ+ children.

Over the dissent of three conservative justices, the court turned away an appeal from Washington, where the law has been upheld. An appellate panel struck down local bans in Florida as an unconstitutional restriction on counselors’ speech.

The high court often steps in when appellate courts disagree, and in separate opinions Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas said that standard was easily met in the controversy over conversion therapy bans.

Thomas wrote that his colleague should have taken up the Washington case because “licensed counselors cannot voice anything other than the state-approved opinion on minors with gender dysphoria without facing punishment.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh also voted to hear the case. It takes four of the nine justices to set a case for arguments.

The court’s decision to avoid the case from Washington comes as efforts to limit the rights of LGBTQ+ kids have spread across the country.

About half the states prohibit the practice of trying to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity through counseling.

A family counselor in Washington, Brian Tingley, sued over a 2018 state law that threatens therapists who engage in conversion therapy with a loss of their license. Tingley claims the law violates his speech rights. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld it in a split decision.

The Supreme Court had previously turned away several challenges to state bans, but those cases reached the court before a 5-4 decision in 2018 in which the justices ruled that California could not force state-licensed anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers to provide information about abortion.

Since the 2018 ruling, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta has voided the local Florida bans.