Texas
Court overturns contempt finding, removes judge in foster care lawsuit
A federal appeals court has ordered the removal of a federal judge and overturned her contempt finding and fine against the state of Texas in a lawsuit over the state’s struggling foster care system.
In a ruling released late Friday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said U.S. District Judge Janis Jack’s contempt ruling and $100,000-per-day fine violates the court’s constitutional limits of power over individual states.
The appeals court also said that Jack had disrespected the state and its attorneys during the long-running case, noting that she at one point remarked, “I don’t know how the state sleeps at night with this. I really don’t.”
“The judge exhibits a sustained pattern, over the course of months and numerous hearings, of disrespect for the defendants and their counsel, but no such attitude toward the plaintiffs’ counsel,” the ruling stated.
The judge’s demeanor exhibits a “high degree of antagonism,” calling into doubt at least “the appearance of fairness” for the state, the ruling added.
An attorney for those who filed the lawsuit alleging that the state routinely fails to investigate complaints of abuse and neglect raised by children in its care said Saturday that the group will appeal the ruling.
“Frankly, this is a sad day for Texas children,” attorney Paul Yetter said in an email.
“For over a decade, Judge Jack pushed the state to fix its broken system,” Yetter said. “She deserves a medal for what she’s done.”
The case began in 2011 with a lawsuit over foster care conditions at the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, the child welfare arm of Texas Health and Human Services.
Since 2019, court-appointed monitors have released periodic reports on DFPS progress toward eliminating threats to the foster children’s safety.
A report earlier this year cited progress in staff training, but continued weaknesses in responding to investigations into abuse and neglect allegations, including those made by children.
In one case, plaintiffs say, a girl was left in the same, now-closed, residential facility for a year while 12 separate investigations piled up around allegations that she had been raped by a worker there.
Texas has about 9,000 children in permanent state custody for factors that include the loss of caregivers, abuse at home or health needs that parents alone can’t meet.
Alabama
Appeals court revives lawsuit in fight between 2 tribes over casino
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — A federal appeals court on Friday revived a lawsuit filed by one Native American tribe over another’s construction of a casino on what they said is historic and sacred land.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a judge’s decision that dismissed the lawsuit filed by the Oklahoma-based Muscogee (Creek) Nation over the constriction of the casino in Alabama. The three-judge panel directed the trial judge to do a “claim by claim” analysis of whether officials with the Poarch Band of Creek Indians in Alabama have sovereign immunity that would prevent them from being sued.
The long-running dispute involves land, known as Hickory Ground, that was home to the Muscogee Nation people before their removal to Oklahoma on the Trail of Tears. The Poarch Band, a separate tribal nation that shares ancestry with the Muscogee, now owns the land and built one of its Wind Creek casinos on the site. The Muscogee Nation filed a lawsuit against Poarch officials, the Department of the Interior and others over the excavation of graves and development of the site.
David Hill, principal chief of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, called the decision a monumental victory for the tribe.
“The Eleventh Circuit’s decision reaffirms our Nation’s sacred and historical ties to Hickory Ground, while also affirming our sovereign right to seek justice against federal agencies and other entities that violated the laws protecting this sacred land,” Hill said in a statement.
A spokeswoman for the Poarch Band said in a statement that the appellate court is simply seeking additional information.
“As the case returns to the District Court, we remain confident in our position. Our focus continues to be on protecting the interests of the Poarch Creek community and upholding our sovereign rights,” Kristin Hellmich, a spokeswoman for the Poarch Band of Creek Indians, wrote in an emailed statement.
The Muscogee Nation argued that Poarch tribal officials broke a legal promise to protect the site when they purchased it from a private landowner in 1980 with the help of a historic preservation grant. Mary Kathryn Nagle, an attorney for the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, said in a statement that the ruling demonstrates that tribal sovereignty “is not a license to destroy the sacred places and graves of other sovereign tribal nations.”
The Poarch Band maintains that it too has ancestral ties to Hickory Ground and that they protected the site by setting aside the ceremonial ground and another 17 acres (6.9 hectares) for permanent preservation. The Poarch Band, in an earlier statement, called the case an attack on their tribal sovereignty and likened the dispute “to Alabama plotting to control land in Georgia.”
The decision was handed down about two weeks after oral arguments in the case in Atlanta.
Texas
Man drops lawsuit against women he accused of helping his wife get abortion pills
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A Texas man who sued his ex-wife’s friends for helping her obtain an abortion informed the court that the two sides reached a settlement, forgoing the need for a trial that would have tested his argument that their actions amounted to assisting in a wrongful death.
Attorneys for Marcus Silva and the three women he sued last year filed court papers this week stating they had reached an agreement. Two of the woman countersued Silva for invasion of privacy but have also dropped now those claims, according to court records.
As of Friday, the judge hadn’t yet signed off on the settlement. Court records didn’t include its terms, but a spokesperson for the defendants said the settlement didn’t involve any financial terms.
“While we are grateful that this fraudulent case is finally over, we are angry for ourselves and others who have been terrorized for the simple act of supporting a friend who is facing abuse,” Jackie Noyola, one of the women, said in a statement. “No one should ever have to fear punishment, criminalization, or a lengthy court battle for helping someone they care about.”
Abortion rights advocates worried that the case could establish new avenues for recourse against people who help women obtain abortions and create a chilling effect in Texas and across the country.
Silva filed a petition last year to sue the friends of his ex-wife, Brittni Silva, for providing her with abortion pills. He claimed that their assistance was tantamount to aiding a murder and was seeking $1 million in damages, according to court documents.
Two of the defendants, Noyola and Amy Carpenter, countersued Silva for invasion of privacy. They dropped their counterclaims Thursday night after the settlement was reached.
“This case was about using the legal system to harass us for helping our friend, and scare others out of doing the same,” Carpenter said. “But the claims were dropped because they had nothing. We did nothing wrong, and we would do it all again.”
Brittni and Marcus Silva divorced in February 2023, a few weeks before Silva filed his lawsuit. The defendants alleged in their countersuit that Silva was a “serial emotional abuser” in pursuit of revenge and that he illegally searched Brittni’s phone without her consent.
Silva was represented by Jonathan Mitchell, a former Texas solicitor general who helped draft a strict Texas abortion law known as Senate Bill 8 before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.
Mitchell declined to comment Friday.
Brittni Silva took the medication in July of 2022 according to court filings. It was a few weeks after the Supreme Court allowed states to impose abortion bans. The lawsuit claimed that text messages were shared between the defendants discussing how to obtain the abortion medication.
Earlier this year, an appeals court blocked an attempt by Silva’s attorney to collect information from his ex-wife for the wrongful death lawsuit against her friends. The decision was upheld by the Texas Supreme Court, which criticized Silva in the footnotes of a concurring opinion signed by two of its conservative justices, Jimmy Blacklock and Phillip Devine.
“He has engaged in disgracefully vicious harassment and intimidation of his ex-wife,” the opinion read. “I can imagine no legitimate excuse for Marcus’s behavior as reflected in this record, many of the details of which are not fit for reproduction in a judicial opinion.”
Abortion is a key issue this campaign season and is the No. 1 priority for women younger than 30, according to survey results from KFF.
Thirteen states ban abortions at all stages of pregnancy, including Texas, which has some of the tightest restrictions in the country. Nine states have ballot measures to protect the right to an abortion this election.
Nevada
High court to review decision in ex-Raiders coach lawsuit over leaked NFL emails
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Former Las Vegas Raiders head coach Jon Gruden will get a full Nevada Supreme Court review of a lawsuit he filed against the NFL over emails leaked to the media before he resigned from the team in 2021.
The state’s highest court isn’t scheduling oral arguments but said Thursday that all seven justices will reconsider findings after a panel split 2-1 in a May 14 decision to dismiss the case. The same three justices on July 1 rejected, by the same 2-1 margin, a request from Gruden’s attorneys to reconsider.
The panel decided the league could move the civil case into arbitration that might be overseen by a defendant, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. Two justices said Gruden knew when he signed a contract with the Raiders that the NFL used arbitration to resolve disputes. The dissenting justice said it would be “outrageous” for Goodell to arbitrate a dispute in which he is a named defendant.
Attorneys for Gruden, Goodell and the league didn’t immediately respond Friday to email messages. NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy declined to comment.
Gruden’s lawsuit alleges that Goodell and the league pressured the Raiders to fire Gruden by leaking emails containing racist, sexist and homophobic comments that Gruden sent, when he was an on-air analyst at ESPN, about Goodell and others in the NFL. Gruden resigned from the Raiders in November 2021.
The NFL appealed to the state high court after a state judge in Las Vegas in May 2022 rejected league bids to dismiss Gruden’s claim outright or to order out-of-court talks that could be overseen by Goodell.
The judge pointed to Gruden’s allegation that the league intentionally leaked only his documents. She said a jury could decide that was evidence of “specific intent,” or an act designed to cause a particular result.
Gruden was Raiders head coach when the team moved in 2020 to Las Vegas from Oakland, California. He’s seeking monetary damages, alleging that selective disclosure of the emails and their publication by the Wall Street Journal and New York Times ruined his career and endorsement contracts.
Gruden coached the Raiders in Oakland from 1998 to 2001, then led the Tampa Bay Buccaneers for seven years, winning a Super Bowl title in 2003. He spent several years as a TV analyst for ESPN before being hired by the Raiders again in 2018.
Court overturns contempt finding, removes judge in foster care lawsuit
A federal appeals court has ordered the removal of a federal judge and overturned her contempt finding and fine against the state of Texas in a lawsuit over the state’s struggling foster care system.
In a ruling released late Friday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said U.S. District Judge Janis Jack’s contempt ruling and $100,000-per-day fine violates the court’s constitutional limits of power over individual states.
The appeals court also said that Jack had disrespected the state and its attorneys during the long-running case, noting that she at one point remarked, “I don’t know how the state sleeps at night with this. I really don’t.”
“The judge exhibits a sustained pattern, over the course of months and numerous hearings, of disrespect for the defendants and their counsel, but no such attitude toward the plaintiffs’ counsel,” the ruling stated.
The judge’s demeanor exhibits a “high degree of antagonism,” calling into doubt at least “the appearance of fairness” for the state, the ruling added.
An attorney for those who filed the lawsuit alleging that the state routinely fails to investigate complaints of abuse and neglect raised by children in its care said Saturday that the group will appeal the ruling.
“Frankly, this is a sad day for Texas children,” attorney Paul Yetter said in an email.
“For over a decade, Judge Jack pushed the state to fix its broken system,” Yetter said. “She deserves a medal for what she’s done.”
The case began in 2011 with a lawsuit over foster care conditions at the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, the child welfare arm of Texas Health and Human Services.
Since 2019, court-appointed monitors have released periodic reports on DFPS progress toward eliminating threats to the foster children’s safety.
A report earlier this year cited progress in staff training, but continued weaknesses in responding to investigations into abuse and neglect allegations, including those made by children.
In one case, plaintiffs say, a girl was left in the same, now-closed, residential facility for a year while 12 separate investigations piled up around allegations that she had been raped by a worker there.
Texas has about 9,000 children in permanent state custody for factors that include the loss of caregivers, abuse at home or health needs that parents alone can’t meet.
Alabama
Appeals court revives lawsuit in fight between 2 tribes over casino
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — A federal appeals court on Friday revived a lawsuit filed by one Native American tribe over another’s construction of a casino on what they said is historic and sacred land.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a judge’s decision that dismissed the lawsuit filed by the Oklahoma-based Muscogee (Creek) Nation over the constriction of the casino in Alabama. The three-judge panel directed the trial judge to do a “claim by claim” analysis of whether officials with the Poarch Band of Creek Indians in Alabama have sovereign immunity that would prevent them from being sued.
The long-running dispute involves land, known as Hickory Ground, that was home to the Muscogee Nation people before their removal to Oklahoma on the Trail of Tears. The Poarch Band, a separate tribal nation that shares ancestry with the Muscogee, now owns the land and built one of its Wind Creek casinos on the site. The Muscogee Nation filed a lawsuit against Poarch officials, the Department of the Interior and others over the excavation of graves and development of the site.
David Hill, principal chief of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, called the decision a monumental victory for the tribe.
“The Eleventh Circuit’s decision reaffirms our Nation’s sacred and historical ties to Hickory Ground, while also affirming our sovereign right to seek justice against federal agencies and other entities that violated the laws protecting this sacred land,” Hill said in a statement.
A spokeswoman for the Poarch Band said in a statement that the appellate court is simply seeking additional information.
“As the case returns to the District Court, we remain confident in our position. Our focus continues to be on protecting the interests of the Poarch Creek community and upholding our sovereign rights,” Kristin Hellmich, a spokeswoman for the Poarch Band of Creek Indians, wrote in an emailed statement.
The Muscogee Nation argued that Poarch tribal officials broke a legal promise to protect the site when they purchased it from a private landowner in 1980 with the help of a historic preservation grant. Mary Kathryn Nagle, an attorney for the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, said in a statement that the ruling demonstrates that tribal sovereignty “is not a license to destroy the sacred places and graves of other sovereign tribal nations.”
The Poarch Band maintains that it too has ancestral ties to Hickory Ground and that they protected the site by setting aside the ceremonial ground and another 17 acres (6.9 hectares) for permanent preservation. The Poarch Band, in an earlier statement, called the case an attack on their tribal sovereignty and likened the dispute “to Alabama plotting to control land in Georgia.”
The decision was handed down about two weeks after oral arguments in the case in Atlanta.
Texas
Man drops lawsuit against women he accused of helping his wife get abortion pills
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A Texas man who sued his ex-wife’s friends for helping her obtain an abortion informed the court that the two sides reached a settlement, forgoing the need for a trial that would have tested his argument that their actions amounted to assisting in a wrongful death.
Attorneys for Marcus Silva and the three women he sued last year filed court papers this week stating they had reached an agreement. Two of the woman countersued Silva for invasion of privacy but have also dropped now those claims, according to court records.
As of Friday, the judge hadn’t yet signed off on the settlement. Court records didn’t include its terms, but a spokesperson for the defendants said the settlement didn’t involve any financial terms.
“While we are grateful that this fraudulent case is finally over, we are angry for ourselves and others who have been terrorized for the simple act of supporting a friend who is facing abuse,” Jackie Noyola, one of the women, said in a statement. “No one should ever have to fear punishment, criminalization, or a lengthy court battle for helping someone they care about.”
Abortion rights advocates worried that the case could establish new avenues for recourse against people who help women obtain abortions and create a chilling effect in Texas and across the country.
Silva filed a petition last year to sue the friends of his ex-wife, Brittni Silva, for providing her with abortion pills. He claimed that their assistance was tantamount to aiding a murder and was seeking $1 million in damages, according to court documents.
Two of the defendants, Noyola and Amy Carpenter, countersued Silva for invasion of privacy. They dropped their counterclaims Thursday night after the settlement was reached.
“This case was about using the legal system to harass us for helping our friend, and scare others out of doing the same,” Carpenter said. “But the claims were dropped because they had nothing. We did nothing wrong, and we would do it all again.”
Brittni and Marcus Silva divorced in February 2023, a few weeks before Silva filed his lawsuit. The defendants alleged in their countersuit that Silva was a “serial emotional abuser” in pursuit of revenge and that he illegally searched Brittni’s phone without her consent.
Silva was represented by Jonathan Mitchell, a former Texas solicitor general who helped draft a strict Texas abortion law known as Senate Bill 8 before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.
Mitchell declined to comment Friday.
Brittni Silva took the medication in July of 2022 according to court filings. It was a few weeks after the Supreme Court allowed states to impose abortion bans. The lawsuit claimed that text messages were shared between the defendants discussing how to obtain the abortion medication.
Earlier this year, an appeals court blocked an attempt by Silva’s attorney to collect information from his ex-wife for the wrongful death lawsuit against her friends. The decision was upheld by the Texas Supreme Court, which criticized Silva in the footnotes of a concurring opinion signed by two of its conservative justices, Jimmy Blacklock and Phillip Devine.
“He has engaged in disgracefully vicious harassment and intimidation of his ex-wife,” the opinion read. “I can imagine no legitimate excuse for Marcus’s behavior as reflected in this record, many of the details of which are not fit for reproduction in a judicial opinion.”
Abortion is a key issue this campaign season and is the No. 1 priority for women younger than 30, according to survey results from KFF.
Thirteen states ban abortions at all stages of pregnancy, including Texas, which has some of the tightest restrictions in the country. Nine states have ballot measures to protect the right to an abortion this election.
Nevada
High court to review decision in ex-Raiders coach lawsuit over leaked NFL emails
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Former Las Vegas Raiders head coach Jon Gruden will get a full Nevada Supreme Court review of a lawsuit he filed against the NFL over emails leaked to the media before he resigned from the team in 2021.
The state’s highest court isn’t scheduling oral arguments but said Thursday that all seven justices will reconsider findings after a panel split 2-1 in a May 14 decision to dismiss the case. The same three justices on July 1 rejected, by the same 2-1 margin, a request from Gruden’s attorneys to reconsider.
The panel decided the league could move the civil case into arbitration that might be overseen by a defendant, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. Two justices said Gruden knew when he signed a contract with the Raiders that the NFL used arbitration to resolve disputes. The dissenting justice said it would be “outrageous” for Goodell to arbitrate a dispute in which he is a named defendant.
Attorneys for Gruden, Goodell and the league didn’t immediately respond Friday to email messages. NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy declined to comment.
Gruden’s lawsuit alleges that Goodell and the league pressured the Raiders to fire Gruden by leaking emails containing racist, sexist and homophobic comments that Gruden sent, when he was an on-air analyst at ESPN, about Goodell and others in the NFL. Gruden resigned from the Raiders in November 2021.
The NFL appealed to the state high court after a state judge in Las Vegas in May 2022 rejected league bids to dismiss Gruden’s claim outright or to order out-of-court talks that could be overseen by Goodell.
The judge pointed to Gruden’s allegation that the league intentionally leaked only his documents. She said a jury could decide that was evidence of “specific intent,” or an act designed to cause a particular result.
Gruden was Raiders head coach when the team moved in 2020 to Las Vegas from Oakland, California. He’s seeking monetary damages, alleging that selective disclosure of the emails and their publication by the Wall Street Journal and New York Times ruined his career and endorsement contracts.
Gruden coached the Raiders in Oakland from 1998 to 2001, then led the Tampa Bay Buccaneers for seven years, winning a Super Bowl title in 2003. He spent several years as a TV analyst for ESPN before being hired by the Raiders again in 2018.
