Lawsuit: Some Georgia absentee ballots sent out too late
Election officials in some Georgia counties waited too long to send out absentee ballots for the state’s Dec. 4 runoff election, so the deadline for returning those ballots should be extended, the Georgia Democratic Party argues in a new federal lawsuit. Results of the general election were certified Nov. 17, but at least 65 of the state’s 159 counties didn’t send out absentee ballots for the runoff until this week, according to the lawsuit filed Thursday. That leaves some would-be absentee voters with only a week to get their ballots back to elections officials. There are two statewide races on the runoff ballot — secretary of state and a seat on the Public Service Commission. Runoff elections in Georgia are triggered when no candidate wins more than 50 percent of the vote. The lawsuit was filed against interim Secretary of State Robyn Crittenden in her official capacity as the state’s top elections official. A spokeswoman for her office didn’t respond to an email Friday seeking comment. The state Democratic Party voter protection hotline received calls from voters seeking help getting absentee ballots they had applied for, the lawsuit says. It is the latest in a series of federal lawsuits filed before and after the general election raising concerns about how and whether the state counts certain ballots. Generally, absentee ballots must be received by Election Day to be counted. The lawsuit asks a judge to order that absentee ballots postmarked by Dec. 4 and received by Dec. 7 be counted. It also asks that the secretary of state be prohibited from certifying the election results until she has confirmed that those ballots have been counted. Georgia law says county officials have to send absentee ballots to eligible applicants for a runoff election “as soon as possible” after the results of the general election are certified, the lawsuit says. Data from the secretary of state’s office shows that five counties began sending out absentee ballots on Nov. 19, the first business day after the general election results were certified, the lawsuit says. Several others sent out absentee ballots on Nov 20 or 21. But 44 counties didn’t send out absentee ballots until Nov. 26, and 21 more waited until Nov. 27, the lawsuit says. “This has and will result in arbitrary and disparate treatment of voters who seek to exercise their respective rights to vote via absentee mail-in ballot, based solely on their county of permanent residence,” the lawsuit says. The number of people affected is not insignificant, the lawsuit says, noting that 283,839 people requested absentee ballots in the general election and at least 121,301 people had submitted applications for absentee ballots for the runoff election. Overseas and military absentee ballots already are considered valid if they’re postmarked by Election Day and received within three days after that, so extending that deadline to other absentee ballots would not be overly burdensome for election officials who have until Dec. 10 to certify their election results, the lawsuit argues. If that solution is not adopted, state Democratic Party chairman Dubose Porter said in a statement submitted with the lawsuit, some Georgia citizens “will lose their fundamental right to vote, because their ballots will have been sent to them too late to cast a ballot that will be counted.” Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Judge sets March trial date for suit against former-Gov. Robert Bentley
Montgomery Circuit Judge Greg Griffin has set a March trial date for a lawsuit filed against former Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley by his former law enforcement chief Spencer Collier. According to the Associated Press, the trial is set for March 4. There, Collier’s team will argue he was wrongly fired by Bentley. The suit was filed in April 2016. The day after Collier was fired he accused Bentley of having an affair with an adviser Rebekah Mason. He alleges that Bentley and Mason made misleading statements to the media in an attempt to try and discredit him. “Their lies have hurt me financially, have severely damaged my reputation and they have made it their mission to permanently end my career in law enforcement,” Collier said in a 2016 statement. The lawsuit named four other defendants besides the Bentley campaign (Bentley for Governor, Inc.) Gov. Bentley himself, new ALEA Secretary Stan Stabler, Rebekah Mason, and the group through which she was paid, the Alabama Council for Excellent Government. Bentley ultimately resigned in April 2017, following allegations he used state resources to cover up an affair with Mason. Nevertheless, he continues to maintain his innocence saying Collier was fired with “cause.”
Lawyers seek ‘Apprentice’ tapes in Donald Trump immigration suit
Lawyers suing President Donald Trump over his decision to end special protections shielding certain immigrants from deportation are seeking unaired footage from his reality TV show “The Apprentice” to try to bolster their case alleging the move was racially motivated, the attorneys said Wednesday. Lawyers for Civil Rights, which sued Trump in February, has issued subpoenas to MGM Holdings Inc. and Trump Productions LLC demanding any footage shot during the production of the show in which Trump “uses racial and/or ethnic slurs” or “makes remarks concerning race, nationality and/or ethnic background.” Former White House staffer and fellow reality-TV star Omarosa Manigault Newman claimed without evidence in a book released in August, “Unhinged,” that a tape exists of the president using the N-word on the reality show’s set. Trump has denied the existence of such tapes, tweeting that the show’s producer told him “there are NO TAPES of the Apprentice where I used such a terrible and disgusting word as attributed by Wacky and Deranged Omarosa.” “I don’t have that word in my vocabulary, and never have,” Trump said. The case filed in Boston’s federal court centers on the Trump administration’s decision to end temporary protected status for thousands of immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and Honduras. Temporary protected status provides safe havens for people from countries experiencing armed conflicts, natural disasters and other challenges. Lawyers for Civil Rights says in the lawsuit that Trump’s move to rescind the program was rooted in animus against immigrants of color, citing comments he made on the campaign trial and in office. “Access to these videotapes will help further demonstrate that Defendant Trump holds racially biased views that impact his policy and decision making,” attorney Oren Nimni said in a written statement. The subpoenas also seek any relevant outtakes, audio clips and transcripts made during production of the show. Emails seeking comment were sent to an MGM lawyer, a Trump Production official and White House officials. A federal judge in July denied Trump’s request to throw out the lawsuit and rejected the administration’s bid to remove Trump as a defendant in the case. In a different case in California, another federal judge last month issued a temporary injunction that bars the Trump administration from ending the protections, saying there is evidence that president “harbors an animus against non-white, non-European aliens which influenced his … decision to end the TPS designation.” The Trump administration is appealing that ruling. Pressure on producers of the “The Apprentice” to release unaired footage of the show intensified during the 2016 presidential campaign after The Washington Post published a 2005 “Access Hollywood” recording of Trump boasting about aggressively groping women. MGM, which owns “The Apprentice,” said at the time that it couldn’t unilaterally release any unaired, archived material because of contractual obligations. The show’s producer, Mark Burnett, also said he didn’t have the ability or right to release footage. A former contestant on “The Apprentice” who has accused Trump of unwanted groping and kissing has also sought footage through a lawsuit against the president, but it’s unclear whether she has received any. The subpoena issued by Summer Zervos‘ attorney in May sought any “Apprentice” material that features Zervos, or Trump talking about her or discussing other female contestants in a sexual or inappropriate way. Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Census Bureau to respond to Alabama lawsuit in fall
The federal government has until mid-November to respond to Alabama’s lawsuit seeking to exclude immigrants living in the country illegally from U.S. Census counts. A federal judge last week gave the U.S. Department of Commerce and Census Bureau an extension until Nov. 13 to reply to the lawsuit. Lawyers had said the Department of Justice components needed additional time to finish “evaluating the arguments that the government will make in this matter.” Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall filed the lawsuit against the federal government in June. Marshall argues the immigrants should not be included in census counts used to distribute congressional district. The lawsuit contends Alabama is at risk to lose a congressional seat, and thus an electoral vote, to a state with a “larger illegal alien population.” Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Lawsuit against Roy Moore won’t move counties says Alabama Supreme Court
A defamation lawsuit filed against former Alabama Chief Justice and Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore by one of his accusers will remain in a Montgomery County court, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled Friday. Leigh Corfman, the woman who said Moore sexually assaulted her when she was 14, filed the suit in the Montgomery County Circuit Court back in January. Corfman specifically said she was only 14 years old when Moore, then 32, approached her outside a courtroom in Etowah County, Ala. According to the report, he ultimately drove her to his home in the woods,told her she was pretty and kissed her, and then undressed her. Moore has vehemently denied Corfman’s allegations of abuse, calling them “politically motivated,” “completely false” and “malicious.” She asserts those words are defamatory in the suit. On Friday, the Alabama Supreme Court denied Moore’s request to have the case heard in Etowah County, where both he and Corfman live, instead of Montgomery County where she filed the suit. “Because I have denied Leigh Corfman’s allegations of sexual misconduct, I will now be forced to try this case in a county where the supposed event did not occur, where she does not live, and where there exists no evidence or witnesses to prove anything. This is ridiculous!” Moore said Friday of the state high court’s decision. He continued, “The Court itself admits venue is proper in either county. Should not the case be tried in the county where we both live and where her reputation and character are well known? She herself has said: “There is no one here [Gadsden] that doesn’t know that I’m not an angel.” “Corfman based her defense of venue in Montgomery County on two statements. One was made by a nonparty and thus was irrelevant to the case, and the other was made in a court case where the statement was privileged. Yet the Supreme Court refused to consider these facts in making its decision,” Moore concluded.
Texas suit could speed DACA’s path to Supreme Court
Three judges have ordered the Trump administration to continue a program that has shielded hundreds of thousands of young immigrants from deportation. Now, a lawsuit filed last week in Texas seeks to shut down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program and may create a legal clash that could speed the issue’s path to the Supreme Court. President Donald Trump’s decision in September to phase out the Obama-era program, called DACA, resulted in protests and a failed congressional effort to salvage it. Experts say it’s a matter of when, not if, the Supreme Court will rule on the program. It could be the second opportunity for the high court to weigh in on a high-profile decision of the president’s, with a ruling on Trump’s travel ban expected before the end of June. Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law Houston, said the Texas lawsuit filed May 1 tees up “a fast pass to the Supreme Court.” If Texas and six other states persuade a judge to issue a nationwide order barring the government from continuing DACA, that decision could conflict with existing judges’ orders telling the government it must partially continue the program. That’s the kind of conflict the Supreme Court generally steps in to address. The high court has already finished hearing arguments ahead of its summer break at the end of June, and it’s rare for the court to hear arguments again before October. But if judges issue conflicting orders on what the government must do with DACA, the court might be asked to make an interim, procedural decision, said Stephen Yale-Loehr, who teaches immigration law at Cornell University’s law school. The Texas lawsuit “creates even more uncertainty in what is going to happen,” he said. DACA, created in 2012, has provided protection from deportation and work permits for about 800,000 young people who came to the U.S. as children and stayed illegally. A person enrolled in the program gets protection from deportation that lasts two years and can be renewed. Judges in California and New York have ruled that the Trump administration must allow current DACA participants to renew their enrollments, but the government doesn’t have to process new applications. A ruling by a judge in the District of Columbia would require the government to also process new applications, but it has been put on hold until late July. While these lawsuits challenged Trump’s decision to wind down DACA, the lawsuit filed by Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina and West Virginia aims to end it. The states argue the creation of the program was unlawful, an overreach by President Barack Obama, a conclusion the Trump administration agrees with. And the states filed the case in a way to put it before a potentially sympathetic judge, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, Texas. Hanen criticized the Obama administration for lax enforcement of immigration laws. And in 2015 he ruled against an expansion of DACA by Obama as well as a program that would have protected the parents of children who are in the country legally. His ruling blocking the programs was upheld by an appeals court. The Supreme Court, short a member after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, was divided 4-4 on the case in 2016, leaving the lower court’s ruling in place. University of Texas law professor Stephen Vladeck said the Texas case “increases the likelihood of conflicting orders to the government and conflicting substantive conclusions about DACA’s legality.” If Hanen sides with the states, he could order the government to immediately stop processing new DACA applications or renewing old ones, which would contradict the existing orders. That would create a “pretty chaotic” situation that the Supreme Court would likely want to resolve, Vladeck said. Beyond what happens in Texas, two courts of appeal are readying to weigh in on DACA, too. Arguments before the San Francisco-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit are scheduled for Tuesday. And arguments before the New York City-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit are expected this summer. There is also the possibility that the Trump administration could issue a new memo, replacing one from September, with a fuller explanation of why it chose to wind down DACA, a move that would lead to another flurry of legal filings. The fact the administration hasn’t yet done that, though, suggests it may be reluctant to do so. The Trump administration has seemed eager to get the issue to the Supreme Court quickly. Earlier this year it took the unusual step of asking the high court to hear the California case before a federal appeals court had ruled on it. The high court declined to do so in late February, but it may not be able to avoid the issue for long. “We’re moving toward the Supreme Court,” Vladeck said. “How quickly depends on what happens next.” Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Local judges recuse selves in Roy Moore lawsuit against accusers
All six judges in an Alabama county have recused themselves from presiding over the lawsuit filed by failed U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore against some of the women who accused him of sexual misconduct. News outlets report Etowah County’s four circuit judges and two district judges filed recusals with interim Alabama Chief Justice Lyn Stuart on Monday, a week after Moore filed a political conspiracy lawsuit. The judges’ recusals cite two reasons. Circuit Judge David Kimberley is a member of the state Judicial Inquiry Commission that suspended Moore as Alabama chief justice in 2016, effectively removing him from the high court over his refusal to adhere to a federal court ruling permitting same-sex marriage. The other reason concerns Moore’s former position as a Sixteenth Judicial Circuit judge in Etowah County. Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Mother sues DHR, caseworkers in death of her daughter, a Montgomery foster mom
The mother of a beloved Montgomery, Ala. teacher filed a lawsuit against Alabama foster care administrators at the Alabama Department of Human Resources (ADHR) and case workers on Wednesday. Valetta Robinson filed the suit Montgomery County over what she considers the wrongful death of her daughter, Porscha Echols, who was reportedly strangled to death last year by her 14 year old foster son. The suit alleges administrators at ADHR were negligent in placing the boy in her 30 year old daughter’s home despite multiple, previous complaints of violent behavior in prior foster homes. “He should have never been placed in Porscha’s home,” said attorney Tommy James. “My client is dead because the people at DHR did not do their jobs and it is appalling that this was allowed to happen. This child should have received the mental health treatment they knew he needed. He easily could have been placed him in a home for troubled teens. These facilities are located throughout the state and DHR knows this. The foster care system completely broke down and failed Porscha Echols and her family,” Robinson is demanding a trial by jury.
‘To Kill A Mockingbird’ Broadway production company countersues Harper Lee’s estate
In a courtroom drama as fascinating as the novel itself — things are once again heating up surrounding the production of the upcoming Broadway adaptation of “To Kill a Mockingbird.” The production company for the show is fighting back against a lawsuit brought forth last month by the estate of the late Alabama author Harper Lee, who wrote the beloved 1960 novel, by introducing a countersuit. Hollywood producer Scott Rudin’s production company Rudinplay filed a $10 million countersuit on Monday against the estate for damages, threatening to cancel the play scheduled to open in December. “Investors are not willing to invest millions of dollars when a cloud exits,” claims the lawsuit. The original suit alleged screenwriter Aaron Sorkin wrongly altered Atticus Finch and other characters from the book in the script, despite a clause in the contract stipulating that “the play shall not derogate or depart in any manner from the spirit of the novel nor alter its characters.” However, the firm that represents Rudin’s company said Sorkin’s script “is a faithful adaptation of a singular novel which has been crafted well within the constraints of the agreement executed by both Harper Lee and the play’s producers before Ms. Lee’s death. Monday’s lawsuit further argues, “The Agreement did not give Ms. Lee approval rights over the script of the Play, much less did it give her right to purport to edit individual lines of dialogue.”
Roy Moore countersues accuser Leigh Corfman for slander, defamation
Former Alabama Chief Justice and U.S. Senate Republican nominee Roy Moore has filed a counterclaim for slander and defamation against Leigh Corfman, who has accused him of making unwanted sexual advances and filed a defamation lawsuit against him in January. In a 23-page filing made in Montgomery County Circuit Court, Moore accuses Corfman of making “slanderous” and “libelous” statements to the Washington Post. “The statements made by Leigh Corfman were slanderous, libelous and were of such magnitude as to amount to defamation of Mr. Moore,” reads the counterclaim. “No evidence other than the self-serving testimony of Leigh Corfman exists to support her contention that she was sexually abused or pursued romantically by Mr. Moore when she was fourteen years of age.” The claim continues, “Leigh Corfman knowingly, willingly and voluntarily made statements to the Washington Post regarding her alleged sexual abuse by Mr. Moore that she knew to be false. Leigh Corfman knowingly, willingly and maliciously made statements she knew to be false to the Washington Post with the intention and knowledge that such statements would damage the reputation of Mr. Moore.” Moore claims Corman’s allegations caused “irrevocable damage” to his reputation “that affected the outcome of the Senate election in December 2017.” “Mr. Moore avers that but for Leigh Corfman making false and malicious statements to members of national and local media, his reputation would not have suffered irrevocable damage that affected the outcome of the Senate election in December 2017,” the counterclaim added. In November, The Washington Post published a bombshell report with the accounts of Corfman and three other women who claimed Moore sexually pursued them when he was in his 30s and they were in their teens. Corfman specifically said she was only 14 years old when Moore, then 32, approached her outside a courtroom in Etowah County, Ala. According to the report, he ultimately drove her to his home in the woods,told her she was pretty and kissed her, and then undressed her. Moore has vehemently denied Corfman’s allegations of abuse, calling them “politically motivated,” “completely false” and “malicious.” She asserts those words are defamatory in the suit. Corfman is not seeking financial compensation, only legal fees, and is looking for Moore to publicly apologize for what he has said about her. She is also seeking a court-enforced ban on Moore or his campaign that would prohibit him from allegedly criticizing her in the future. One of Moore’s attorneys said this all has been a “political attempt” to smears Moore’s reputation. “This is and has been a political attempt to smear the good name and reputation of Judge Roy Moore and we will not let their injustice continue,” attorney Melissa Isaak said Tuesday. “Yesterday we filed claims for slander and defamation against Leigh Corfman, and claimed damages for attorneys fees under the Alabama Litigation Accountability Act. We also continue to argue that this case should be tried in Etowah County and wonder why Leigh Corfman has chosen to file this case in Montgomery and not Etowah County where both she and Judge Moore reside and where her own character and reputation are well known?”
Lawsuit again Roy Moore continues, judge refuses to dismiss
A Montgomery County judge has rejected former Alabama Chief Justice and U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore’s request to have a defamation lawsuit against him thrown out. The judge also denied a request to move the suit to Etowah County. Montgomery County Circuit Judge Roman Shaul denied Moore’s request to dismiss the suit filed by Leigh Corfman. Corfman was one of the three women named in The Washington Post’s bombshell report back in November, during Alabama’s U.S. Senate special election, who all claimed Moore sexually pursued them when he was in his 30s and they were in their teens. Moore vehemently denied Corfman’s allegations of abuse, calling them “politically motivated,” “completely false” and “malicious.” Corfman asserted those words are defamatory in the suit she filed in January. Moore’s attorney contends Moore had a First Amendment right to defend himself. Corfman is not seeking financial compensation, only legal fees, and is looking for Moore to publicly apologize for what he has said about her. She is also seeking a court-enforced ban on Moore or his campaign that would prohibit him from allegedly criticizing her in the future. Judge Shaul also scheduled a formal court hearing in the case for Thursday, April 12.
Harper Lee’s estate sues over Broadway version of ‘To Kill A Mockingbird’
The upcoming Broadway adaptation of “To Kill a Mockingbird” has been hit with a lawsuit by the estate of the late Alabama author Harper Lee, who wrote the beloved 1960 novel. The federal lawsuit was filed in Alabama this week by the late author’s lawyer Tonja Carter against the theater company of New York producer Scott Rudin. It alleges screenwriter Aaron Sorkin wrongly altered Atticus Finch and other characters from the book in the script, despite a clause in the contract stipulating that “the play shall not derogate or depart in any manner from the spirit of the novel nor alter its characters.” The lawsuit states Atticus is “based on Ms Lee’s own father, a small-town Alabama lawyer who represented black defendants in a criminal trial”, and “is portrayed in the novel as a model of wisdom, integrity, and professionalism,” noting any shift from that, departs from the spirit of the novel, thus the suit asks a judge to enforce that portion of the contract. A firm that represents Rudin’s company said Sorkin’s script “is a faithful adaptation of a singular novel which has been crafted well within the constraints of the agreement executed by both Harper Lee and the play’s producers before Ms. Lee’s death. This action undertaken by the estate of Harper Lee is an unfortunate step in a situation where there is simply artistic disagreement over the creation of a play that Ms. Lee herself wanted to see produced, and is the kind of disagreement which one expects would be worked out easily between two parties who have a mutual interest in seeing a work produced.” The statement continued calling out the estate lawyer’s history litigious behavior. “The estate has an unfortunate history of litigious behavior and of both filing and being the recipient of numerous lawsuits, and has been the subject of considerable controversy surrounding its handling of the work of Harper Lee both during her illness and after her death. This is, unfortunately, simply another such lawsuit, the latest of many, and we believe that it is without merit. While we hope this gets resolved, if it does not, the suit will be vigorously defended,” the statement added. The play is set to open December 13.
