Believe All Women or Support Joe Biden?

SHERRY F. COLB

Cornell Law professor Sherry F. Colb comments on recent sexual assault allegations against presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden. Colb argues that if the only choices for President are Donald Trump and Joe Biden, the sexual assault allegation against the latter will take second fiddle to the need to defeat the former and defends this perspective as not manifesting hypocrisy or indifference to sexual assault or other intimate violence.

Read More

Singleton v. Cannizzaro

Docket: 19-30197

Opinion Date: April 21, 2020

Judge: Catharina Haynes

Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law

Plaintiffs allege that for years, prosecutors at the Orleans Parish District Attorney's Office, under the direction of District Attorney Leon Cannizzaro, used fake "subpoenas" to pressure crime victims and witnesses to meet with them. The Fifth Circuit held that (1) at this early, motion to dismiss stage, the individual defendants are not entitled to absolute immunity for plaintiffs' subpoena-related state-law claims and (2) the court lacked jurisdiction to consider the merits of plaintiffs' claims. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's holding that the individual defendants are not entitled to absolute immunity for their alleged creation and use of fraudulent subpoenas, but dismissed the remainder of defendants' appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

United States v. Johnson

Docket: 17-60852

Opinion Date: April 21, 2020

Judge: Priscilla R. Owen

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit vacated defendant's sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. 922(g) and 924(e) by knowingly possessing a firearm after he had been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. The court held that the district court committing plain error by violating Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32 when it relied on factual allegations in the confidential sentencing recommendation that were not in the presentence report and that were not disclosed by defendant. The court explained that the use of undisclosed facts to justify an above-guidelines sentence seriously affects the fairness, integrity, and public reputation of judicial proceedings. Therefore, the court remanded for resentencing.

United States v. McGinnis

Docket: 19-10197

Opinion Date: April 21, 2020

Judge: Stuart Kyle Duncan

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8), which prohibits individuals subject to certain domestic violence protective orders from possessing firearms or ammunition for any purpose, is facially constitutional under the Fifth Circuit's two-step NRA framework. Even assuming arguendo that the conduct at issue -- the keeping and possessing of firearms by individuals subject to domestic protective orders -- falls within the Second Amendment right, defendant's facial challenge fails. The court applied intermediate scrutiny and held that section 922(g)(8) is reasonably adapted to the government interest of reducing domestic gun abuse. The court also held that if the commonly understood definitions of terms in the protective order include acts involving "physical force," the protective order is sufficient to support a conviction under section 922(g)(8)(C)(ii). In this case, the jury plausibly found that the order satisfied the statute and the court declined to reverse defendant's conviction on this basis. However, the court remanded for the limited purpose of conforming defendant's written judgment to the district court's oral pronouncement.

M.D.C.G. v. United States

Docket: 19-40076

Opinion Date: April 21, 2020

Judge: E. Grady Jolly

Areas of Law: Personal Injury

Plaintiff and two minors filed suit against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), asserting claims of assault and battery, false imprisonment/false arrest, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and negligent hiring, retention, and supervision. Plaintiff's claims arose from a Border Patrol agent's physical and sexual abuse of plaintiff and the minors, including rape, beatings, knife body-carvings, strangulations, and the attempted burial of a living victim. The Fifth Circuit held that the agent's conduct was outside the scope of his employment, and thus plaintiff could not recover damages from the United States under the FTCA. Therefore, the court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the FTCA claims based on the agent's conduct. The court also held that the FTCA's discretionary function exception deprived the district court of subject matter jurisdiction over the negligent supervision claims, and thus vacated in part, remanding to the district court to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.