Federal Litigation

Subscribe to Federal Litigation via RSS

Ah, the Jones Act.In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, the President waived the Jones Act provisions barring foreign built tankers from carrying cargo between U.S. ports.Is it a "statutory relic" which is outdated and counter-productive? Does it cause consumer prices to increase, unfairly hitting remote communities like Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico? Should it…

Interesting case noting the interplay between the Declaratory Judgment Act and the federal courts' admiralty jurisdiction.  The case is Garanti Finansal Kiralama A.S. v. Aqua Marine and Trading, Inc. and the original opinion can be found here.Facts are straightforward:  a marine shipping fuel provider brought a claim in arbitration demanding to be paid for…

As Amended.  Often seen in statutes.  Rarely litigated.The First Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decieion in a Defense Base Act case.  It is entitled Truczinskas v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs and can be found here.  The facts are short.  A employee duing military training in Saudi Arabia was found hanging from…

Judge Richard Posner, writing for the majority on a Seventh Circuit panel, struck down Illinois’ ban on firearms possession outside the home as unconstitutional under the 2nd Amendment. The decision stays its impact for 180 days to allow the Illinois’ legislature time to “fix” the law.The opinion can be downloaded here.Much to read with the opinion largely based on historical analysis of carriage of firearms in the 18th century and on empirical studies about gun related crimes in America.We are disinclined to engage in another round of historical analysis to determine whether eighteenth-century America understood the Second Amendment to include a right to bear guns outside the home. The Supreme Court has decided that the amendment confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside. The theoretical and empirical evidence (which overall is inconclusive) is consistent with concluding that a right to carry firearms in public may promote self-defense. Illinois had to provide us with more than merely a rational basis for believing that its uniquely sweeping ban is justified by an increase in public safety. It has failed to meet this burden. The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment therefore compels us to reverse the decisions in the two cases before us and remandStay tuned.