On December 21, 2006, William K. Suter, Clerk of the Supreme Court, wrote to the Solicitor General informing the General that, although his office had waived a right to respond to the Michael New’s petition for certiorari, the Court has directed the Clerk to request that the Solicitor General file a response to the petition on or before January 22, 2007. (This deadline was subsequently was
Firm’s FOIA Litigation Against Social Security Administration Leads to Release of U.S. – Mexico Totalization Agreement
In response to our firm’s still-pending FOIA lawsuit on behalf of TREA Senior Citizens League (TSCL) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) finally released the “U.S.-Mexico Social Security Totalization Agreement,” hand-delivering it to the firm in late December 2006.
This is the first known release of the Mexican Totalization
Michael G. New v. Donald H. Rumsfeld — Petition for Certiorari
Today, we filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, seeking review by the United States Supreme Court of the dismissal of Michael G. New’s collateral attack on his January 1996 court-martial. (Former Army Specialist New was convicted of disobedience of an allegedly lawful order for failure to wear the United Nations uniform prescribed for his unit’s deployment as part of a U.N. commanded
Gun Owners Foundation Amicus Brief in United States v. Stanko
Mr. Rudolph Stanko was convicted of possession of a firearm and ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1), which prohibits any person from possessing a firearm or ammunition if that person has been convicted of certain types of crimes punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. According to the statutory definition, the predicate crime cannot be any federal or state
State of Wyoming v. BATF District Court Oral Argument
On October 6, 2006, our attorneys had the opportunity to present oral argument in support of the Gun Owners Foundation amicus brief in Wyoming v. BATF. At stake in this litigation before the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming is the statutory and constitutional right of the state of Wyoming to conduct its own criminal background check for purchasers of firearms in Wyoming.
State of Wyoming v. BATF Amicus Curiae Brief for Gun Owners Foundation in District Court
Today, our firm filed an amicus curiae brief for Gun Owners Foundation in the U.S. District Court for the State of Wyoming on behalf of the State of Wyoming, and the Wyoming Attorney General, Patrick J. Crank.
The brief was submitted in opposition to a BATF ruling that a Wyomingconcealed carry permit based on a Montana criminal background check is not sufficient to allow an FFL dealer to transfer
Michael New Petition for Rehearing En Banc
Today, the legal team for Michael New filed a petition for rehearing en banc of New’s collateral attack on his court-martial conviction for disobedience of a “lawful” order. In his petition, New documents the unmistakable fact that the three-judge panel decision — affirming the district court’s dismissal of his complaint that he was denied due process of law
Social Security Totalization Agreement: TSCL’s Freedom of Information Act Complaints Filed
On June 29, 2006, we filed Freedom of Information Act complaints against both the United States Department of State and the Social Security Administration in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The complaints arise from requests for records made by TSCL beginning in 2003 relating to the Social Security Totalization Agreement which the United States Government has negotiated
Religious Liberty Not to Have a Social Security Number (Idaho Court of Appeals)
On March 17, 2006, we filed a supplemental reply brief bringing to the attention of the Idaho Court of Appeals the United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Gonzales v. UDV, in which Chief Justice John Roberts — writing for a unanimous court — construed the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act to provide very favorable protection to individual liberty
United Seniors Association v. Social Security Administration Amicus Brief Filed to Attack Federal Statute Censoring 15 Political Words
We filed an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of the Free Speech Defense and Education Fund, Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund, Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, Citizens United Foundation, and Downsize DC Foundation in support of United Seniors Association’s (USA) petition for a writ of certiorari.
The amicus brief takes issue with the casual
Michael New Oral Argument
On February 16 at 9:30AM, Herb Titus is scheduled for oral argument on behalf of Michael New before Circuit Judges Randolph and Garland and Senior Judge Williams, urging the appellate panel to reverse U.S. District Judge Friedman’s order dismissing Mr. New’s claim that he was unconstitutionally convicted of disobedience of a lawful order. Central to Mr. New’s constitutional claims
Birthright Citizenship Study Re-Released: “Children Born in the United States to Aliens Should Not, by Constitutional Right, Be U.S. Citizens”
A legal analysis of Birthright Citizenship, written by Bill Olson, Herb Titus and Alan Woll, was re-released by U.S. Border Control today. The paper, “Children Born in the United States to Aliens Should Not, by Constitutional Right, Be U.S. Citizens” was originally published in January 2001,and then updated in March 2003. The House of Representatives is expected to be considering legislation
Michael New Reply Brief
On November 23, 2005, Michael New’s legal team filed a hard-hitting reply brief to the United States government’s continuing attempt to avoid New’s claim that his 1996 court-martial conviction for disobedience of a “lawful” order was unconstitutional. For over 10 years now, the government has sought to dismiss New’s claim that a 1995 order to wear a U.N. uniform
Citizens United, Citizens United Foundation, Amicus Brief in Wisconsin Right to Life Case
Today we filed an Amicus Brief for Citizens United and Citizens United Foundation in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC. The brief asks the Supreme Court to overturn a decision of a Special Three Judge District Court in the District of Columbia. The brief argues that the lower court misread the Supreme Court’s decision in McConnell v. FEC resolving a “facial”
FSDEF Amicus Brief in United Seniors Association v. Social Security Administration
We filed an Amicus Brief for the Free Speech Defense and Education Fund in support of United Seniors Association’s petition for rehearing of the decision to fine them over $500,000 for using the words “Social Security” on carrier envelopes. The FSDEF brief submits that the panel misapplied the deferential agency review standard of Chevron and failed to apply the relevant
FSC Comments on FEC Electioneering Communications
The Free Speech Coalition (“FSC”) and Free Speech Defense and Education Fund (“FSDEF”) filed these Comments with the Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) on Friday, September 30, 2005, in connection with the FEC’s consideration of regulations with respect to the definition of “electioneering communication.”
Michael New Initial Brief
We filed, on behalf of Michael New, an Initial Brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. This brief presents for decision whether the district court improperly dismissed — for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted — each of the four counts of New’s Second Amended Complaint, collaterally attacking his January 25, 1996 court-martial
FSC Comments to the Federal Election Commission on Internet Communication Regulations
On behalf of the Free Speech Coalition, we submitted comments to the Federal Election Commission regarding the proposed regulations on Internet communications.
McCreary (Ten Commandments) U.S. Supreme Court Case Amicus Brief Filed
Today we filed an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of :
Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund,
Joyce Meyer Ministries,
Committee to Protect the Family Foundation,
Lincoln Institute for Research and Education,
American Heritage Party,
Public Advocate of the United States,
Radio Liberty, and
Spiritual Counterfeits Project,
FSC Comments to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance
On behalf of the Free Speech Coalition, we submitted post-hearing comments to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance relating to its staff report and June 22, 2004 hearings on “Charity Oversight and Reform: Keeping Bad Things from Happening to Good Charities.” The comments point out shortcomings of many of the proposed solutions contained in the discussion draft.
Postal Service Proposed Regulations on First Class Rates
On behalf of the Free Speech Coalition, we filed comments with the U.S. Postal Service expressing the concern that the proposed regulations, which clarify the type of mail that must be entered at First-Class rates and that which is eligible for Standard mail rates, would inappropriately shift much educational mail from Nonprofit Standard to First-Class rates.
Michael New v. Donald Rumsfeld
Today we filed our Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint. By their motion to dismiss, Defendants seek to block the door to the federal courthouse to a soldier court-martialed for challenging an illegal and unconstitutional order.
FEC Rulemaking Definition of Political Committee
On behalf of the Free Speech Coalition, we filed comments with the Federal Election Commission opposing the proposed expansion of the definition of political committees to include potentially thousands of nonprofit organizations.
Defending the Ten Commandments
Today we filed our appellant’s brief in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the right of an anonymous plaintiff to file suit without seeking leave of court or providing any compelling rational for the waiver under the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Barrow County, Georgia — Ten Commandments Case
Today we filed our response to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal’s memorandum to counsel concerning jurisdiction of our appeal of the district court’s denial of our motion to dismiss. This response also opposes appellee’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.