January 4, 2024, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • NAACP v. Tindell, 23-60647, appeal from S.D. Miss.
    • per curiam (Smith, Elrod, Engelhardt), § 1983, standing
    • Denying motion for injunction pending appeal of district court’s denial of injunction of new Mississippi statute expanding the special judicial district surrounding the Mississippi state capitol and empowering the chief justice of the Mississippi Supreme Court to appoint the judge for the district and the Mississippi Attorney General to appoint the prosecutors for the district (as opposed to the appointment of these positions by local elected officials for all other judicial districts).
    • The Court held that the plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed on the merits of their Fourteenth Amendment claims because they would be unable to establish standing. “Plaintiffs utterly fail to demonstrate that they, as members of the Jackson community, have any legally protected interest in the CCID court’s accountability to the Jackson local governing authority (of which they are not even a part).” The Court also rejected a vote-dilution theory of standing: “Claiming that they live within the district and therefore suffer from a ‘district specific dilution of voting rights,’ they mistake the difference between being able to vote on equal footing—which is what the Equal Protection Clause protects—and the substantive impact of their vote—i.e., what the politicians they vote for have the power to do.” The Court further held that the creation of the new court and the denial of appointment power over that new court to local officials could not deprive any constitutionally protected right: “The legislature decided against giving Jackson’s local officials a new grant of power over the new court. That is the right and prerogative of the legislature, not of Jackson’s voters.” The Court also rejected the plaintiffs’ theory of “stigmatic” harm.

Unpublished

  • U.S. v. Cabral-Aleman, 23-50182, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Davis, Ho, Ramirez), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming imposition of two-level enhancement to sentence based on intentional destruction of cell phone.
  • U.S. v. Cruz-Ramirez, 23-50339, c/w 23-50365, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Higginson, Engelhardt), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and sentence for illegal reentry.
  • Johnson v. City of San Antonio, 23-50476, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Dennis, Elrod, Wilson), municipal liability
    • Affirming dismissal of municipal liability claims arising from alleged false arrest of plaintiff at Quinceanera event.
  • Feitosa v. Garland, 23-60314, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Stewart, Southwick), immigration
    • Denying in part and dismissing in part Brazilian citizen’s petition for review of BIA order denying her second motion to reopen and denying her request for sua sponte reopening.