Civil Rights Law Decisions: Decided
Decided - The FindLaw Noteworthy Decisions and Settlements Blog

Recently in Civil Rights Law Category

For years, New York has tried to clamp down on the city's sex shops. But the Appellate Division of the State Supreme Court ruled this week that adult video stores, bookshops, and even topless dancing clubs are all protected by the First Amendment.

Does freedom of speech = freedom of sex?

Just a few days before the one year anniversary of his death, Eric Garner's family reached a settlement in its wrongful-death claim against New York City.

Last year, on July 17, 2014, police attempted to arrest Eric Garner for selling untaxed cigarettes. According to the police, Garner resisted arrest, so one officer used a chokehold, which is prohibited by the Police Department's policies. By the end of the short struggle, Garners' cries of "I can't breathe" subsided, and he died.

Not long after, Garner's family filed a wrongful death claim against the city.

If you haven't heard about the Supreme Court's ruling regarding same-sex marriage in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, you've probably been living under a rock or have never used Facebook before.

FYI: The Supreme Court ruled that marriage is a fundamental right and same-sex couples must be allowed to marry. While you may have heard all about the decision by now, here is a more in-depth look into the case, the ruling, and the dissents.

Free practice of religion and free speech. Our First Amendment protections are a little bit stronger after two of the Supreme Court's recent decisions in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. and Elonis v. United States.

Here is what you need to know about these decisions:

The Supreme Court is reaching the final cases of its October 2014 term, and has some doozies on the docket.

From raisin rights to marriage rights and the right to a humane execution, here are some of the highlights on next week's SCOTUS oral argument calendar.

Supreme Ct. Stays Executions, Will Hear Lethal Injection Challenge

For the first time in years, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether the lethal injection method of execution is constitutional. The decision to hear the case comes shortly after one Oklahoma state prisoner out of four to file the case was already executed.

At least that won't happen to the other three petitioning prisoners: The High Court granted a stay of their executions until the justices make a ruling.

Does this spell the end of the death penalty? And what is "midazolam," anyway?

This has been a big year for landmark decisions and settlements, and FindLaw's Decided was there to cover all of 2014's big legal moments.

There were Supreme Court decisions and denials, companies settling over less than honest business practices, and even a reminder on how social media can screw up a perfectly good legal agreement.

Here's to 2014, and here's the Top 10 cases you loved most from this year:

Police officers may stop a vehicle based on a misunderstanding of traffic laws without violating the civil rights, the Supreme Court has ruled.

In its 8-1 ruling on Monday, the High Court found that even though a North Carolina police officer misunderstood a state traffic law regarding brake lights, the mistake was reasonable, and thus the search that followed was not illegal. The driver, Nicholas B. Heien, consented to the search of his car following the stop, which yielded a baggie of cocaine.

So why did the Court rule for a search based on a good-faith mistake in Heien v. North Carolina?

Gay marriage opponents got their first victory in a federal appeals court Thursday, as the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld same-sex marriage bans as constitutional in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee.

Two judges on the 6th Circuit's three-judge panel determined that the issue of defining marriage should be left to the states, not judges, reports the Detroit Free Press. Meantime, the lone dissenting judge blasted her colleagues, calling the opinion more of a "TED talk" than a constitutional analysis. The 2-1 decision is now the rule of law in the four states mentioned above.

Why did the 6th Circuit uphold these states' gay marriage bans when so many other courts have struck down similar laws?

An Arizona law denying bail to certain undocumented immigrants was struck down on Wednesday by a federal appeals court, finding the law to be an unconstitutional violation of due process.

This isn't the first time that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has reviewed Proposition 100, a 2006 Arizona ballot measure that denied bail to undocumented immigrants charged with "serious" crimes. The Los Angeles Times reported that the appellate court upheld the law in a 2-1 decision last year, but the full panel wanted to rehear the case.

So why did the 9th Circuit decide to struck down the no-bail law this time?