October 2012 Archives

Mark Menard was permanently injured while crossing through a railroad freight yard. He sued the freight yard operator, CSX Transportation (CSX) for his injuries, but the district court ruled that his complaint was barred because failed to assert sufficient facts to overcome his status as a “trespasser” under Massachusetts law.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed, and remanded Menard’s case for limited discovery.

An asylum applicant won't win an immigration appeal simply because he's credible; the facts supporting his application must also meet the U.S. criteria for asylum.

Luis Escobar, a citizen of Guatemala, asked the First Circuit Court of Appeals to review the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) decision denying his applications for asylum, statutory withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture. While the Boston-based court sympathized with Escobar, it rejected his appellate arguments.

Two Boston College researchers caught a break on Wednesday when Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer extended a previous stay he had granted of a district court order demanding the researchers’ taped recordings with former Irish Republican Army members, reports the Boston Globe.

The researchers, who have spent the last year trying to convince federal courts that they should be able to withhold oral history recordings from international authorities, now have until November 16 to ask the Supreme Court to review their case.

The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) is a pain for those subject to it. A sex offender must register periodically in each jurisdiction where he resides, works, or goes to school, and he must periodically appear in person to update information and be photographed.

Despite the inconvenience, courts have overwhelmingly upheld SORNA requirements.

This week, the First Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a plethora of arguments against SORNA enforcement. Let's delve into why a regulated offender failed to persuade the Boston-based appellate court that he shouldn't have to comply with the registry requirements.

An immigration judge may grant a motion for continuance for “good cause shown.”

This week, the First Circuit Court of Appeals clarified that the possibility of legislation that would alter existing immigration laws does not qualify as “good cause shown.”

Will convicted Rhode Island attorney Robert Ciresi accept his fate, or appeal all the way to the Supreme Court?

Monday, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Ciresi's 2011 conspiracy convictions.

A woman can use China’s one-child policy as the basis for an asylum application, but her husband cannot.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week in a matter of first impression that 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(B), a statute enacted to pave the way for asylum for victims of China’s coercive population control policies, does not automatically extend to a spouse of a person forced to undergo an abortion.

The Supreme Court has yet to announce whether it will consider Gill v. OPM — or any of the seven gay marriage petitions pending before the Court, but today it announced that it will not review the First Circuit’s National Organization for Marriage v. McKee ruling.

In January, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Maine law that requires groups that spend more than $5,000 on referendum advocacy to disclose the identity of donors that gave more than $100. The appellate court found that the law provided fair warning of its reach, it was not overbroad, and its $100 threshold was narrowly tailored to meet Maine’s compelling interest in an informed electorate.