U.S. Ninth Circuit - The FindLaw 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

For a second time now, a jury has ruled that Roundup, the weed-killer made by Monsanto, which was just purchased by Bayer, has caused an individual's cancer.

This week's verdict hasn't assessed liability or damages yet, as those are part of phase 2 of the trial. In this phase, the jury only ruled that, according to evidence it heard, Roundup was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff, Edwin Hardeman, to develop non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, a form of blood cancer.

Asylum-Seekers Entitled to Habeas Review

You may stumble on Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam's name, but you should not forget it in immigration law.

In Thuraissigiam v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said asylum-seekers may challenge expedited removal orders by habeas petition. From coast to coast, news organizations reported it is as a decision with "sweeping implications."

It will certainly stall President Trump's efforts to speed up deportations. It will likely set up a day in the U.S. Supreme Court, too.

Judge Says Bail System Is Unconstitutional

Riana Buffin lost her job at the Oakland Airport because she was in jail.

She was arrested for allegedly stealing some property; that was her problem. But she couldn't post bail because she was poor.

That was a problem with the system. In Buffin v. City and County of San Francisco, a federal judge said the bail system was unconstitutional.

In a panel decision out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, one defendant is catching a tough break after the court found that the warrant that secured his cell phone location data was not supported by probable cause.

Despite the lack of probable cause, a divided panel found that the officer's good faith reliance on the warrant being supported by probable cause defeated the fact that it was not.

9th Circuit Revives Muslim Spying Case Against FBI

Farouk al-Aziz attended the Islamic Center of Irvine, publicly declaring his Muslim faith during prayer with hundreds of other members.

But there were a couple of things wrong with that: his real name was Craig Monteilh, and he was a government informant. The Federal Bureau of Investigation wanted him to gather information for a counterterrorism investigation.

In Fazaga v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Muslims filed a class-action over the FBI's spying in their places of worship and elsewhere. Reversing a trial court, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said they have a case.

Judge: Prosecutors Can't Take Mongols' Trademarked Logo

Jesse Ventura, the former pro wrestler-turned-governor, could not get a hold on the jury.

He testified that he was a Mongol back in the 1970s, but it was not a criminal gang. It was a motorcycle club, he said.

Jurors didn't believe it, and found the gang was a criminal enterprise involved in murder, attempted murder, and drug dealing. The judge, however, had a stunning difference of opinion.

Health Groups Sue EPA Over Asbestos Reporting

How in the world does asbestos get into crayons, baby powder, and makeup?

That's what the plaintiffs want to know in Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization v. Wheeler, a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency. They say asbestos exposure is always bad, but in children's products?!

The plaintiffs want the EPA to impose stricter reporting requirements on companies that handle asbestos. Otherwise, they say, there is no way to know how the toxic material gets into consumer products.

Twelve former NFL players and one widow have had the dismissal of their case against their former teams affirmed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

After all that has come to light in the CTE fallout, the case probably would have at least been illuminating, if not impactful. The former players were alleging a civil conspiracy, under RICO, that the teams were overmedicating the players, without providing the players with adequate information about the consequences, which cut-short their careers. Unfortunately for the former players and one widow, as the Ninth Circuit affirmed, the case was filed after the expiration of the statute of limitations.

A surprising new trend out of the Pacific Northwest involves bikini clad baristas serving coffee in drive-thru coffee stands.

The bikini baristas have taken social media by storm, and have received a surprisingly welcoming reception from almost everyone, except the cities that have been trying to regulate these businesses out of existence. And if you're not convinced that this is an important constitutional matter, just consider the level of analysis the attorney for the city of Everett provides when explaining what an "anal cleft" is to the Ninth Circuit panel of judges: "There is only one vertical opening made as if by splitting that could be associated with the anus on the human body."

The full Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in favor of granting a preliminary injunction preventing the San Francisco soda label and advertising warning law from taking effect until the litigation challenging it concludes.

The appellees sought review of the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction. After a Ninth Circuit panel reversed the district court, the en banc court stepped in to review the matter. The full court upheld the panel's reversal, finding that the beverage and advertising industry challengers had shown a likelihood of success on the merits based upon the heavy burdens the warning labels would impose.