Same-Sex Marriage and Judicial Elections

Largely overlooked in the spate of reports on the recent election was the defeat in a retention election of David Baker, Michael Streit, and Marsha Ternus, three Justices on the Iowa Supreme Court.  They had previously joined the majority in ruling that Iowa’s ban on same sex-marriage violated the state’s equal protection guarantees.  As a result of that ruling, Iowa became the only state in the Midwest to allow same-sex marriage.  This was important not only for gay and lesbian couples in Iowa but also in nearby states.  A majority of same-sex marriages in Iowa during the past year involved couples from Illinois, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.

One key to the election results was the money that was spent in Iowa by national groups opposed to same-sex marriage, and Iowa opponents of same-sex marriage welcomed the spending and surely delighted in the Iowa returns.  Bob Vander Plaats, a leader of pro-removal campaign said, “It’s the people rising up, and having a voice for freedom, and holding an out-of-control court in check.”  

Continue ReadingSame-Sex Marriage and Judicial Elections

SCOTUS to Address Requirements for Federal Murder Statute

Yesterday, the Supreme Court agreed to decide what “federal nexus” must be proven in a murder prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(a)(1)(C).  The statute makes it a federal crime to kill “another person, with intent to . . . prevent the communication by any person to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a federal offense.”  The specific question before the Court is whether a defendant may be “convicted of murder under § 1512(a)(1)(C) without proof that information regarding a possible federal crime would have been transferred from the victim to federal law enforcement officers or judges.”  Additionally, the case presents interesting questions regarding the interpretation of statutory state-of-mind requirements and the scope of federal criminal jurisdiction.

The decision below was United States v. Fowler, 603 F.3d 702 (11th Cir. 2010).  Here’s what happened.  

Continue ReadingSCOTUS to Address Requirements for Federal Murder Statute

SCOTUS Okays Piling on Mandatory Minimums — In the Name of Proportionality?

Yesterday, the Supreme Court held in Abbott v. United States that the five-year mandatory minimum prescribed by 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) must be imposed consecutively to other mandatory minimums imposed pursuant to other statutes.  The 924(c) mandatory minimum targets defendants who have used, carried, or possessed a firearm in connection with a crime of violence or a drug trafficking crime.

The defendants in Abbott illustrate how the same conduct that triggers 924(c) can also trigger other mandatory minimums.  

Continue ReadingSCOTUS Okays Piling on Mandatory Minimums — In the Name of Proportionality?