Michael and Jayne Bray v. Planned Parenthood
The status as of May, 2014
A draft of the original lawsuit filed in the fall of 2007 against Planned Parenthood Columbia Williamette, Inc. is here:
A complaint was likewise filed against the U.S. Marshals and they responded as follows:
22 March 2013 Brief of Appellees
Thomas Condit, counsel for the Brays, filed a reply:
15 April 2013 Appellant Reply Brief
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (a panel of three judges: Rogers, Donald, and Andrews) reviewed the decision of the District Judge Edmund Sargus, Jr. and affirmed 3-0 on 21 March, 2014. However, the opinion contained a serious rebuke of the Marshals, reported upon by Jonathan Stempel (Reuters, Mar. 21, 2014):
Writing for a three-judge 6th Circuit panel, Circuit Judge John Rogers upheld that dismissal, saying it was not “clearly established” at the time of the raid that the Brays’ rights against illegal searches and seizures were being violated.
But Rogers said the four-hour detention was unjustified, and that the seizure of “expressive materials of negligible market value” made it seem as though the raid was meant to intimidate the family and confiscate “disfavored” books and papers.
“If the facts alleged in the complaint are true, this case involves an incident that is more like home raids by Red Guards during China’s Cultural Revolution than like what we should expect in the United States of America,” the judge wrote.
“It is true that the debtor’s ideas – that it is moral to take violent, illegal action to stop abortions – are repugnant,” Rogers added. “But it is contrary to our fundamental norms to permit government-sanctioned attacks on the purveyance of ideas, even when those ideas are repugnant.”
The Court’s opinion is here:
Thomas Condit filed a most eloquent petition for rehearing (before a full panel of Sixth Circuit judges) on April 4, 2014:
Bray CA6 – Petition for Rehearing En Banc
On 30 April, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit – regarding the “en banc” – full panel – consideration of the Complaint, ordered the Attorney General’s Office as follows:
30 April 2014 Court orders AG to Reply to Charges Against Marshals
The Attorney General’s Office replied on 14 May, 2014:
14 May 2014 Marshals’ Response to Petition -Bray CA6
Stay tuned.
Judge Orlando Garcia and the Clintonistas: Perverters of Law PP Collection in Ohio
Comments are currently closed.