Since June 26, 2015, when jubilant masses swarmed First Street in front of the Supreme Court and the White House illuminated the night with rainbow lights, lawyers, scholars, and many citizens have waited with bated breath to see how the legacy of Obergefell v. Hodges would shape the next generation of jurisprudence.
A complaint that our firm has just filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland tells a powerful and appalling story of the abuse of an American citizen, convicted of no crime, at the hands of employees of PTS of America, Inc., a Nashville-based private company that is in the business of transporting prisoners and detainees.
Recent reports are that law students are demanding to postpone their exams as a result of the national tragedies in Ferguson and New York.
Students who find it impossible to take tests because of news reports about injustices in our legal system should not become constitutional lawyers. Better yet, they should find another career altogether.
On June 24, 2014, the United States District Court for the District of Oregon ruled that the No-Fly list was unconstitutional because the government does not provide Americans who are on the list any meaningful opportunity to contest their inclusion.
On Wednesday June 25, in a unanimous ruling the Supreme Court held that the police need warrants to search the cellphones of people they arrest. Courts have long allowed warrantless searches in connection with arrests, allowing officers to conduct a full search of the person being arrested as well as any property on or relatively near them at the time they are arrested.
(One of the trademarks registered to Pro Football, Inc. d/b/a/ The Washington Redskins)
On Wednesday, the United States Patent And Trademark Office (Trademark Trial and Appeal Board or “TTAB”) canceled the Washington Redskins’ trademark registrations in the start of what is likely to be a lengthy legal battle.
Last year, Chief Justice John Roberts, in ruling with the majority that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional, wrote “Blatantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare.” Even if true, this statement does not speak to the prevalence of subtly discriminatory actions, often based on hidden, deep-se
Can an employer be liable for racist and sexist comments by a client or business partner—someone who does not even work for the employer—toward one of its employees?
Under a recent decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, the answer is “yes.” In Freeman v. Dal-Tile Corp., a decision issued on April 29, 2014, the Fourth Circuit recognized that an employer can be liable for harassment perpetrated by a third-party against one of its employees.
The President’s Executive Order on Non-Retaliation for Disclosure of Compensation Information: How it will affect federal contractors and their employees
On April 8, 2014, President Barack Obama signed an Executive Order prohibiting federal government contractors from retaliating against employees for disclosing their own or other employees’ salary information. This post will explore the implications of this new Executive Order for federal contractors and their employees.
Will Prince George’s County residents face less fairness than others if The Fairness for All Marylanders Act of 2014 (SB 212) becomes law? Possibly.
On March 5, 2014, the Maryland Senate passed SB212 (2014), historic legislation providing the protections of Maryland’s employment, public accommodations, and housing anti-discrimination laws to transgender persons. Passing by a vote of 32-15 in the Senate, the bill reportedly passed with the largest margin ever for an LGBT-rights bill in Maryland.
This blog is for general informational purposes only. Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA is a law firm and some of the information on the blog relates to legal topics. Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA does not offer or dispense legal advice through this blog or by e-mails directed to or from this site. By using the blog, the reader agrees that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between the reader and Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA or its attorneys. The blog is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney licensed in your state. The information on the blog may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date. While the blog is revised on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. The opinions expressed at or through the blog are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney. The JGL Law Blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service in Circular 230, we inform you that any tax advice contained on this site (including any links provided) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication.