|
|
|
Yankton lawyer Jason Ravnsborg wins GOP attorney general nod
Court Updates |
2018/06/24 22:17
|
South Dakota Republicans on Saturday chose Yankton lawyer Jason Ravnsborg to run against Democratic former U.S. Attorney Randy Seiler in the race for state attorney general.
GOP delegates voted to nominate Ravnsborg at their state party convention, where the attorney general contest was the main show for attendees. Democrats nominated Seiler as their candidate at a party gathering last week.
Ravnsborg won out over state Sen. Lance Russell in a second round of voting after Lawrence County State's Attorney John Fitzgerald was dropped from consideration following his third-place showing in the initial ballot.
"We've been working hard," Ravnsborg said after he won. "I've been to every county in our state at least twice."
Ravnsborg has proposed expanding programs that allow lower-level prisoners to work while serving their sentences and establishing a meth-specific prison and mental health facility in the western part of the state. He said he has leadership and management experience and touted his support among county sheriffs to delegates.
Ravnsborg, 42, of Yankton, is a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve. He's looking to succeed outgoing Attorney General Marty Jackley as the state's chief lawyer and law enforcement officer.
The high-profile office has served as a frequent springboard for gubernatorial hopefuls and takes on the state's top legal cases, such as South Dakota's recent successful push to get the U.S. Supreme Court to allow states to make online shoppers pay sales tax.
Russell, a former state's attorney and current chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, had said he wanted to be attorney general to address rising crime and improve government transparency. Fitzgerald has been the Lawrence County state's attorney since 1995 and campaigned on his experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court sides with 'Buckets of Money' financier
Court Updates |
2018/06/20 08:58
|
The Supreme Court is siding with a financial adviser known for his "Buckets of Money" retirement strategy who challenged the appointment of the administrative law judge who ruled against him in a fraud case.
The justices ruled Thursday that Raymond Lucia of California is entitled to a new hearing because the judge in his case was not properly appointed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. The 6-3 decision could affect administrative law judges in other federal agencies.
But the court declined to address a larger issue raised by the Trump administration. It wanted the justices to rule that the president has broad authority to fire certain officials.
The SEC already has changed the way it appoints its judges by requiring a vote by commissioners, instead of relying on staff members. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Drug court graduates get second chance at life
Court Updates |
2018/06/17 08:58
|
Kevin Hunter's day job doesn't typically lend itself to feel-good moments, but he got to share in 34 of them Monday afternoon.
Hunter, a Fort Wayne police captain, was among the first to congratulate nearly three dozen graduates of the 45th Allen Superior Court Drug Court. He runs the police department's Vice and Narcotics Division, which often sees decidedly fewer happy outcomes for people it investigates.
"I usually talk about very depressing things," Hunter said. "Today, I get to see hope and action."
The court was established as one of the state's first in 1996 by the late Judge Ken Scheibenberger, and it allows drug dealers and users a chance at life without those substances. Hundreds have taken part in drug court, and many have had charges against them dismissed because they completed counseling and treatment programs.
Hunter, who joined the department in 1989, said the court is valuable, particularly as the opioid crisis rages in northeast Indiana. A vice and narcotics sergeant attends drug court meetings, he said.
The program offers positive options to people who once might have been arrested by officers, sent to court and sentenced to lengthy prison terms, said Hunter, a member of the county's Opioid Task Force.
"Many times it's (that) they made a bad choice," he said, referring to people who have sold or used drugs. "But they're still human beings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court allows Ohio, other state voter purges
Court Updates |
2018/06/10 00:27
|
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can clean up their voting rolls by targeting people who haven't cast ballots in a while.
The justices rejected, by a 5-4 vote Monday, arguments in a case from Ohio that the practice violates a federal law intended to increase the ranks of registered voters. A handful of other states also use voters' inactivity to trigger a process that could lead to their removal from the voting rolls.
Justice Samuel Alito said for the court that Ohio is complying with the 1993 National Voter Registration Act. He was joined by his four conservative colleagues. The four liberal justices dissented.
Partisan fights over ballot access are being fought across the country. Democrats have accused Republicans of trying to suppress votes from minorities and poorer people who tend to vote for Democrats. Republicans have argued that they are trying to promote ballot integrity and prevent voter fraud.
Under Ohio rules, registered voters who fail to vote in a two-year period are targeted for eventual removal from registration rolls, even if they haven't moved and remain eligible. The state said it only uses the disputed process after first comparing its voter lists with a U.S. postal service list of people who have reported a change of address. But not everyone who moves notifies the post office, the state said.
So the state asks people who haven't voted in two years to confirm their eligibility. If they do, or if they show up to vote over the next four years, voters remain registered. If they do nothing, their names eventually fall off the list of registered voters.
"Combined with the two years of nonvoting before notice is sent, that makes a total of six years of nonvoting before removal," Alito wrote.
Justice Stephen Breyer, writing in dissent, said the 1993 law prohibits removing someone from the voting rolls "by reason of the person's failure to vote. In my view, Ohio's program does just that."
In a separate dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said Congress enacted the voter registration law "against the backdrop of substantial efforts by states to disenfranchise low-income and minority voters." The court's decision essentially endorses "the very purging that Congress expressly sought to protect against," Sotomayor wrote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Firm News RSS Feed
