Latest news with #11thCircuit
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
State NAACP Calls for Appeal in Fatal Atlanta Police Shooting After Judge Drops Charges
Jimmy Hill is determined to continue his fight for justice after a federal judge decided Tuesday to drop the charges against retired Atlanta police officer Sung Kim, who shot and killed his son Jimmy Atchison in 2019. 'Change ain't going to come if we sit back and wait on others,' Hill told Capital B Atlanta the morning after the judge issued his ruling. 'You know, we gotta be able to have the courage to step out on faith and be the change we've been looking for.' Atchison, a 21-year-old father of two, was accused of stealing a woman's purse and cellphone at gunpoint; however, after he was killed, a witness said he didn't have a gun. He had already evaded Kim and federal task force members on foot twice that day when they followed him into an Adamsville apartment, where he was hiding in a closet under a pile of clothes. According to the subsequent investigation, officers yelled conflicting commands at Atchison, like 'Don't move' and 'Show me your hands.' Other officers who were in the room told investigators that Atchison raised one or both hands quickly in the seconds before Kim fired his weapon. Last month, Kim — who was charged with murder, aggravated assault, involuntary manslaughter, and violation of oath — testified during an evidentiary hearing that he thought Atchison had a firearm and was going to shoot him. In his order dismissing the charges, U.S. District Judge Michael L. Brown wrote that the shooting was 'textbook self-defense.' In the months following his son's death, Hill's family and Atlanta's activist community led dozens of protests that led to the Atlanta Police Department pulling out of federal task forces entirely in 2019 because, at the time, they banned officers from wearing body cameras. The following year, the Department of Justice changed its policy to allow local and state law enforcement to wear body cameras while serving on a federal task force. Victories like APD's withdrawal from federal task forces have bolstered Hill's willingness to continue to fight for justice for his son. Read More: Judge to Decide Whether to Move Forward With Trial in Fatal Police Shooting of Jimmy Atchison 'People respond to pressure,' Hill said. 'I refuse to sit back, I refuse to be tired.' Next on his agenda is to have the Fulton County District Attorney's office appeal the judge's decision up to the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. Assisting Hill in this quest is Gerald Griggs, a local attorney and president of the Georgia NAACP. Griggs told Capital B Atlanta that he wrote a letter to the district attorney's office Wednesday morning to stress the importance of appealing this case because Atchison was unarmed at the time of the shooting. 'We're not gonna remain silent, we're just going to keep going.' Jimmy Hill, father of Jimmy Atchison 'We believe that [this] sets a dangerous precedent in the 11th Circuit, which covers most of the Southern states, that an officer can shoot an unarmed individual who's been given several conflicting commands and in the face,' Griggs said. A spokesperson for District Attorney Fani Willis' office told Capital B Atlanta in a statement Wednesday afternoon that they are reviewing the decision and considering next steps. The office has 30 days to notify the court of appeals; after which, there is then time allotted for it to file documents with the court explaining why it is appealing and what specifically it disagrees with in the judge's order. According to Griggs, the 11th Circuit can take anywhere from six months to several years to decide whether to accept an appeal. If it agrees to take the case, it will order a briefing and the case will be assigned to either a single judge or a three-judge panel. Griggs said he isn't certain what the outcome will be because he's seen the 11th Circuit deny appeals when the victim was armed, but hasn't seen many where they've upheld the lower court's decision when the victim was unarmed. 'It's hard to say because it is one of the more conservative circuits in the United States, but I think based on these facts there needs to be an appeal, otherwise this sets a very dangerous precedent for the South and for the nation,' Griggs continued. Regardless, Hill plans to continue to fight until he gets justice for his son. On Mother's Day weekend, Hill protested in honor of his son's late mother, Cynthia Atchison, outside the megachurch of a local pastor who told Black parents to stop blaming white cops for killing their children. Hill said he believes Cynthia's death in 2022 was due to a broken heart. Read More: Viral Sermon Blaming Black Parents for Police Killings Sparks Mother's Day Protest 'I'll get out there and fight in the rain, in the heat, whatever,' Hill said. 'I get out there and fight on days I didn't want to fight. But I knew it had to be done because that's my son and I love him. So we're not gonna remain silent, we're just going to keep going.' The post State NAACP Calls for Appeal in Fatal Atlanta Police Shooting After Judge Drops Charges appeared first on Capital B News - Atlanta.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Challenge to Florida stripper age law dropped
After a federal appeals court last month upheld similar restrictions in Jacksonville, plaintiffs have dropped a challenge to a Florida law that prevents strippers under age 21 from performing in adult-entertainment establishments. Attorneys for two clubs, a dancer and an adult retail store filed a notice Tuesday in federal court in Tallahassee dismissing the lawsuit, which challenged the law on First Amendment grounds. U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor issued an order Wednesday closing the case. The notice of dismissal did not explain the reasons, but attorneys for the plaintiffs filed a court document May 7 that pointed to a decision last month by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That decision upheld the constitutionality of a Jacksonville ordinance that bars dancers under age 21 in strip clubs. The May 7 document said the Jacksonville ordinance 'was very similar to the (state) statute challenged in this proceeding. In particular both laws prohibit the employment of persons under the age of 21 in exotic dance establishments.' It also said the plaintiffs in the Jacksonville case did not plan to seek a rehearing or to go to the U.S. Supreme Court. 'Accordingly, the decision issued by the Eleventh Circuit on April 23, 2025 is likely to be a final decision and precedential within this circuit,' the May 7 document said. Lawmakers and Gov. Ron DeSantis last year overwhelmingly approved the age restriction, with supporters saying it was aimed at combatting human trafficking. The lawsuit was filed in July by operators of Cafe Risque, an establishment in Alachua County; operators of Sinsations, an establishment in Jacksonville; Serenity Michelle Bushey, a dancer who performed at Cafe Risque but was barred by the law from working there because she was under 21; and Exotic Fantasies, Inc., which operates a retail store in Jacksonville. The lawsuit said the Legislature did not 'consider any alternative forms of regulation which would burden First Amendment rights less severely; that is, the Legislature made no effort to solicit information in support of a more narrowly tailored law.' Also, it said the state had not shown a connection between human trafficking and adult-entertainment establishments. Winsor in December put the case on hold while the Atlanta-based appeals court considered the Jacksonville ordinance. In the May 7 filing, attorneys for the plaintiffs wrote that operators of Cafe Risque and Sinsations and Bushey 'are similarly situated to the litigants in (the Jacksonville case); to-wit: they are either performers or establishments utilizing performers to provide exotic dance entertainment.' But the document appeared to leave open the possibility that Exotic Fantasies, the retail store, could continue to challenge the law. 'Exotic Fantasies has alleged that the Legislature considered adverse secondary effects in connection with exotic dance clubs but did not consider any evidence linking adult retail stores to human trafficking or other adverse secondary effects,' the May 7 document said. 'Exotic Fantasies has also alleged that, as a matter of empirical fact, there is no basis to conclude that adult retail stores with no on-premises entertainment are linked in any way with human trafficking.' But the notice of dismissal Tuesday included all of the plaintiffs. It was filed 'without prejudice,' a legal term that leaves open the possibility that a challenge could be re-filed. Click here to download our free news, weather and smart TV apps. And click here to stream Channel 9 Eyewitness News live.
CBS News
29-05-2025
- General
- CBS News
Judge considers whether Florida Attorney General Uthmeier should be held in contempt over state immigration law
A federal judge was considering Thursday whether Florida's attorney general disobeyed her order prohibiting the enforcement of a new state law making it a misdemeanor for people in the U.S. illegally to enter Florida, and whether he should be held in contempt and sanctioned. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams specified in her ruling last month that her temporary restraining order against enforcing the Florida law applied to all of the state's local law enforcement agencies. The Miami judge later noted that there was a substantial likelihood that the Florida law would be found unconstitutional. But Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier sent out an April 23 letter to Florida's law enforcement agencies saying that he couldn't prevent law enforcement officers from enforcing the law "where there remains no judicial order that properly restrains you from doing so." "As set forth in the brief my office filed today, it is my view that no lawful, legitimate order currently impedes your agencies from continuing to enforce Florida's new illegal entry and reentry laws," Florida's attorney general said in the letter. Florida's immigration law has led to dozens of arrests Dozens of people, including a U.S. citizen, have been arrested under the law. Uthmeier has appealed the judge's order to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. In court papers, Uthmeier said that he was merely notifying local law enforcement agencies in the April 23 letter that he had filed a court brief that held a legal view disagreeing with the judge's order. He had obeyed the judge's order by notifying local law enforcement agencies in an April 18 letter that they couldn't enforce the law while the court case proceeded, according to Uthmeier's court filings. "There is no basis for contempt or sanctions," Uthmeier said. "Interpreting an order to prohibit a state attorney general from disagreeing with a federal order — while following it — would also be an extraordinary, first-of-its-kind assertion of federal judicial power, implicating grave constitutional concerns." But attorneys for an immigrants rights groups that challenged the Florida law said it was unacceptable that the Florida attorney general's April 23 letter "encouraged arrests that he fully understood were specifically prohibited." Florida's attorney general has only added to the confusion, opponents say Even if Uthmeier's arguments are taken at face value, that he was merely stating his legal position, he has done nothing to clear up the confusion despite given ample opportunities, said lawyers for the Florida Immigrant Coalition. They said the options the judge could consider include financial sanctions and referring Uthmeier's conduct to the Florida Bar for disciplinary proceedings or to federal authorities for prosecution. "Considered objectively and in the context of the earlier letter, the Attorney General's second letter plainly undermined the notice he was directed to provide, and invited arrests which he knew would be violations of this court's order," the immigrants rights' lawyers said in court papers. "That is quintessential contempt of court."
The Independent
29-05-2025
- General
- The Independent
Judge considers whether Florida's attorney general should be held in contempt over immigration law
A federal judge was considering Thursday whether Florida 's attorney general disobeyed her order prohibiting the enforcement of a new state law making it a misdemeanor for people in the U.S. illegally to enter Florida, and whether he should be held in contempt and sanctioned. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams specified in her ruling last month that her temporary restraining order against enforcing the Florida law applied to all of the state's local law enforcement agencies. The Miami judge later noted that there was a substantial likelihood that the Florida law would be found unconstitutional. But Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier sent out an April 23 letter to Florida's law enforcement agencies saying that he couldn't prevent law enforcement officers from enforcing the law 'where there remains no judicial order that properly restrains you from doing so.' 'As set forth in the brief my office filed today, it is my view that no lawful, legitimate order currently impedes your agencies from continuing to enforce Florida's new illegal entry and reentry laws,' Florida's attorney general said in the letter. Dozens of people, including a U.S. citizen, have been arrested under the law. Uthmeier has appealed the judge's order to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. In court papers, Uthmeier said that he was merely notifying local law enforcement agencies in the April 23 letter that he had filed a court brief that held a legal view disagreeing with the judge's order. He had obeyed the judge's order by notifying local law enforcement agencies in an April 18 letter that they couldn't enforce the law while the court case proceeded, according to Uthmeier's court filings. 'There is no basis for contempt or sanctions,' Uthmeier said. 'Interpreting an order to prohibit a state attorney general from disagreeing with a federal order — while following it — would also be an extraordinary, first-of-its-kind assertion of federal judicial power, implicating grave constitutional concerns.' But attorneys for an immigrants rights groups that challenged the Florida law said it was unacceptable that the Florida attorney general's April 23 letter 'encouraged arrests that he fully understood were specifically prohibited.' Even if Uthmeier's arguments are taken at face value, that he was merely stating his legal position, he has done nothing to clear up the confusion despite given ample opportunities, said lawyers for the Florida Immigrant Coalition. They said the options the judge could consider include financial sanctions and referring Uthmeier's conduct to the Florida Bar for disciplinary proceedings or to federal authorities for prosecution. 'Considered objectively and in the context of the earlier letter, the Attorney General's second letter plainly undermined the notice he was directed to provide, and invited arrests which he knew would be violations of this court's order," the immigrants rights' lawyers said in court papers. "That is quintessential contempt of court.' ___
Associated Press
29-05-2025
- General
- Associated Press
Judge considers whether Florida's attorney general should be held in contempt over immigration law
MIAMI (AP) — A federal judge was considering Thursday whether Florida's attorney general disobeyed her order prohibiting the enforcement of a new state law making it a misdemeanor for people in the U.S. illegally to enter Florida, and whether he should be held in contempt and sanctioned. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams specified in her ruling last month that her temporary restraining order against enforcing the Florida law applied to all of the state's local law enforcement agencies. The Miami judge later noted that there was a substantial likelihood that the Florida law would be found unconstitutional. But Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier sent out an April 23 letter to Florida's law enforcement agencies saying that he couldn't prevent law enforcement officers from enforcing the law 'where there remains no judicial order that properly restrains you from doing so.' 'As set forth in the brief my office filed today, it is my view that no lawful, legitimate order currently impedes your agencies from continuing to enforce Florida's new illegal entry and reentry laws,' Florida's attorney general said in the letter. Dozens of people, including a U.S. citizen, have been arrested under the law. Uthmeier has appealed the judge's order to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. In court papers, Uthmeier said that he was merely notifying local law enforcement agencies in the April 23 letter that he had filed a court brief that held a legal view disagreeing with the judge's order. He had obeyed the judge's order by notifying local law enforcement agencies in an April 18 letter that they couldn't enforce the law while the court case proceeded, according to Uthmeier's court filings. 'There is no basis for contempt or sanctions,' Uthmeier said. 'Interpreting an order to prohibit a state attorney general from disagreeing with a federal order — while following it — would also be an extraordinary, first-of-its-kind assertion of federal judicial power, implicating grave constitutional concerns.' But attorneys for an immigrants rights groups that challenged the Florida law said it was unacceptable that the Florida attorney general's April 23 letter 'encouraged arrests that he fully understood were specifically prohibited.' Even if Uthmeier's arguments are taken at face value, that he was merely stating his legal position, he has done nothing to clear up the confusion despite given ample opportunities, said lawyers for the Florida Immigrant Coalition. They said the options the judge could consider include financial sanctions and referring Uthmeier's conduct to the Florida Bar for disciplinary proceedings or to federal authorities for prosecution. 'Considered objectively and in the context of the earlier letter, the Attorney General's second letter plainly undermined the notice he was directed to provide, and invited arrests which he knew would be violations of this court's order,' the immigrants rights' lawyers said in court papers. 'That is quintessential contempt of court.' ___ Follow Mike Schneider on the social platform Bluesky: @
