Law Commons^™

Table Of Contents, Seventh Circuit Review

Seventh Circuit Review

No abstract provided.

Seventh Circuit Holds That Bankruptcy Trustee's "Strong-Arm" Powers Not Strong Enough For The Irs, Paul T. Geske

Seventh Circuit Review

In 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit confronted, for the first time, the issue of whether a bankruptcy trustee can claw back assets that a bankrupt debtor fraudulently transferred to the federal government. Generally, government entities are immune to suit due to sovereign immunity, but the Bankruptcy Code abrogates federal sovereign immunity as to a number of Code provisions. One such provision is Section 544(b), often referred to as the source of the bankruptcy trustee's "strong-arm" powers. The strong-arm powers allow trustees to avoid transfers that would be fraudulent and voidable under state law. However, these …

Marriage Solemnization And The First Amendment's Neutrality Principle: Who May Solemnize A Marriage?, Claudia Cortes

Seventh Circuit Review

The most fundamental principle of the Establishment Clause is government neutrality towards religion. Pursuant to this principle of neutrality, the government may accommodate religious beliefs, but it can neither prefer religion over non-religion nor favor certain religious beliefs. In most states, a marriage does not become legal upon the state's mere issuance of a marriage license. Instead, marriage solemnization is required to create a legally recognized marriage. Marriage solemnization refers to a ceremony or a ritual by which two individuals take on their new status as husband and wife as well as to the set of procedures that must be …

Plead Guilty, You Could Face Deportation: Seventh Circuit Rules Misadvice And Nonadvice To Non-Citizens Has Same Effect Under The Sixth Amendment, Dana Cronkite

Seventh Circuit Review

The Sixth Amendment right to assistance of counsel has evolved since its inception. Originally, the right only meant that criminal defendants in federal cases were entitled to assistance of counsel of their choosing. The right was eventually applied to state criminal proceedings, and later interpreted to mean that criminal defendants had a right to effective assistance of counsel. This right is imperative in protecting a defendant's fundamental right to a fair trial. In 1984, the Supreme Court laid out a two-part test to determine whether a defendant's Sixth Amendment rights were violated by ineffective assistance of counsel. This test, known …

Unreasonable Religious Accommodation?: Fighting Irish Challenge The Opt-Out Form To The Affordable Care Act's "Contraceptive Mandate", Emily A. Herbick

Seventh Circuit Review

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) has been controversial from its inception, especially in regard to the "contraceptive mandate," which requires certain employers with group health plans to provide contraceptive coverage for their female employees without cost-sharing. In order to respect both the federal statutory right to contraceptive coverage and the religious rights of employers who provide health insurance for their employees, regulations were promulgated that provided exceptions to the contraceptive mandate. For example, religious employers who incorporate as non-profits are exempt from providing contraceptive coverage to their employees under the ACA. To receive this accommodation, …

Ka Bow! Seventh Circuit Knocks Down Trademark Claim, Sarah B. Virani

Seventh Circuit Review

Integral to the success of a business is its ability to protect its trademark. When another individual or business infringes upon a business's trademark, the infringed user can bring a claim under the Lanham Act, which codifies federal trademark law, in part to protect consumers from confusion as to the source of a product or service. An essential question is whether a trademark holder may, under the Lanham Act, bring a successful claim for trademark infringement against another for a fictional product.

The Seventh Circuit addressed this matter in Fortres Grand Corporation v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, in which the …

Katz And Dogs: The Best Path Forward In Applying United States V. Davis' Good Faith Exception To The Exclusionary Rule And How The Seventh Circuit Has Gone Astray, Arlo Walsman

Seventh Circuit Review

Sometimes, law enforcement officers violate the Fourth Amendment and in the process find and seize evidence they wish to use in a subsequent criminal prosecution. In these circumstances, a question that has long troubled courts, and a question that is becoming more and more difficult to answer, is whether such evidence should be admissible at trial.

In Weeks v. United States and Mapp v. Ohio, the Supreme Court established that evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment was not admissible in federal and state prosecutions. This rule has become known as the exclusionary rule. However, in a line …

Table Of Contents, Seventh Circuit Review

Seventh Circuit Review

No abstract provided.

Preface, Kathleen Mallon

Seventh Circuit Review

No abstract provided.

Laundry And Cable Television: How The Seventh Circuit Preserved Consumer Protection Class Action Litigation From Washing Down The Tubes, Stephen D. Pauwels

Seventh Circuit Review

Class actions are an essential tool for plaintiffs seeking relief from relatively minor harms. In recent years, the Supreme Court has handed down a collection of rulings that seem to have created additional hurdles––or heightened those already in place––to obtaining class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 23. One such ruling, Comcast v. Behrend, seemed to have enhanced the predominance requirement and thus raised speculation from various commentators about the ability of plaintiffs to bring class actions where resolution of liability and damages questions are raised for the entire class.

The Seventh Circuit, in Butler v. Sears, …

Yes, We Were Wrong;No, We Will Not Make It Right: The Seventh Circuit Denies Post-Conviction Relief From An Undisputed Sentencing Error Because It Occurred In The Post- Booker, Advisory Guidelines Era, Gregory S. Dierdorf

Seventh Circuit Review

Federal courts disfavor granting collateral relief from final criminal judgments. This mentality is premised on a need for finality in the criminal process; the idea that, at some point, a criminal case must come to an end. Post-conviction relief is available, however, where an error in the trial court causes a miscarriage of justice that must be remedied to preserve the integrity of the criminal justice system.

For example, the Seventh Circuit has granted post-conviction relief where the sentencing court miscalculated the defendant's prison sentence by misapplying the career offender-sentencing enhancement under the then-binding Federal Sentencing Guidelines. However, the court …

Judge Posner Got It Right: Requiring Abortion Doctors To Have Hospital Admitting Privileges Places An Undue Burden On A Woman Seeking An Abortion, Kelly K. Koss

Seventh Circuit Review

Anti-abortion activists have sought to undermine and restrict a woman's right to choose ever since 1992, when the Supreme Court replaced Roe v. Wade's strict scrutiny analysis with the looser undue burden test in Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. Under Casey's undue burden test, a state regulation cannot have the "purpose or effect of placing a significant obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus." However, the Casey Court failed to define the types of regulations that would run afoul of the undue burden test and create a "substantial obstacle" in the …

Don't Break The Safety Valve's Heart: How The Seventh Circuit Superimposes Substantial Assistance On The Mandatory Minimum Safety Valve's Complete Truthful Disclosure Requirement, Adrienne N. Kitchen

Seventh Circuit Review

Congress passed the safety valve to mitigate the disparate and often harsh sentences mandatory minimums impose on low-level drug defendants. But judicial interpretation continues to impose disparate sentences. In 2014, in United States v. Acevedo-Fitz, the Seventh Circuit reaffirmed its position in an ongoing circuit split regarding the safety valve. The safety valve requires defendants to meet five criteria, the fifth—sometimes called the heart of the safety valve—requires defendants provide complete truthful disclosure to prosecutors prior to sentencing. Judges interpret this requirement as imposing a burden on defendants to prove they met all five criteria without requiring the government …

Conference, Conciliation, And Persuasion: The Seventh Circuit's Groundbreaking Approach To Analyzing The Eeoc's Pre-Suit Obligations, Lisa M. Deleon

Seventh Circuit Review

In EEOC v. Mach Mining, LLC, the Seventh Circuit sharply diverged with its sister circuits when it held that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)'s statutorily mandated conciliation process is immune from judicial review. In Mach Mining, the Seventh Circuit addressed the provision contained in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that requires the EEOC to engage in "informal methods of conference, conciliation, and persuasion" with an employer before it can file a discrimination lawsuit against that employer. These pre-suit negotiations, or "conciliation," provide an opportunity for the EEOC to reach an out-of-court agreement with …