* On June 1, a Michigan federal judge once again held that the Muslim Brotherhood-Hamas front group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), must pay legal fees and costs after AFLC successfully “quashed” harassing and burdensome subpoenas issued by CAIR to Ms. Zaba Davis, a private citizen who received the subpoenas because she publicly expressed her opposition to the construction of an Islamic center in her neighborhood. This was the third ruling by the court upholding what it termed a “sanction” for CAIR’s reckless violation of federal law.
* On June 3, AFLC filed its notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, seeking review of the district court’s order dismissing our lawsuit challenging Obama’s unlawful executive order regarding Obamacare for a lack of “standing,” which, unfortunately, is a way for the court to avoid addressing the difficult constitutional issues. But no man is above the law, which is why we are pursuing an appeal in this important case.
* On June 9, AFLC filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to review our case challenging the HHS mandate on behalf of Priests for Life.
* On June 10, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit granted our motion to stay the mandate in our legal challenge to the HHS Mandate while the case is on review in the U.S. Supreme Court. This is important because it means that the injunction issued by the D.C. Circuit back in 2013 remains in effect throughout this review process.
* On June 15, AFLC Co-Founder & Senior Counsel Robert Muise presented oral argument before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in its appeal of a lower federal court ruling that denied AFLC’s motion for a preliminary injunction. AFLC’s motion requested that the court order the King County, Washington, transit authority to display an anti-terrorism bus advertisement that it had refused to display. You can watch the oral argument by clicking on the image below.
* On June 16, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel David Yerushalmi presented argument in a hearing held in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on whether the recent change to the New York City Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) advertising regulations moots the court’s order directing the MTA to run a “Hamas Killing Jews” advertisement on MTA buses. The hearing was part of a federal civil rights lawsuit filed by AFLC on behalf of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), Pamela Geller, and Robert Spencer after the MTA refused to run the ad.
* On June 22, AFLC filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, appealing the federal district court’s ruling on June 19 that “dissolved” the court’s earlier order requiring the MTA to run our client’s “Hamas Killing Jews” advertisement. This appeal will present an exceedingly important question: whether the government can violate the First Amendment and then on the heels of an adverse court decision simply modify its rules to avoid the consequences of its unlawful behavior. We think not.