Legal Briefs: This Week in Law

November 11, 2013

Civil forfeiture proceedings: guilty until proven innocent? (The Economist)

Supreme Court hears arguments on whether Congress may criminalize conduct that may be more appropriate for state courts; in this case, whether a scorned wife should have been convicted of violating an international agreement on the use of chemical weapons because she attempted to poison her husband’s lover. (CNN)

The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rules that the contraception mandate under the Affordable Care Act violates the Free Exercise Clause. (U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit)

Laws against texting while driving don’t appear to be very effective. (Mother Jones)

With the Fifth Circuit reversing a district court’s decision enjoining Texas’ new abortion laws, Planned Parenthood files an emergency petition with the Supreme Court. (Bloomberg)

What does it mean for a judge to be impartial? (NY Times)

Supreme Court considers the question of what constitutes “clothing” for purposes of compensating workers for time spent putting on protective gear. (Washington Post)

In a lawsuit brought by the Humane Society, the Tenth Circuit grants a temporary injunction barring the USDA from inspecting horse slaughtering plants, which will temporarily halt any slaughtering. (CBS News)

Illinois lawmakers pass bill legalizing same-sex marriage. (Chicago Tribune)