Cohen to be hush money trial's star witness, Arizona Democrats seek to repeal abortion ban, and 5th Circuit's Ho blasts judiciary for forum shopping ?
Reuters Legal
From the courts to law firms, we bring you the latest legal news. Subscribe to our newsletters: https://bit.ly/3nhgllA
?? Good morning from The Legal File! Here is the rundown of today's top legal stories:
?? Trump's ex-fixer Michael Cohen to be key witness in hush money criminal trial?
Michael Cohen, who once said he would take a bullet for?Donald Trump, is now poised to serve as a star prosecution witness in the former U.S. president's criminal trial on charges of covering up hush money paid to porn star?Stormy Daniels.
Cohen's role at the first criminal trial ever of a U.S. president, which began on April 15 in New York state court in Manhattan, marks the culmination of his 15-year arc from being the businessman-turned-politician's lawyer and "fixer" to an outspoken antagonist.
The case stems from Cohen's $130,000 payment to Daniels before the 2016 election for her silence about a sexual encounter she had with Trump a decade earlier. Cohen, formerly a top executive at Trump's real estate company before becoming his lawyer, says Trump directed the payment.
This will not be Cohen's first time testifying in court against his former boss. Cohen took the stand in October in a civil fraud case over the former president's valuations of his real estate assets and testified that he had manipulated the values of Trump's real estate properties to match "whatever number Mr. Trump told us."??Learn more.
More on the ‘hush money’ trial:
?? Arizona Democrats seek to repeal 1864 abortion ban, but need Republican help
Democrats in the Arizona House of Representatives on Wednesday will seek to repeal an 1864 ban on abortion that is poised to become state law once again, but they will need the help of some Republicans in the closely divided legislature.
A state?Supreme Court ruling?on April 9 revived a ban on nearly all abortions under a law written during the U.S. Civil War when Arizona was not yet a state and women lacked the right to vote.
The law, which would take effect within 60 days, imposes a sentence of two to five years for anyone found guilty of inducing an abortion except for a doctor who deems it necessary to save the life of the mother.
The ruling added fuel to a raging debate across the US over abortion rights ahead of the?Nov. 5 election.
Democrats, confident that public opinion is on their side in supporting abortion rights, have sought to elevate the issue since the U.S. Supreme Court rescinded the constitutional right to abortion in 2022 and Republican-led states went about setting new restrictions.
Arizona House Democrats sought to repeal the ban a week ago, but were thwarted by the narrow Republican majority.
Democrats said they will try again in Wednesday's session, scheduled to start at 10 a.m. MST (1 p.m. ET, 1700 GMT). More on the ban that remains a polarizing issue.
领英推荐
?? Conservative US judge blasts judiciary for 'forum shaming'
Conservative U.S. Circuit Judge James Ho argued that judicial policymakers wrongly caved into political pressure to curtail "judge shopping" with a policy change that would deter right-leaning litigants from steering cases to preferred judges.
In a speech delivered on April 15 to the Midland County Bar Association, Ho argued that the U.S. Judicial Conference's new judicial assignment policy undercut the judiciary's independence by giving into critics engaged in "forum shaming." Ho has been an?early opponent?of the policy.
"Judges are supposed to follow the law, not distort the rules to avoid criticism. The last thing we should do is gerrymander the rules in response to political pressure," Ho said, according to his prepared remarks
Under the March 12 policy, any lawsuit challenging federal or state laws would be assigned a judge randomly throughout a federal district rather than stay in the specific, smaller division, or courthouse, where the case was initially filed.
If implemented, the policy would disrupt a tactic often used by conservative litigants of filing cases in small divisions in Texas' four federal districts whose one or two judges were appointed by Republican presidents. Those judges have often rule in their favor on issues like abortion, immigration and gun control.
The new policy is?non-binding, though, leaving it to individual district courts to decide whether and how to follow it. The chief judge of Texas' Northern District has said?it does not plan to?adopt it for now.
?? US appeals court decision may deter M&A disclosure-only shareholder suits
A long-awaited decision issued on April 15 by the 7th Circuit could make it easier for companies involved in M&A deals to fight back against shareholder suits demanding beefed-up disclosures in proxy filings.
The appeals court, writes Alison Frankel, questioned the business model of shareholder firms that file lawsuits challenging M&A proxy disclosures and then dismiss their suits when defendants agree to make additional disclosures and pay shareholder lawyers a mootness fee.
Will the new ruling prompt judges to start scrutinizing “deal tax” lawsuits more rigorously???
?? That's all for today, thank you for reading?The Legal File, and have a great day!
For more legal industry news, read and subscribe to The Daily Docket.