TRUMP CAMPAIGN SCORES MAJOR ELECTION INTEGRITY VICTORY IN PHILADELPHIA

Philadelphia, PA - November 5, 2020 - (The Ponder News) -- Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. released the following statement on the Trump Campaign's major election integrity victory in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:

"In a major victory for election integrity, election transparency, all Pennsylvania voters, and the rule of law, the Trump Campaign has prevailed in our suit challenging our Republican poll watchers’ complete lack of any meaningful access to the ballot processing and counting process.

"The eyes of the country are on Pennsylvania, but Pennsylvania Democrats, led by their radical left Secretary of State whose only goal is to steal this election from President Trump, has kept eyes off of the absentee ballot counting process. That ends now in Philadelphia.

"As a result of this incredible legal victory, the lower court’s order has been reversed. Now, according to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, ‘all candidates, watchers, or candidate representatives’ shall ‘be permitted to be present for the canvassing process’ and ‘be permitted to observe all aspects of the canvassing process within 6 feet, while adhering to all COVID-19 protocols, including, wearing masks and maintaining social distancing.'

"For the good of the nation, every Pennsylvania county should follow the lead of this judge and provide access for observers to ensure transparency and integrity in Pennsylvania. That is the only way to ensure a fair, transparent election in which all Pennsylvania voters can have confidence their vote will count."

- Justin Clark, Trump 2020 Deputy Campaign Manger and Senior Counsel

Click here to read the order.

Two COVID-19 Cases Filed Against People’s Republic of China (PRC)

New York, NY - May 05, 2020 - (The Ponder News) -- During this time of uncertainty, as the coronavirus continues to upend lives and businesses, the need for the rational and consistent application of the Rule of Law has never been more urgent. Legal Language Services’ (LLS) senior consultant, Tom McLean, Esq. and LLS’s president, Victor Hertz, reviewed two recently-filed lawsuits related to the pandemic, brought against the People’s Republic of China (PRC). These suits are representative of several similar cases, including those brought by the Missouri and Mississippi Attorneys General.

The Two Cases

Both suits against the PRC were brought under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) and, according to McLean, “appear to suffer from weak causation, scapegoating China for the pandemic.” Similar cases, such as the complaint brought by Liang Xuguang against the US Federal Government (among others), have also been filed in the PRC. LLS’s blog post – Panic, Pandemic, and the Rule of Law – examines the causation, decisions and validity of these two lawsuits.

Case 1, Alters v People’s Republic of China, is a class action asserting that the PRC acted in its own best interest to maintain its "Superpower status" and negligently failed to contain the COVID-19 virus in Wuhan. [1]

Case 2, Buzz Photos v People’s Republic of China, is an attempt by a business to recover damages arising from COVID-19-related lost sales and layoffs. [2]

Do These Cases Deserve Their Day in Court?

LLS believes everyone deserves their day in court. “Perhaps the attorneys who filed these cases know more than they let on in their complaints. If so, these cases have merit and should be heard even if President Xi and the PRC government disagree,” said McLean. He adds, “If these cases are weak and have been filed for publicity, rather than a true hope of recovering money, then they do a disservice to the United States and its judicial system. If the US judicial system works as it should, then the litigants in these cases will not prevail.”

Hertz points out that “similar litigation was filed after the 9/11 attacks, seeking damages from Saudi Arabia. Those cases were dismissed by the Supreme Court.” [3]

"It is essential that the legal profession uphold the Rule of Law when society is stressed and people feel at risk,” Hertz reiterates. “Ultimately, good litigation will produce good precedents and these cases against China will rise or fall on their own merits.”

[1] 1:20-cv-21108 (SD FLA 2020)
[2] 3:20-cv-00656 (ND TX 2020)
[3] Supreme Court decision No. 08-640 in the matter of Federal Insurance Co., et al. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al.

About Legal Language Services

Since 1983, Legal Language Services has helped US law firms, sole practitioners and governments communicate across linguistic and political boundaries. LLS is the premier source of legal translation in the United States. They also provide the interpreting backbone for 911 calls. Having been through fires, floods, hurricanes, recessions, stock market crashes and the aftermath of 9/11, they have the experience and the expertise to get through the COVID-19 crisis.

Additionally, LLS offers:

· Secure HIPAA-compliant 24/7 telephonic interpreting service in more than 200 languages and dialects.

· Interpreting services are available on demand via a secure HIPAA-compliant video-remote platform, available in twenty languages, including American Sign Language (ASL).

· Verbatim transcription, legal services and a broad spectrum of international litigation services, including expert consulting on international service of process, legal discovery services and evidence-taking abroad.

For more information about Legal Language Services, please visit their website by clicking HERE.

Lawsuit Filed Against Real Estate Company for Firing Employee Who Asked to Work Remotely During 'Shelter-in-Place' Orders

Dallas, TX - April 25, 2020 - (The Ponder News) -- The former general counsel for Frisco, Texas-based real estate investment and development company Tekin & Associates has filed suit against her former employer, claiming wrongful dismissal in response to her request to work from home during the current COVID-19 outbreak.

As a resident of Dallas County subjected to the county's shelter-in-place orders designed to stem the transmission of the coronavirus, Amy Reggio had sought permission to work from home to avoid violating the county orders. Among her concerns was the risk of legal repercussions for driving to the company's Collin County office, which was not included among "essential" businesses under the Dallas County order.

Ms. Reggio's requests were systematically denied by company president Mark Tekin, culminating with Mr. Tekin firing her on March 27 "within minutes" of receiving an email she had sent him outlining her concerns, and reiterating her refusal to violate Dallas County law and her ability to work from her home, according to the lawsuit.

"We are in unprecedented times and the last concern any of us should have is that our employer will flatly refuse to concede that health concerns and complying with the law are viable reasons to work remotely," said Ms. Reggio's attorney Joshua Iacuone of the Dallas-based litigation law firm of Rogge Dunn Group PC.

"Not only did Mr. Tekin repeatedly refuse to consider Amy's requests, he proved to be increasingly belligerent in expressing his anger over the fact that she shared her concerns, refused to violate the law, and asked to work from home," added attorney Rogge Dunn, who also represents Ms. Reggio.

Rogge Dunn Group has built a well-deserved reputation for aggressive litigation, outstanding results and attentive client service. Led by founding partner Rogge Dunn, the firm is well-known for successfully trying high-profile business and employment disputes. This trial experience fosters innovative strategies to obtain effective settlements and minimize litigation risks for corporate and individual clients. Based in Dallas, the firm tries cases in state and federal courts in Texas and throughout the United States.

Tahirih Files Lawsuit Challenging the Use of CBP to Conduct Credible Fear Interviews

by Tahirih Justice Center

Washington, D.C. - April 2, 2020 - (The Ponder News) -- The Tahirih Justice Center filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the use of Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agents to screen asylum seekers for their ‘credible fear’ of persecution. This policy change violates federal immigration law and was enacted by officials who did not have the authority to do so. The lawsuit is filed on behalf of women and children currently detained at the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley. Tahirih has also sought information on this clandestine policy through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to compel the government to release records on this troubling practice.

“Credible fear interviews are supposed to be the non-adversarial, first step in the extensive asylum process, in which asylum seekers who have experienced severe violence recount intimate details of their persecution. For decades, these interviews have been conducted by asylum officers, specially trained to work with individuals who have experienced trauma,” said Julie Carpenter, Tahirih Senior Litigation Counsel. “Using Border Patrol—federal law enforcement officers whose mission is to capture and detain immigrants—to conduct these immediate interviews intentionally puts the fate of survivors of gender-based violence, and other asylum seekers, in the hands of agents who lack the necessary expertise in asylum law.”

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation

Source: Laura Loomer

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.

Read more...

EPA Refuses to "Settle" in Further Lawsuits

Washington, D.C. - October 18, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced they will enact the position outlined in Congressman Jason Smith’s taxpayer protection legislation that passed the U.S. House of Representatives in September. The policy would prevent radical liberal groups from taking Missourians’ tax dollars and imposing burdensome government regulations.

“There was a massive loophole called ‘sue and settle’ that has been hurting Missourians for years, and I’m glad the EPA has joined me in stopping this harmful practice,” said Congressman Smith.

The wasteful “sue and settle” process occurs when a federal agency accepts a lawsuit from an outside advocacy organization and then, rather than defend itself, the agency settles the lawsuit out of court in a closed-door agreement.

“Sue and settle” agreements usually involve the U.S. taxpayer paying attorney fees for the radical organization. Between 2009 and 2012, these lawsuits resulted in more than 100 new regulations and tens of millions of tax dollars spent on compliance costs.

Under the Obama Administration, there were almost twice as many settlements as there were during both President Bush and President Clinton’s Administrations combined.

In his announcement, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said, “The days of regulation through litigation are over. We will no longer go behind closed doors and use consent decrees and settlement agreements to resolve lawsuits filed against the Agency by special interest groups where doing so would circumvent the regulatory process set forth by Congress. Additionally, gone are the days of routinely paying tens of thousands of dollars in attorney’s fees to these groups with which we swiftly settle.”

Like Smith’s legislation, the EPA’s directive removes the incentive for outside groups to sue the federal government by barring the federal government from paying the attorney’s fees in any environmental law case arising under the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, or the Endangered Species Act.

Congressman Smith has a track record of success in fighting against the sue and settle practice. In March, Smith introduced the Stop Taxpayer Funded Settlements Act with seven cosponsors. This legislation was attached to the Interior Appropriations Bill and approved by a bipartisan majority. The bill passed on September 14, 2017.

“It’s wrong for Washington to leave the ‘sue and settle’ loophole open and waste Missourians hard-earned money paying attorney fees for radical environmentalist groups and other radical, left wing organizations,” said Congressman Smith. “I’m proud that my legislation to fix this problem was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives and that the EPA is following suit with closing this harmful loophole.”

==Special Offer==
Buy More Save More at 1-800-PetMeds - Up to $20 off + Free Shipping (Expires December 31, 2018)
==Special Offer==

Michigan funeral home asks appeals court to uphold respectful dress code for employees

by: Alliance Defending Freedom

Cincinnati, OH - October 6, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- A federal court ruled last year in favor of the funeral home, which the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued over the discharge of an employee who refused to comply with a requirement to dress in a manner sensitive to grieving family members and friends. The EEOC appealed the decision. ADF attorneys represent R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, which has locations in Detroit, Garden City, and Livonia.

The EEOC’s appeal seeks to force the business’s owner to allow a biologically male employee to wear a female uniform while interacting with the public. The district court ruled that the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act protects the freedom of the business to maintain a dress code consistent with its sincerely held faith convictions.

“The government should respect the freedoms of those who wish to respectfully serve the grieving and vulnerable,” said Wardlow. “The federal government shouldn’t use employment law to strong-arm private business owners into violating their religious beliefs. The district court was right to affirm this, and we will vigorously encourage the 6th Circuit to uphold that ruling.”

The funeral home hired the male employee as a funeral director and embalmer at its Garden City location in 2007. Funeral directors at the company regularly interact with the public, including grieving family members and friends. After informing the funeral home of an intention to begin dressing as a female at work, the employee was dismissed for refusing to comply with the same company dress code that all other employees are required to follow while on the job.

As the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan acknowledged in its opinion and order in the case, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, the company’s sole corporate officer and majority owner, Thomas Rost, is a Christian whose faith informs the way he operates his business and how he serves those who are deeply grieved by the loss of a loved one. Not only would Rost be violating his faith if he were to pay for and otherwise permit his employees to dress as members of the opposite sex while serving the grieving, the employee dress policy is intentionally sensitive to interaction with customers at an especially delicate time of their lives.

ADF attorneys argued that the funeral home did not violate Title VII, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in employment, and is, in fact, protected by RFRA, which says that the government cannot force someone like Rost to violate his faith unless it demonstrates that doing so is the “least restrictive means” of furthering a “compelling government interest.” The district court agreed that the EEOC’s actions violate RFRA.

Lawsuit opposes Trump's ban on transgender military service

Danbury:News-Times

Two LGBT-rights organizations filed a lawsuit in federal court Wednesday challenging President Donald Trump's tweets declaring he wants a ban on transgender people serving in the military.

The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Washington on behalf of five transgender service members with nearly 60 years of combined military service.

Transgender people have been allowed to serve openly in the military since June 2016. Trump, in a series of tweets on July 26, announced that he planned to end that policy.

Read more...

Congressman Lowenthal Sued to Remove Historic Pride Flag From Outside His Capitol Hill Office

Washington, D.C. - July 25, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- Congressman Alan Lowenthal (CA-47) vowed to fight a lawsuit that seeks to force him to remove a historic Pride Flag from outside his Washington, D.C. Congressional office.

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the suit claims that the plaintiff is “offended and injured by the placement of the Gay Pride Rainbow Flag,” and requests that the court order the flag removed and declared a “religious symbol,” homosexuality be declared a “religion,” and marriage equality be overturned nationwide. He is also seeking $1 in damages.

Congressman Lowenthal was the first Member of Congress to permanently fly the Pride flag outside his Capitol Hill office. Congressman Lowenthal first flew the Pride flag outside his DC office in March, 2013 (and inside his Long Beach district office) to show his solidarity with LGBT Americans, in support of marriage equality, and in opposition to discrimination and violence.

“I fly the Pride Flag outside my office in support of every LGBTQ individual—those in my district, those in our nation, and those around the world,” Congressman Lowenthal said. “It is a symbol of both how far we have come on equality for all Americans and, as these incidents illustrate, how far we still have to go. It is a symbol of love, of peace, and diversity. I will fight this hateful attempt to silence equality and justice. We have come too far to allow the voices of bigotry and hate to win.”

In a separate incident involving a different individual earlier this year, a visitor to the Cannon House Office Building entered the Congressman’s office and angrily exclaimed his belief that the Pride Flag outside the office was inappropriate alongside the American flag.

Members of Congress have permanent fixtures outside each office to accommodate three flags, with two spaces going to the American flag and the member’s state flag. The third slot is used for a personal selection of the Congress member.

The man left the Congressman’s office, removed the Congressman’s Pride Flag from its holder, threw it to the ground, and proceeded to repeatedly stomp on it. The man was ultimately escorted into the custody of Capitol Police officers.

Following a lengthy investigation, Capitol Police were ultimately unable to identify the perpetrator.

Three other Members of Congress who fly the Pride Flag outside their D.C. offices were also named in the suit. They are Congresswoman Susan Davis (CA-53), and Congressmen Don Beyer (VA-08) and Earl Blumenauer (OR-3).

Lawsuit, Heroin, Mines, Electricity, Broadband, ICE, Small Business, Drones, Afghanistan, DACA

Congresswoman Barbara Lee, Members of Congress File Largest Congressional Lawsuit in History Against President Trump
Barbara Lee (D-CA 13th)
June 20, 2017
In the week since the lawsuit was filed, public reporting has revealed that President Trump has received additional foreign benefits – including new trademarks in China – and is brokering business deals in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf while regional tensions escalate.
Read more...

Leaders of Bipartisan Heroin Task Force React to Study Showing Increase in Emergency Room Visits, Inpatient Stays for Opioid-Related Issues
Ann Kuster (D-NH, 2nd)
June 20, 2017
“This study is alarming but not surprising,” said Congresswoman Kuster. “The opioid crisis is putting severe strain on our healthcare system and is impacting communities throughout New Hampshire and across the country. This study underscores the need to strengthen prevention, treatment, and recovery services and strategies for those who are struggling with substance misuse. This crisis requires a comprehensive approach and I’m committed to working across the aisle to improve access to treatment services.”
Read more...

Congressman LaHood Introduces Legislation to Increase Opportunity to Restore Abandoned Mines
Darin Lahood (R-IL, 18th)
June 21, 2017
“While mining is an important part of Illinois’ economy, abandoned mines continue to present safety dangers and missed opportunities for new development. That is why I have introduced this bill, which would protect third-party groups from frivolous lawsuits when they attempt to clean up or re-purpose these abandoned mines. No group should be punished for wanting to help out their local community in this way,” stated LaHood. “I look forward to seeing this bill move forward with bipartisan support.”
Read more...

LaMalfa’s Electricity Reliability and Forest Protection Act Passes House
Doug LaMalfa (R-CA, 1st)
June 21, 2017
The bipartisan legislation provides streamlined processes for the removal of hazardous trees or other vegetative overgrowth within or adjacent to electricity infrastructure – such as power lines – on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service lands, reducing the risk of forest fires and electrical grid blackouts. The bill passed the House by a margin of 300-118.
Read more...

At E&C Hearing, Latta Discusses Increasing Broadband Access In Rural America
Robert E. Latta (R OH, 5th)
June 21, 2017
During his questioning, Latta said, “Broadband support programs aim to increase broadband coverage in rural America where agricultural production generate significant value to the national economy and are an essential source of revenue and jobs in rural communities. Today, modern high precision farming operations require access to high-speed broadband to support advanced operations and technologies that significantly increase crop yields, reduce costs, and improve the environment. A program that only seeks to measure broadband coverage based on population centers, households, or road miles will overlook coverage gaps in agricultural communities.
Read more...

Congresswoman Lawrence Sends Letter to DHS on ICE Raids in Michigan
Brenda Lawrence (D-MI, 14th)
June 16, 2017
I have sent this letter in order to receive clarity on the rationale and methods used for targeting individuals with final orders especially if some of these orders appear to be decades old and do not reflect the current conditions in the countries of origin.
Read more...

HOUSE COMMITTEE PASSES LAWSON BILL TO HELP SPUR INNOVATION IN SMALL BUSINESS
Al Lawson (D-FL, 5th)
June 15, 2017
His bill would create a pilot program under the Small Business Administration’s Small Business Innovation Research Program (SBIR). This pilot program will provide additional funding for Phase II of the SBIR program which helps small business startups bring their products and services from commercialization into the marketplace.
Read more...

Lewis leads bipartisan Drone Innovation Act
Jason Lewis (R-MN, 2nd)
June 19, 2017
“America continues to lead the world in technological advances. It’s clear to me that drones have a growing role to play in interstate commerce, and that’s vital to maintaining our economic strength at home and competitiveness on the world stage. The Drone Innovation Act will promote that spirit of invention by establishing a clear framework for the operation of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). Importantly, my legislation also lays out clear protections for your right to privacy and gives local governments the primary responsibility in forming guidelines for how drones can be used in our communities. I look forward to working with the FAA to maintain an environment that works for all stakeholders, and thank my colleagues for their support.”
Read more...

4 VETERANS IN CONGRESS WRITE TO SECRETARY MATTIS EXPRESSING "GRAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE DIRECTION OF THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN
Ted Lieu (D-CA, 33rd)
June 21, 2017
“Secretary Mattis is right – we definitely aren’t winning in Afghanistan. And it’s completely unacceptable that 6 months into the new administration, President Trump and his advisors still can’t agree on a strategy,” said Rep. Ruben Gallego, a member of the House Armed Services Committee and a Marine Corps combat veteran. “Deploying a few thousand additional American troops might buy the struggling Afghan government more time, but it certainly won’t produce any lasting gains. I strongly object to sending more brave young Americans into harm’s way without a real plan, simply to kick the can down the road.”
Read more...

Lipinski Joins Bill to Protect DACA Recipients from Deportation
Daniel Lipinski (D-IL, 3rd)
June 21, 2017
Congressman Dan Lipinski (IL-3) has signed on as a co-sponsor of H.R. 496, the BRIDGE (Bar Removal of Individuals who Dream and Grow our Economy) Act, which would protect recipients of DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) from the threat of deportation. This past Friday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) continued the uncertainty for DACA recipients when it stated, “The future of the DACA program continues to be under review with the administration.”
Read more...