Tag Archives: Lawsuit

More groups challenge Trump’s latest travel ban in court

FILE PHOTO - Protesters hold signs against U.S. President Donald Trump's limited travel ban, approved by the U.S. Supreme Court, in New York City, U.S. on June 29, 2017. REUTERS/Joe Penney/File Photo

By Mica Rosenberg

NEW York (Reuters) – Muslim immigrants and an advocacy group filed a fresh lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s latest version of a travel ban that placed indefinite restrictions on the entry of citizens from eight countries to the United States.

The suit filed late Monday in federal court in Maryland challenges a Sep. 24 Presidential proclamation limiting travel from Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Chad and North Korea. Certain government officials from Venezuela were also barred.

Six individual plaintiffs who are U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents with Iranian relatives who could be blocked from coming to the United States, along with the group Iranian Alliances Across Borders, claim the ban violates an immigration law that prevents discrimination based on nationality.

The complaint says that the majority of the people affected by the ban are Muslim and point to Trump’s campaign promises for “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” The suit says North Korea and Venezuela were added so Trump could “cloak this latest iteration of his Muslim ban in religiously neutral garb by invoking a national security review.”

The latest ban goes fully into effect on Oct. 18 and could affect tens of thousands of potential immigrants and visitors. Trump has argued that the restrictions are necessary to tighten security and prevent terrorist attacks.

Department of Justice spokesman Ian Prior said the agency “will continue to vigorously defend the President’s inherent authority to keep this country safe.”

Trump’s proclamation followed on two earlier temporary travel bans against some of the same countries, after the government did a global review of information sharing and security screening protocols.

The first ban issued soon after Trump took office in January targeted seven countries but was blocked by courts following a hasty implementation and chaotic scenes at airports.

The second ban signed in March targeted six countries and was also blocked by lower courts. It was then partially revived by the Supreme Court in June. The third ban, with no clear end date, came out when the temporary measures expired.

On Friday the American Civil Liberties Union said it was seeking to amend an existing lawsuit in Maryland federal court filed against the previous March 6 ban to include the latest proclamation.

Legal experts say the new restrictions are likely on more solid footing, in part because they followed a detailed review by federal agencies.

(Reporting by Mica Rosenberg; editing by Susan Thomas)

Washington state sues OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma

Kentucky accuses Endo of contributing to opioid epidemic

By Nate Raymond

(Reuters) – Washington state on Thursday sued OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma LP, becoming the latest state or local government to file a lawsuit seeking to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable for a national opioid addiction epidemic.

The city of Seattle also filed a separate lawsuit against Purdue as well as units of Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd, Johnson & Johnson, Endo International Plc and Allergan plc.

The lawsuit by Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson accused Purdue of deceptive marketing of OxyContin and convincing doctors and the public that its drugs had a low-risk of addiction and were effective for treating chronic pain.

He said he would be seeking to force Purdue to pay a “significant” sum for engaging in marketing practices that downplayed the addictiveness of its drugs, allowing it to earn billions of dollars while fuelling the opioid crisis.

“I don’t know how executives at Purdue sleep at night,” Ferguson told reporters.

Stamford, Connecticut-based Purdue said in a statement it was “deeply troubled” by the opioid crisis and that its U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved products account for just 2 percent of all opioid prescriptions.

“We vigorously deny these allegations and look forward to the opportunity to present our defense,” Purdue said.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, opioids were involved in over 33,000 deaths in 2015, the latest year for which data is available. The death rate has continued rising, according to estimates.

The lawsuits followed a wave of cases against opioid manufacturers and distributors by Louisiana, West Virginia, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Ohio, Missouri, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as well as several cities and counties.

Purdue and three executives pleaded guilty in 2007 to federal charges related to the misbranding of OxyContin, which is used to relieve pain, and agreed to pay a total of $634.5 million to resolve a U.S. Justice Department probe.

That year, the privately held company also reached a $19.5 million settlement with 26 states and the District of Columbia. It had agreed in 2015 to pay $24 million to resolve a lawsuit by Kentucky.

In filing his lawsuit in King County Superior Court in Seattle on Thursday, Ferguson said he was breaking off from an ongoing multi-state probe by various attorneys general into companies that manufacture and distribute opioids.

While Ferguson said looked forward to seeing its results, “we felt we had a case ready to go.”

(Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Susan Thomas and Tom Brown)

Black Lives Matter movement cannot be sued, U.S. judge rules

Black Lives Matter movement cannot be sued, U.S. judge rules

(Reuters) – A Louisiana police officer cannot sue Black Lives Matter because it is a social movement, a U.S. judge ruled on Thursday, finding the campaign could not be held responsible for injuries he got at a protest.

The unidentified officer sued Black Lives Matter and an activist involved in a July 2016 protest in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, where the officer was struck by a rock.

The Black Lives Matter movement began with the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter on social media in 2012 after black high school student Trayvon Martin was shot dead in Sanford, Florida, by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman. Zimmerman was acquitted of second degree murder and manslaughter.

It grew into a nationwide movement in response to the use of excessive force by police, particularly against black men.

“‘Black Lives Matter,’ as a social movement, cannot be sued, however, in a similar way that a person cannot plausibly sue other social movements such as the Civil Rights movement, the LGBT rights movement or the Tea Party movement,” Chief Judge Brian Jackson of a U.S District Court in Baton Rouge wrote in a 24-page ruling.

While the movement itself lacked the capacity to be sued, an associated entity could be held liable, Jackson said. But the judge found the officer had not made a sufficient case against such a group or an individual involved and dismissed the lawsuit.

Billy Gibbens, an attorney for DeRay Mckesson, the activist named in the lawsuit, said his client “does not condone violence of any kind, and we are very sorry that the officer was injured.”

“The court was absolutely correct to find that DeRay is not responsible for the criminal conduct of an unidentified person,” Gibbens said in an email.

Attorneys for the officer, Black Lives Matter and the activist named in the lawsuit did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

It was not clear how the ruling might affect a related lawsuit filed by an officer who was wounded during protests last year in Baton Rouge.

(Reporting by Letitia Stein)

California to file lawsuit over Trump border wall

A view of a section of the U.S.-Mexico border fence at El Paso, U.S. opposite the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico February 2, 2017. REUTERS/Jose Luis Gonzalez

By Dan Levine

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – California’s attorney general plans to file a lawsuit on Wednesday challenging President Donald Trump’s plan to construct a wall along the border with Mexico, the state AG’s office said, adding to the obstacles facing a key Trump campaign promise.

Trump has insisted Mexico would pay for building the wall, which experts said could cost about $22 billion and take more than three years to complete.

With Mexico refusing to pay, Trump has said since taking office in January that the wall will initially need U.S. funding but that he will find a way to make Mexico ultimately pay for it.

Democrats in the U.S. Congress, however, firmly oppose the border wall, and at least some Democratic senators would need to vote for its inclusion in a spending package.

Democratic attorneys general including California’s Xavier Becerra have sued the Trump administration on a range of issues.

The border wall lawsuit set to be filed on Wednesday will allege that Trump’s wall violates federal environmental standards, as well as constitutional provisions regarding the separation of powers and states’ rights, a Becerra spokesperson said.

Last month the Trump administration said it had selected four construction companies to build concrete prototypes for a wall, which will be will be 30 feet (9 meters) tall and about 30 feet wide and will be tested in San Diego.

(Reporting by Dan Levine; Editing by Sandra Maler)

California, three other states sue over Trump action on ‘Dreamer’ immigrants

FILE PHOTO: A sign is seen during a rally against the rescindment of DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program outside the San Francisco Federal Building in San Francisco, California, U.S., September 5, 2017. REUTERS/Stephen Lam

By Dan Levine

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – California and three other states sued President Donald Trump’s administration on Monday over his decision to end protections for people brought to the United States illegally as children, the latest bid by Democratic state attorneys general to salvage the policy.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said Trump’s move to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that protected these immigrants from deportation and gave them work permits would be “an economic travesty” for the most populous U.S. state, which depends on immigrant labor.

Minnesota, Maryland and Maine joined California in filing the lawsuit in federal court in San Francisco.

Trump last week said he would end the program, which was created in 2012 by his Democratic predecessor Barack Obama, effective in March, giving Congress six months to determine the fate of the nearly 800,000 young adults covered by DACA, dubbed “Dreamers.”

A Justice Department spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment. The department last week said Obama overstepped his constitutional authority when he bypassed Congress and created the program unilaterally.

Last week, 16 other state attorneys general filed a separate lawsuit in a Brooklyn federal court saying Trump’s decision violated constitutional protections for Dreamers, as well as other claims. The California lawsuit asserts similar legal grounds.

If people protected under DACA lose their work authorization, the California lawsuit also said, then they would face the loss of employer-provided health insurance, which would potentially increase the state’s expenditures on the uninsured.

“In California you don’t become the world’s sixth-largest economy, just because,” Becerra said.

Trump’s move drew criticism from business and religious leaders, mayors, governors, Democratic lawmakers, unions and civil liberties advocates. Legal experts have said court challenges to Trump’s decision could face an uphill battle because a president typically has wide authority in implementing immigration policy.

(Reporting by Dan Levine; Editing by Will Dunham)

California university system sues Trump over roll back of ‘dreamers’ program

U.S. President Donald Trump stops to answer reporters' questions as he and first lady Melania Trump depart for a weekend retreat with his cabinet at Camp David, from the White House in Washington, U.S., September 8, 2017. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

By Mica Rosenberg

(Reuters) – A former top security official who helped put in place a program protecting people brought to the United States illegally as children, is suing the Trump White House as head of the University of California system over plans to roll back the policy.

Janet Napolitano, the former U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security under President Barack Obama, said in a lawsuit filed on Friday that ended the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program, or DACA, violates the due process of about 800,000 beneficiaries, known as “dreamers,” who were granted permits that protected them from deportation.

“The University has constitutionally-protected interests in the multiple educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body,” the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Northern California said. “If these students leave the University before completing their education, UC will lose the benefits it derives from their contributions, as well as the value of the time and money it invested in these students.”

The lawsuit also argues Trump did not follow the proper procedures needed to cancel a program of this magnitude.

California has more DACA recipients than any other state, many are in their 20s and are current students.

“They’ve grown up here, they’ve gotten their educations here, many of them don’t even speak the language of the country to which they would be deported if this decision were allowed to stand,” Napolitano said on a call with reporters.

The legal challenge comes on top of a separate lawsuit filed earlier in the week by 16 Democratic Attorneys General saying the president’s decision to end the program was based in part on racial animus towards Mexicans, who are the largest beneficiaries.

Department of Justice spokesman Devin O’Malley gave the same comment about Napolitano’s lawsuit as he did in response to the lawsuit by the states. Attorney General Jeff Sessions in announcing his decision to end the program said it was “inconsistent with the Constitution’s separation of powers.”

Obama enacted DACA through an executive action implemented by the Department of Homeland Security after Congress failed to pass legislation.

“While the plaintiffs in today’s lawsuit may believe that an arbitrary circumvention of Congress is lawful, the Department of Justice looks forward to defending this Administration’s position,” O’Malley said in a statement.

Trump, who delayed the end of the program until March 5, shifted responsibility to a Congress controlled by his fellow Republicans, saying it was now up to lawmakers to pass immigration legislation that could address the fate of those protected by DACA. Trump’s move was criticized by business and religious leaders, mayors, governors, Democratic lawmakers, unions and civil liberties advocates.

Legal experts have said that court challenges to Trump’s actions could face an uphill battle, since the president typically has wide authority when it comes to implementing immigration policy.

(Reporting by Mica Rosenberg in New York; Additonal reporting by Yehaneh Torbati; editing by Grant McCool)

States file lawsuit challenging Trump decision on Dreamers

New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman announces the filing of a multistate lawsuit to protect Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients at a news conference at John Jay College in New York City, U.S., September 6, 2017. REUTERS/Joe Penney

By Mica Rosenberg

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Fifteen states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit on Wednesday challenging President Donald Trump’s decision to end protections and benefits for young people who were brought into the United States illegally as children.

The multistate lawsuit filed by a group of Democratic attorneys general on Wednesday to protect beneficiaries of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program argues their state economies will be hurt if residents lose their status.

The lawsuit seeks to block Trump’s decision and maintain DACA.

The lawsuit claims Trump’s decision was “motivated, at least in part, by a discriminatory motive” against Mexicans, who are the largest beneficiary of the program. It points to his statements from the 2016 presidential campaign.

The attorneys general also argue the government has not guaranteed DACA recipients that their application information will not be used “for purposes of immigration enforcement, including identifying, apprehending, detaining, or deporting non-citizens.”

New York’s Attorney General Eric Schneiderman took the lead filing the case in the Eastern District of New York. He said that 42,000 New Yorkers participate in DACA, and the end of the program will be “devastating” for them and would cause “huge economic harm” to the state.

In commenting on the suit, the U.S. Department of Justice noted that DACA was implemented under an executive order by former President Barack Obama, not through congressional action.

“While the plaintiffs in today’s lawsuits may believe that an arbitrary circumvention of Congress is lawful, the Department of Justice looks forward to defending this Administration’s position,” spokesman Devin M. O’Malley said.

Trump’s decision on Tuesday to end the five-year-old program instituted by former President Barack Obama plunged almost 800,000 young people, known as “Dreamers,” into uncertainty. The move drew criticism from business and religious leaders, mayors, governors, Democratic lawmakers, unions and civil liberties advocates.

Trump, who delayed the end of the program until March 5, shifted responsibility to a Congress controlled by his fellow Republicans, saying it was now up to lawmakers to pass immigration legislation that could address the fate of those protected by DACA.

But the governor of Washington, whose state joined the lawsuit, criticized Trump for distancing himself from a final decision on the program.

Trump said Tuesday he still has “great heart” for the dreamers.

“The president has tried to shirk responsibility for this, but let’s be clear, it is his hand on the knife in these people’s backs,” said Washington Governor Jay Inslee at a press conference announcing the suit. “He can’t just put it on Congress. It is his responsibility to fix this.”

Other claims in the lawsuit are based on the Administrative Procedure Act, arguing the White House did not follow the correct process in changing the policy.

Legal experts have said that court challenges to Trump’s actions could face an uphill battle, since the president typically has wide authority when it comes to implementing immigration policy.

(Reporting by Mica Rosenberg in New York; Additional reporting by Lawrence Hurley and Doina Chiacu in Washington and Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

Japan’s Tepco gets slapped with new U.S. lawsuit over Fukushima

FILE PHOTO: Logo of the Tokyo Electric Power Co Holdings (TEPCO) is seen on helmets at TEPCO's South Yokohama Thermal Power Station in Yokohama, Japan July 18, 2017. REUTERS/Issei Kato/File Photo

TOKYO (Reuters) – Tokyo Electric Power Co Holdings said on Thursday it has been hit with another lawsuit filed in a U.S. court seeking $5 billion for compensation over the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, the second filed against the utility in a U.S. court.

The suit filed by 157 individuals is seeking that amount to set up a compensation fund for the costs of medical tests and treatment they say they need after efforts to support the recovery from the world’s worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl in 1986.

The utility, known as Tepco, is being sued regarding improper design, construction and maintenance, claiming compensation for physical, mental and economic damages, the company said in a statement.

A multi-plaintiff lawsuit was filed on Aug. 18, 2017, against Tokyo Electric Power Co and other parties in the Southern District Court in California, the legal information group Justia said on its website.

Tepco has been hit with more lawsuits than in any previous Japanese contamination suit over the meltdowns of three reactors at its Fukushima Daiichi plant north of Tokyo after a massive earthquake and tsunami in March 2011.

Radiation forced 160,000 people from their homes, many never to return, and destroyed businesses, fisheries and agriculture.

In June, a federal appeals court cleared the way for a group of U.S. military personnel to file a suit against Tepco over radiation exposure that they say occurred during recovery efforts on board the USS Ronald Reagan.

Tepco did not make clear whether the two suits involved the same plaintiffs but Justia has two cases listed.

Shareholders of Tepco are suing the utility’s executives for a record 5.5 trillion yen ($67.4 billion) in compensation, in a long standing case.

The company’s former chairman and other executives of the company appeared in court in June to answer charges of professional negligence, in the first criminal case after the meltdowns at the plant. They all pleaded not guilty.

The criminal and civil legal cases do not threaten financial ruin for Tepco, which is backstopped by Japanese taxpayers. The company faces nearly $150 million of costs to decommission the Fukushima plant and clean up the surrounding area, according to the latest government estimate.

Tepco shares fell nearly 1 percent on Thursday, in line with many of Japan’s other utilities, before the company announced the lawsuit.

(Reporting by Aaron Sheldrick)

Mylan, U.S. finalize $465 million EpiPen settlement

EpiPen auto-injection epinephrine pens manufactured by Mylan NV pharmaceutical company for use by severe allergy sufferers are seen in Washington, U.S. August 24, 2016. REUTERS/Jim Bourg/File Photo

By Nate Raymond

BOSTON (Reuters) – Mylan NV <MYL.O> has finalized a $465 million settlement resolving U.S. Justice Department claims it overcharged the government for its EpiPen emergency allergy treatment, which became the center of a firestorm over price increases.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Massachusetts on Thursday announced the accord, which was soon after criticized by some congressional members as being too easy on the drugmaker. It came 10 months after Mylan said it had reached a deal.

The settlement resolved claims that Mylan avoided higher rebates to state Medicaid programs by misclassifying EpiPen as a generic product, even though it was marketed and priced as a brand-name product.

“Taxpayers rightly expect companies like Mylan that receive payments from taxpayer-funded programs to scrupulously follow the rules,” Acting U.S. Attorney William Weinreb said in a statement.

Under the deal, Mylan did not admit wrongdoing. It will reclassify EpiPen and pay the rebate applicable to its new classification as of April 1, 2017.

“Bringing closure to this matter is the right course of action for Mylan and our stakeholders to allow us to move forward,” Mylan Chief Executive Heather Bresch said in a statement.

The deal followed a False Claims Act whistleblower lawsuit filed by French rival Sanofi SA <SASY.PA> in 2016, two years after it first raised the matter with authorities, Weinreb’s office said.

Sanofi, which formerly marketed a rival product called Auvi-Q, will receive nearly $38.8 million as a reward from the government.

Sanofi in a statement called pursuing the matter “the right thing to do.” It has a separate antitrust lawsuit pending alleging Mylan engaged in illegal conduct to squelch competition to EpiPen.

Mylan shares rose 2.10 percent to $31.11 on the Nasdaq.

The EpiPen, which Mylan acquired in 2007, is a handheld device that treats life-threatening allergic reactions by automatically injecting a dose of epinephrine.

Mylan came under fire last year after raising the price of a pair of EpiPens to $600, from $100 in 2008, enraging consumers and putting it in the center of the ongoing U.S. debate over the high cost of prescription medicines.

Mylan has since offered its own generic version for about $300. The company announced it had reached a Justice Department settlement in October.

Some congressional members previously criticized the $465-million settlement as too small. U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut, renewed that position on Thursday, calling it “completely insufficient.”

A U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General analysis released in May found the U.S. government may have overpaid for EpiPens by up to $1.27 billion between 2006 and 2016.

“Absolving Mylan from a finding of wrongdoing has cleared the way for the company to pocket the money it embezzled from an American public in desperate need of lifesaving and affordable medications,” Blumenthal said in a statement.

Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa in a statement called the accord a “disappointment,” saying it “looks like the settlement amount short-changes the taxpayers.”

Mylan shares were up 0.1 at $30.50 in late trading.

 

(Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Nick Zieminski)

 

Chicago sues Trump administration over sanctuary city plan

FILE PHOTO - Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel listens to remarks at a news conference in Chicago, Illinois, U.S. on December 7, 2015. REUTERS/Jim Young/File Photo

By Julia Jacobs

CHICAGO (Reuters) – Chicago on Monday sued to prevent the Trump administration from enforcing new policies that would withhold money from so-called sanctuary cities that deny U.S. immigration officials access to local jails.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, said the federal policies force the nation’s third largest city to choose between its constitutional rights and funding for law enforcement.

“These new conditions also fly in the face of longstanding City policy that promotes cooperation between local law enforcement and immigrant communities,” the lawsuit said.

The policies also include a requirement that local law enforcement agencies give federal authorities 48 hours notice before releasing anyone wanted for immigration violations.

Democratic Mayor Rahm Emanuel said on Sunday that the city would sue, escalating a pushback against an immigration crackdown launched by Republican President Donald Trump’s administration.

“We are bringing this legal challenge because the rhetoric, the threats from this administration embodied in these new conditions imposed on unrelated public safety grants funds are breeding a culture and climate of fear,” Emanuel’s senior legal adviser, Corporation Counsel Ed Siskel, said on Monday.The conditions from the Justice Department apply to the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants, which provide money to hundreds of cities. Chicago is expected to receive $3.2 million this year for purchasing equipment.

Siskel said the city will follow the initial complaint with a motion for a preliminary injunction to halt the government’s imposition of the new conditions.

The city will request a decision from the judge before the Sept. 5 deadline to apply for the Byrne grant, Siskel said.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said on Monday that Chicago officials have shown an “open hostility” to enforcing laws designed to reduce crime and protect law enforcement.

He added that more Chicagoans were murdered last year than residents of Los Angeles and New York combined, and that Chicago needed to reverse a “culture of lawlessness.”

“This administration will not simply give away grant dollars to city governments that proudly violate the rule of law and protect criminal aliens at the expense of public safety,” Sessions said in a statement.

The lawsuit is the first to challenge the Justice Department over the Byrne program but is not the first legal attack on the administration’s sanctuary city policies.

Emanuel said on Sunday that the lawsuit would prevent the administration from setting a precedent that could be used to target other funding.

Sanctuary cities in general offer illegal immigrants safe harbor by declining to use municipal resources to enforce federal immigration laws. Dozens of local governments and cities, including New York and San Francisco, are part of the sanctuary movement. “Sanctuary city” is not an official designation.

The lawsuit came nearly two weeks after Sessions said the Justice Department would bar cities from the Byrne program unless they allowed immigration authorities unlimited access to local jails and give the 48 hours pre-release notice.

Chicago and its high murder rate have been frequently criticized by Trump, and cracking down on illegal immigration was a theme of his 2016 presidential campaign.

(Reporting by Mark Weinraub and Julia Jacobs; Editing by Jonathan Oatis)