In April, a Florida court held a bench trial over Zoom to decide a child abduction case under the Hague Convention. Later that month, the same state held a major virtual trial on the voting rights of convicted felons, with the public listening in by phone.
As criminal courts grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, some in the legal industry wonder whether a virtual jury trial could be next.
Just weeks ago, the idea might have seemed inconceivable. Now, as remote meetings using videoconferencing tools such as Zoom become a regular fixture in courts, some are concerned that virtual trials would deprive defendants of the constitutional right to confront witnesses, an impartial jury, due process of law and effective counsel.
Since the COVID-19 crisis began, Lighthouse has been working to keep up with the growing need in our community. We have increased our capacity for emergency shelter by more than 100% and moved to a safe location, while serving thousands of individuals with emergency food each week. Funds raised from this event will support Lighthouse’s COVID-19 emergency efforts
Join us for some great entertainment for a great cause!
Since the COVID-19 crisis began, Lighthouse has been working to keep up with the growing need in our community. We have increased our capacity for emergency shelter by more than 100% and moved to a safe location, while serving thousands of individuals with emergency food each week. Funds raised from this event will support Lighthouse’s COVID-19 emergency efforts.
Tony “T-Money” Green Lin-Say Ralphe Armstrong Joan Belgrave Pato Margetic Suzi Quatro
3:00 p.m.
Laith Al-Saadi Detroit Academy of Arts and Sciences Choir Cassi Fitch Oakland University Chorale Sean Blackman Sonia Lee Robert Bradley Stephen Clark
4:00 p.m.
Jill Jack Tino Gross & Linda Lexy Devin Scillian Eva Under Fire Rocky Wallace George Aneed
5:00 p.m.
Ali McManus Carolyn Striho & Scott Dailey The Accidentals Booster Mostyn Karen Newman & Michael King Hustleberry Fin Robert Bradley
6:00 p.m.
Jeff Gutt Alice Cooper The Four Tops’ Alexander Morris Lily Tomlin
7:00 p.m.
Mitch Ryder Thornetta Davis Leopold and His Fiction Austin Scott Raye Williams
8:00 p.m.
JonPaul Wallace Tegan Marie Joan Belgrave Sensational Steve – The Beggers Hustleberry Fin
9:00 p.m.
Trey Simon Bobby Harlow The GO Tino Gross & Linda Lexy
10:00 p.m.
Ethan & Gretchen Davidson RJ Harper Laura Rain Ralphe Armstrong
11:00 p.m.
Tony “T-Money” Green Liz Larin Emily Rogers Ali McManus Tosha Owens Tino Gross & Linda Lexy
12:00 a.m.
Alexander Zonjic George Aneed Jimmie Bones Tino Gross & Linda Lexy Baybro Kaleido The GO John Sinclair
1:00 a.m.
Audra Kubat Ralphe Armstrong Jesse Palter Billy Brandt Julianne Ankley David Winans II
About Lighthouse
Lighthouse of Michigan was established in 2019 when Lighthouse of Oakland County and South Oakland Shelter combined forces and merged agencies.
Lighthouse of Oakland County was founded in 1972 and started with a group of volunteers who provided food and clothing from the back door of a local church.
South Oakland Shelter was established in 1985 by seven religious congregations in Oakland County.
The new Lighthouse will leverage the best of both agencies, providing direct services (food, shelter, rental/utility and other financial assistance, clothing, crisis referrals) and stability and housing programs that develop and support self-sufficiency.
With over 80 years of combined experience, Lighthouse aims to be a Beacon of Hope to our neighbors who need us the most. Families turn to us seeking support for the most basic of needs such as food or shelter. Many of these people are seeking help for the first time. Lighthouse’s vision is to solve the problems of poverty and homelessness by building affordable housing in local communities and by providing people with the resources, relationships, and skills they need to better themselves.
South Oakland Shelter 18505 W. 12 Mile Rd. Lathrup Village, MI 48076 248-920-6000 x5500
Komorn Law
Komorn Law is proud to be participating in support of the Lighthouse of Michigan during this complex time when so many of our neighbors, friends and families need a little help or know someone that needs a little help.
We hope you can take a moment and reflect on the difficulties many people are facing and find it in your heart… to make a donation to the Lighthouse of Michigan. Your donation will help continue their mission to help those in need of assistance with basic items for their families and themselves to rise up through this corona virus pandemic.
On behalf of the legal team here at Komorn Law we would like to say… stay safe… stay healthy… give what you can…take only what you need and look out for one another.
The U.S. Supreme Court did indeed meet and vote remotely to rule on the Wisconsin election.
But it’s a stretch to say they denied a “right to vote remotely”
The traditional remote voting right is to cast an absentee ballot by Election Day, and that was still allowed under this ruling.
The court struck down a lower court decision that would have allowed any absentee ballot received by April 13, 2020, to count, not just those postmarked by Election Day.
A pair of high court rulings set the stage for Wisconsin’s April 7, 2020 pandemic election.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down an order from Gov. Tony Evers that would have moved the election back to June, which kept in-person voting in place.
And the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that all absentee ballots had to be postmarked by Election Day, reversing a federal judge’s order, forcing thousands who requested but didn’t receive an absentee ballot to vote in person if they wanted their vote to count.
Politifact Sources
Facebook post by Conservatives Are Destroying Our Future, April 7, 2020
On Monday, the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments over the phone for the first time ever due to the coronavirus pandemic; they’ll hear 10 cases remotely from now until May 13. But that’s not the only history being made on Monday, as the Supreme Court will also for the first time ever make the audio available to be listened to live, The Associated Press reports.
The US Supreme Court will hear oral arguments by telephone conference on May 4, 5, 6, 11, 12 and 13 in a limited number of previously postponed cases. The following cases will be assigned argument dates after the Clerk’s Office has confirmed the availability of counsel:
18-9526, McGirt v. Oklahoma 19-46, United States Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B.V. 19-177, Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc. 19-267, Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, and 19-348, St. James School v. Biel 19-431, Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania, and 19-454, Trump v. Pennsylvania 19-465, Chiafalo v. Washington 19-518, Colorado Department of State v. Baca 19-631, Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc. 19-635, Trump v. Vance 19-715, Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, and 19-760, Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG
In keeping with public health guidance in response to COVID-19, the Justices and counsel will all participate remotely. The Court anticipates providing a live audio feed of these arguments to news media. Details will be shared as they become available.
The Court Building remains open for official business, but most Court personnel are teleworking. The Court Building remains closed to the public until further notice.
The Court will use a teleconferencing system that will call counsel the morning of argument. All counsel for the cases to be argued that day will be called simultaneously at approximately 9:15 a.m. and will all be placed on a conference call with the Clerk of the Court, Scott Harris, to receive any last-minute instructions and to ask any remaining questions they may have. Once that briefing is completed, the phone lines for counsel will be muted, and counsel will remain on this same line until approximately 9:50 a.m. At that time, counsel will all be moved to the main conference call to await the beginning of argument.
At 10 a.m., the Justices will enter the main conference call, and the Marshal of the Court, Pamela Talkin, will cry the Court. The Chief Justice will call the first case, and he will acknowledge the first counsel to argue. Following the usual practice, the Court generally will not question lead counsel for petitioners and respondents during the first two minutes of argument. Where argument is divided and counsel represents an amicus or an additional party, the Court generally will not ask questions for one minute. At the end of this time, the Chief Justice will have the opportunity to ask questions. When his initial questioning is complete, the Associate Justices will then have the opportunity to ask questions in turn in order of seniority. If there is time remaining once all Justices have had the opportunity to question counsel, there may be additional questioning.
Once the time for the first counsel’s argument has expired, the Chief Justice will thank counsel for their argument, and acknowledge the next attorney. This process will continue until argument in the case is complete. Counsel for the petitioner in each case will be allotted three minutes for rebuttal. If there is a second case to be argued that day, the Chief Justice will call that case promptly after the end of the first argument, and the same process will be followed. The Marshal will announce the conclusion of arguments.
Monday, May 4: Booking.com trademark
10 a.m. ET: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B.V.
Summary: Generic terms cannot be trademarked, but Booking.com wants to trademark its name.This case is about whether generic terms can become protected trademarks by the addition of a generic “.com” domain.
Attorneys: Government attorney Erica Ross, Booking.com attorney Lisa Blatt.
Tuesday, May 5: Aid for HIV program
10 a.m.. ET: USAID v. Alliance for Open Society International
Summary: A new twist on an old case. In 2013, the justices said the government had violated the First Amendment by making funding for U.S. nonprofits contingent on those nonprofits trumpeting the government’s policy position on key issues. The case is back, but this time the question before the court is whether it’s unconstitutional if the government makes funding contingent for foreign-based affiliates of those same U.S. nonprofits.
Wednesday, May 6: Birth control access & Robocalls
10 a.m.ET: Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania consolidated with Trump v. Pennsylvania
Summary: The court considers a Trump administration rule that would allow employers with religious or moral objections to birth control to limit their employees’ access to free birth control under the Affordable Care Act.
11 a.m. ET:Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants
Summary: In 1991, Congress passed a law that prohibits most robocalls. In 2015, Congress created an exception for government debt collection. Political groups, which want to use robocalls to raise money and turn out voters, are challenging the act as a violation of their First Amendment free speech rights.
Monday, May 11: Native American land & Religious freedom
10 a.m. ET:McGirt v. Oklahoma
Summary: On the surface, this case is about whether states, like Oklahoma, can prosecute members of Native American tribes for crimes committed in the historical bounds of tribal land. But it has implications for state power over thousands of miles of land in Oklahoma that has historically belonged to Creek, Cherokee, Seminole, Chickasaw and Choctaw tribes.
11 a.m.ET: Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru consolidated with St. James School v. Biel
Summary: A freedom of religion case that tests whether lay teachers at parochial schools are protected by federal laws barring discrimination based on race, gender, age and disability; or whether, as the schools here maintain, their lay teachers are exempt from the protection of those laws. The case has potential implications for the millions of Americans employed not just by parochial schools but also by religiously affiliated hospitals, charities and universities.
Tuesday, May 12: Trump finances
10 a.m. ET: Trump v. Mazars consolidated with Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG; Trump v. Vance
Summary: These cases involve subpoenas for some of Trump’s pre-presidential financial records. Two consolidated cases — Trump v. Mazars and Trump v. Deutsche Bank — ask whether Congress has the power to subpoena the president’s personal records except during an impeachment proceeding; Trump v. Vance addresses a New York grand jury subpoena for those same records in the course of a criminal investigation.
Wednesday, May 13: Faithless electors
10 a.m. ET: Chiafalo v. Washington; Colorado Department of State v. Baca
Summary: Both cases involve so-called faithless electors — Electoral College delegates who fail to vote for the presidential candidate they were pledged to support. At issue is whether states can punish or remove such electors in order to ensure that the state’s electors accurately represent the state’s vote.
