A Constitutional Commitment to Access to Literacy: Bridging the Chasm Between Negative and Positive Rights

EVAN CAMINKER

Michigan Law dean emeritus Evan Caminker discusses a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in which that court held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause secures schoolchildren a fundamental right to a “basic minimum education” that “can plausibly impart literacy.” Caminker—one of the co-counsel for the plaintiffs in that case—explains why the decision is so remarkable and why the supposed dichotomy between positive and negative rights is not as stark as canonically claimed.

Read More

Mississippi ex rel. Fitch v. Yazaki North America, Inc.

Citation: 2019-CA-00094-SCT

Opinion Date: April 30, 2020

Judge: Maxwell

Areas of Law: Antitrust & Trade Regulation, Civil Procedure, Consumer Law

In 2012, the executives of several Japanese auto-parts manufacturers pled guilty to federal crimes based on an international scheme to fix the price of Automotive Wire Harness Systems (AWHS). Three years later, the State of Mississippi sued the American subsidiaries of these federally prosecuted companies, alleging violations of the Mississippi Consumer Protection Act (MCPA) and the Mississippi Antitrust Act (MAA), as well as a civil conspiracy to violate the MCPA and MAA. The trial court dismissed the State’s complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. The State appealed. After review, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed: the alleged unfair trade practices were too remote in time to support the State’s claim for injunctive relief under the MCPA; the complaint alleged no “wholly intrastate” transactions that would make the alleged illegal cartel punishable under the MAA; and because the State alleged no viable claim for a statutory violation, its civil-conspiracy claim, based solely on the alleged statutory violations, also failed.

Young v. Air Masters Mechanical Inc.

Citation: 2018-CT-00401-SCT

Opinion Date: April 30, 2020

Judge: Griffis

Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Family Law, Government & Administrative Law, Labor & Employment Law, Trusts & Estates

Daniel Tewksbury and Bobbie Young were previously married and were the parents of two minor children, Lane and Emma. They divorced in May 2006, and Daniel was ordered to pay child support. Daniel stopped making child-support payments in 2008. Bobbie later married Gerald Young, Jr. Gerald filed a petition to adopt Lane and Emma. In the adoption, Daniel’s parental rights were terminated. As of the termination of his parental rights, Daniel owed Bobbie $34,759 for child support. On April 5, 2015, Daniel died in an automobile accident. The accident occurred while Daniel was in the course and scope of his employment with Air Masters Mechanical, Inc. Bobbie then filed a petition with the Workers’ Compensation Commission on behalf of Lane and Emma, claiming that the children were entitled to Daniel’s workers’ compensation death-benefit proceeds and sought the payment of the $34,759 in outstanding child support. The Workers’ Compensation Commission Administrative Judge (AJ) determined that the child-support lien of $34,759 was valid and payable under Section 71-3-129. Air Masters and Associated General Contractors filed a petition for review with the Commission. The Commission concluded that Lane and Emma were not entitled to Daniel’s death benefits because they were not his statutory dependents under Mississippi Code Section 71-3-25 (Supp. 2019). The Commission reversed the AJ’s order and dismissed Bobbie’s petition. On appeal, a divided Court of Appeals reversed the Commission’s decision, concluding the child-support lien was valid. The Mississippi Supreme Court reversed, finding Section 71-3-129 did not authorize a lien on death benefits payable directly to the deceased employee’s statutory dependents. Accordingly, the child-support lien did not apply to Daniel’s death benefits. Further, because Daniel had no statutory dependents, there were simply no benefits to which the lien can attach in this case. As a result, the Commission properly dismissed the claim. The judgment of the Court of Appeals was reversed. The judgment of the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission was reinstated and affirmed.

Brown v. Mississippi

Citation: 2018-DR-01256-SCT

Opinion Date: April 30, 2020

Judge: Griffis

Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Joseph "Peanut" Brown sat on death row since his conviction for capital murder in Adams County, Mississippi in 1994. The jury found that Brown shot and killed a convenience-store clerk during a robbery. Brown filed a successive petition for post-conviction relief in which he raised numerous issues. The Mississippi Supreme Court determined most of the claims raised at this point were subject to the time bar, the successive-writ bar, and/or were barred by res judicata. The Court determined the remaining issue was without merit. The successive petition was therefore denied.

Saddler v. Mississippi

Citation: 2018-KA-01298-SCT

Opinion Date: April 30, 2020

Judge: Josiah D. Coleman

Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Johnny Lee Saddler confessed to the inappropriate touching of a thirteen-year-old girl. He contended his constitutional and procedural rights were violated during trial court proceedings, arguing that because he invoked his right to counsel and his right to silence, the trial court erred by denying the motion to suppress his confession. Saddler further argued his trial counsel was constitutionally inadequate. Finally, Saddler argued that the trial court erred by allowing the State to present improper lay opinion evidence. After review of the trial court record, the Mississippi Supreme Court determined Saddler waived his rights, and his confession was properly admitted. The Court found Saddler's counsel was not constitutionally ineffective, and the lay opinion did not prejudice Saddler's defense.