Hampton v. Haley Although an executive agency is generally not required to spend all appropriated funds, since the 2012-2013 Appropriations Act expressed the clear intent of the General Assembly that an entire $51 million appropriation be spent on premium increases for the state group health insurance plan and that plan enrollees not bear any of the premium increase, and since members of the Budget and Control Board all acknowledged that the appropriation indicated that intent, the Board violated the separation of powers when it decided to require enrollees to pay half the premium increase.
Hampton v. Haley The General Assembly appropriated funds so the state could pay all of the health insurance premium increases for state employees, a fact acknowledged by the State Budget and Control Board.
Bryson v. State Budget & Control Board Petitioner brought this suit seeking a declaration that the S.C. Budget and Control Board’s Aug. 8, 2012 decision raising enrollee premiums for the state’s health insurance plan was a violation of the constitutional separation of powers.
Brown v. Town of Cary A resident of Cary, N.C., loses his constitutional challenge to a local sign ordinance, cited by the town to demand removal of a sign painted on the resident’s house saying “Screwed by the Town of Cary”; the 4th Circuit reverses the district court decision for the resident, and says the Cary sign ordinance is content neutral and passes constitutional scrutiny.
Center for Individual Freedom Inc. v. Tennant, Sec’y of the State of W. Va. In a challenge by plaintiff advocacy groups, the Center for Individual Freedom and West Virginians for Life, to the district court’s decision interpreting West Virginia’s statutory scheme to regulate advocacy groups’ spending in political campaigns, the 4th Circuit upholds the district court decision to strike periodicals from the definition of “electioneering communications” and upholds the definition’s exclusion of grassroots lobbying, but reverses other portions of the lower court decision.
Rowe v. Benjamin Even though the speech that got plaintiff fired was on a matter of public concern, since he spoke out pursuant to his official duties as a government employee, the First Amendment does not protect him from discipline. Although the defendant-mayor was not plaintiff’s employer, since this area of law is not well settled, the mayor is entitled to qualified immunity.
Centro Tepeyac v. Montgomery County, Md. A Maryland limited-services pregnancy services center wins an injunction against enforcement of a local ordinance that would require it to post a sign saying it did not have a “licensed medical professional on staff”; the 4th Circuit reverses the district court’s denial of an injunction to the center.
Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns Inc. v. St. Brigid’s Roman Catholic Congregation Inc. The 4th Circuit upholds summary judgment for a Baltimore “Pregnancy Center” on its challenge to a local ordinance the Center said violated its free speech rights by compelling it to post signs saying the Center did not provide or make referral for abortion or birth control services.
In re Barnwell County Hospital Even though the S.C. Constitution generally bars an individual from holding two offices of honor or profit at the same time, since the Barnwell County Council has responsibility for and ownership of the assets of the Barnwell County Hospital, members of the County Council may also appoint themselves to the Barnwell County Hospital Board.
Wag More Dogs LLC v. Cozart An Arlington County sign ordinance that required a doggy daycare business to remove a 960-square foot painting of cartoon dogs on the side of the daycare’s business passes constitutional muster as a content-neutral restriction on speech that survives intermediate scrutiny, the 4th Circuit says.
Next Page »