Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience. Necessary
Detroit man arraigned in gas station triple shooting, prosecutor says
View Comments
A 22-year-old Detroit man was arraigned Sunday on charges stemming from a triple shooting at a gas station Wednesday that killed a teen and injured two people, authorities said.
Timothy Charles McGhee Jr. was charged in connection with the fatal shooting of Morgan Dawkins, 19, of Detroit and the shootings of Angel David, 19, and Tyree Harris, 28, both of Detroit.
Dawkins was an innocent bystander, the Wayne County Prosecutor s Office said.
McGhee was arraigned in 34th District Court in Romulus on first-degree murder, assault with intent to murder and felony firearm.
First filed
RSA and CHIP had their lawsuit locked and loaded when Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed off on the rent law in June 2019. They filed just two weeks later with an argument that would become the basis of suits to follow.
The rent law violates the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, their complaint argued. Specifically, a “takings clause” in the Fifth Amendment bars governments from seizing private property without compensating owners the RSA suit argues that rent regulation, which targets one group to pay for the benefit of others, amounts to just that.
By largely restricting owners from refusing new leases, the law also violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause, the suit alleges, because the government can’t hinder property owners from keeping people off their property. Another violation of due process, the case claims, is that the law is arbitrary and irrational.
May 14, 2021 at 12:21 PM
Shares3
Ed. note: This article first appeared on The Juris Lab, a forum where “data analytics meets the law.”
A month and a half ago, a panel on the Ninth Circuit ordered supplemental briefing in
Jones v. Becerra an important Second Amendment case concerning the constitutionality of a California statute which bans the sale of firearms to individuals under the age of 21 requesting the parties address three questions:
“What is the original public meaning of the Second Amendment phrases: ‘A well regulated Militia’; ‘the right of the people’; and ‘shall not be infringed’?
How does the tool of corpus linguistics help inform the determination of the original public meaning of those Second Amendment phrases?
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
5th Circ. Orders New Look At $50M Formosa Water Settlement
Law360 (April 30, 2021, 8:11 PM EDT) The Fifth Circuit on Friday ruled that a Texas federal judge wrongly construed a portion of a $50 million settlement agreement between Formosa Plastics Corp. and an environmental group, and placed an overly heavy burden on Formosa to prove its compliance with a zero-discharge pledge.
In an unpublished per curiam opinion, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit agreed with Taiwanese plastics company Formosa that U.S. District Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt misconstrued its consent agreement with the San Antonio Bay Estuarine Waterkeeper in a way that fails to distinguish between previous releases of plastic pellets and future releases.