Up Next At High Court: ISP Liability & State Subpoena Suits
By Editorial Team
The U.S. Supreme Court is set to commence its December oral argument session, focusing on crucial legal matters. The upcoming week will see discussions on internet service provider (ISP) liability for customers’ infringing activities online and the necessity for subjects of state subpoenas to challenge them in state court before federal claims. Additionally, the court will delve into issues regarding asylum seekers’ persecution determinations and the ability of previously convicted individuals to bring civil rights suits against future prosecutions.
Internet Provider Liability
The Supreme Court will address the question of whether ISPs can be held liable for failing to disconnect customers engaged in infringing activities online. Cox Communications Inc. is seeking to overturn a Fourth Circuit decision that found the ISP contributed to copyright infringement by not terminating accounts associated with music piracy. The case raises issues of contributory liability and the standard for finding willfulness under the Copyright Act.
Persecution Determination Appeals
The court will also examine whether federal courts must defer to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ determinations on asylum seekers’ past persecution claims. The case involves a family from El Salvador seeking asylum in the U.S. due to threats from cartel members back home. The dispute centers on the level of deference federal courts should give to the BIA’s findings.
State Subpoena Challenges
Another key issue to be discussed is whether subjects of state subpoenas must first challenge them in state court before bringing federal claims. First Choice Women’s Resource Centers Inc. is contesting a Third Circuit ruling that dismissed its federal First Amendment challenge to a subpoena issued by the New Jersey Attorney General. The case raises questions about the ripeness of federal pre-enforcement challenges to state subpoenas.
Prospective Constitutional Challenges
The court will also consider whether individuals previously convicted of a crime can file civil rights suits seeking relief from potential future convictions. Gabriel Olivier, a Mississippi man, is challenging a city ordinance that restricts protests near a public amphitheater. The case raises issues of the constitutionality of ordinances and the ability of convicted individuals to seek prospective relief through civil rights suits.
These upcoming oral arguments at the Supreme Court will address critical legal questions with far-reaching implications for various areas of law.
