Appeals Court Rejects Oregon Complaint
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Washington, DC-A complaint challenging a 快猫视频 (快猫视频) regulation implementing 1996 快猫视频 funding restrictions has been rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
The State of Oregon filed the complaint in September 2005 against 快猫视频's "program integrity" regulation, saying it violated the state's 10th Amendment rights and the Spending Clause of the U. S. Constitution by thwarting state policies governing legal services programs. The U.S. District Court in Oregon dismissed the case on the merits, holding that the State was not entitled to relief under either theory. In a ruling dated January 8, the appeals court concluded that Oregon lacked standing to pursue the case because the 快猫视频 regulations do not affect the state itself in any way. The appeals court vacated the District Court's order with instructions that the case instead be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because of the lack of standing to state a claim.
The 1974 快猫视频 Act prohibits 快猫视频-funded programs from using either 快猫视频 or private money for certain activities. In 1996, additional restrictions were imposed by Congress that prohibit 快猫视频-funded programs from spending money on certain activities, such as lobbying, filing of class-action lawsuits and seeking or collecting attorneys' fees. Furthermore, 快猫视频-funded programs cannot engage in the 1996 restricted activities at all, regardless of the source of funding. To enforce these restrictions, 快猫视频 adopted the program integrity rule that requires 快猫视频 grantees to maintain objective integrity and independence from any entity that engages in these restricted activities.
In 2005, the 快猫视频 grantee in Oregon, Legal Aid Services of Oregon (LASO), proposed merging with the Oregon Law Center (OLC), a non-快猫视频 program that is free to handle 快猫视频-restricted cases. The State had encouraged this merger. The new combined program would have had two divisions-one subject to 快猫视频 rules and one that was not. The divisions would have shared personnel, equipment and office space. 快猫视频 reviewed the proposal and concluded that it would not comply with the Corporation's program integrity rule because the two divisions would lack legal and functional separation.
In a separate but related case, LASO, OLC and others also sued 快猫视频 to force 快猫视频 to approve their merger proposal. The District Court last year granted 快猫视频's motion for summary judgment, rejecting all of the plaintiffs' claims. That case is currently on appeal to the Ninth Circuit.
In addition to these two cases, three others have been launched against 快猫视频 regarding the 1996 restrictions Congress placed on 快猫视频 grantees. The first, Legal Aid Society of Hawaii v. 快猫视频, was decided entirely in 快猫视频's favor by the Ninth Circuit in 1998. The other two, Velazquez v. 快猫视频 and Dobbins v. 快猫视频, have been combined in the Eastern District of New York and are currently on remand to the District Court after the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a partial injunction again 快猫视频. In Velazquez all but one of the 1996 restrictions were upheld by the courts and the remaining claims only address the program integrity rule.