Still trying to reform New York knife law

Over opposition from some powerful elected officials, efforts continue in New York City to reform knife laws “that effectively criminalize tools that vast numbers of Americans carry with them to work as electricians, stagehands and other tradesmen – a fact that helps explain why the reforms usually enjoy union support.” [James Varney, Real Clear Investigations; Jon Campbell, Village Voice] I wrote about this crazy law for Cato in 2014, and see these related posts.

Facebook prevails in another pair of abetting-terrorism suits

“A federal judge in Brooklyn, New York, has dismissed two lawsuits that claimed Facebook should be liable for allowing terrorists to use its platform to advance violence….The plaintiffs had claimed that Palestinian terrorism organizations used the social media platform to incite and organize attacks.” [Debra Cassens Weiss, ABA Journal; Eugene Volokh (federal judge ruled “in my view quite correctly”)]

Sugar in Jelly Bellies? Who knew?

In a lawsuit seeking class action status in California state court, Jessica Gomez alleges that Jelly Belly’s “Sport Beans,” which are touted as containing electrolytes and vitamins, “contain more sugar than she thought,” and that the ingredient list resorted to the euphemism “evaporated cane juice” to describe the sweetener. [John O’Brien and Sara McCleary, Legal Newsline]

Medical roundup

More tales of motorist-beware Tenaha, Texas

From John Ross’s April 28 Short Circuit (Institute for Justice):

Readers may recall Tenaha, Tex. officials’ particularly opprobrious abuse of asset forfeiture, which got a write-up in The New Yorker. This week, the Fifth Circuit shares additional details that were news to the editorial staff: During the investigation of the city’s forfeiture practices, the city marshal bugged other officials’ offices, including the mayor. He was also stealing drugs from the evidence room and selling them.

Is it a climate of forfeiture-derived local government finance that attracts this sort of official?

I wrote up Sarah Stillman’s New Yorker piece at the time. Overlawyered coverage of Tenaha here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Whiplash and incentives, abroad

“In my first 20 years as a consultant I wrote many reports which were economical with the truth – the truth being that there was very little wrong with the vast majority of compensation claimants that I saw. I was moving with the herd.” While lawyers, insurers, and others are all complicit, writes Dr. Charlie Marks, the onus is on the medical profession to speak up against medico-legal misdiagnosis [Irish Times via Patrick Collinson, The Guardian (“Whiplash: the myth that funds a £20bn gravy train”)]

SF supervisor seeks ban on delivery robots

Worries “that many delivery jobs would disappear” are cited among the reasons San Francisco Supervisor Norman Yee is sponsoring a ban on delivery robots in the city, prompting this response:

Commenters have several suggestions for Steps 4 and beyond, including (@railboss): “Complain there aren’t any decent restaurants anymore with reasonably priced food or that deliver.”

Pennsylvania high court limits civil asset forfeiture

In an important decision the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled that to seize property under civil process the state must prove that property played a significant role in crime, and the value seized cannot be disproportionate to the offense [AP/Allentown Morning Call, C.J. Ciaramella/Reason, opinion in car and real estate proceedings involving Elizabeth Young, background Milad Emam, Philadelphia Inquirer 2016 op-ed on Institute for Justice brief] Philadelphia authorities seized Young’s house and minivan after her son sold $90 worth of marijuana on her front porch. Earlier this year I covered a different Pennsylvania intermediate court decision, which also checked the scope of forfeiture law, here.