Geography and the Law Exhibit at the Harris County Law Library

This month, the Law Library is exploring Geography and The Law, a new exhibit on display until February 28th. Learn how a treasure map and a Google Earth satellite image played a role in two recent court decisions and how a Story Map is impacting access to justice. 

The following cases are featured in the exhibit.

United States of America v. Paciano Lizarraga-Tirado, 789 F. 3d 1107 (2015)

After a Border Patrol agent recorded the GPS coordinates of a defendant’s arrest using a handheld device, the evidence was questioned as hearsay. The panel of judges in this case disagreed. Google Earth satellite images, like photographs, make no assertion, even when the software identifies a specific location on that image with a tack and GPS coordinates. Tack-coordinate pairs are auto-generated and require no human intervention. As such, images labeled in this way are not hearsay.

Smith v. The Abandoned Vessel, 610 F. Supp. 3d 868 (2009)

Plaintiff Nathan Smith, a self-described treasure hunter, sought title, under the law of finds, to a legendary sunken ship in Refugio County, Texas. To locate the ship, Smith consulted an 1851 county map along with GPS data and satellite images from Google Earth. He cobbled together his own sort of treasure map and felt certain that he had found the long-lost vessel. Unfortunately, his spurious claims and questionable geographic and scientific evidence failed to persuade the court. The case was dismissed.

Texas Supreme Court Commission to Expand Legal Services Releases Justice Gap Report

On December 6, 2016, the Commission to Expand Civil Legal Services released eight recommendations for increasing the public's access to justice in Texas. As part of these recommendations, the Commission presented innovative options for those of modest means to participate in the legal system and thereby narrow the justice gap in Texas. Two overarching goals guided the Commission in the drafting of its report: connecting lower and middle-income clients with affordable representation and helping pro se litigants navigate the court system.

According to the report, the success of current initiatives has been dependent upon the participation of public law libraries at the state and county levels. Recognizing the essential role that libraries play, the Commission's report encourages the court to promote adequate funding for public law libraries and for the placement of navigators in libraries, courthouses, and other public spaces. 

In addition to the Travis County Law Library and the Texas State Law Library, the Harris County Law Library was recognized by the Commission for taking steps to close the justice gap. We at the Harris County Law Library are very proud of this recognition, as well as our partnership with the Houston Volunteer Lawyers Program in providing services to the populations targeted by the Commission’s recommendations and objectives. We look forward to continuing to provide assistance to our library clientele, helping them to navigate their way through the justice system.

Fastcase v. Casemaker

Georgia State Seal

A recent legal battle between two online publishers, Fastcase and Casemaker, is pitting the proprietary interests of private companies against the public good. At issue is the extent to which a publisher of online legal content is entitled to copyright claims over state rules and regulations, a seemingly uncomplicated dispute. However, according to the Georgia Secretary of State, which has designated Casemaker as the exclusive publisher of the Georgia Administrative Code, the question is indeed more complex.

The Georgia Secretary of State has granted Casemaker the right to publish, distribute, and license its rules and regulations, but Fastcase has taken exception to that right, maintaining that Georgia regulations are public law, published under statutory mandate as part of the public domain, and therefore uncopyrightable. Based on this belief, Fastcase posted the Georgia Administrative Code on its online platform, making it available to many thousands of Fastcase subscribers, including state bar association members throughout the country. Lawriter, the parent company of Casemaker, sent Fastcase a demand letter asking them to stop publishing the Georgia rules and regulations or requesting that they purchase a subscription to the electronic files. Instead of capitulating to Casemaker’s demands, Fastcase sued, saying that no private publisher is entitled to claim copyright over public regulations. The Georgia Secretary of State's office has expressed its desire to ensure that the Fastcase litigation does not hinder public access to the state's administrative laws but the Secretary of State has since made no further comment. The ultimate outcome of the case remains to be seen.

In TBJ: Local Justice a Violin Virtuoso

Justice Brett Busby, 14th Texas Court of Appeals

Justice Brett Busby’s name often appears in the pages of the Texas legal community’s newspapers and magazines next to quotes and facts about his successful legal and judicial career.* But in the February 2016 issue of Texas Bar Journal, Justice Busby is featured for his musical talent.  In the interview, he recounts an invitation he received from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor to play his violin while clerking for the Court. More recently, Justice Busby performs with the Houston Civic Symphony, which holds five concerts a year. He is also chair of Artistic & Orchestra Affairs for the Houston Symphony Orchestra, through which he promotes music programs for local school children.

If you would like to read about Justice Busby’s musical endeavors, visit the Texas Bar Journal website for a digital copy or find a printed copy of the journal at the Harris County Law Library.

* See, e.g., John Council, Texas Conservative Leaders Mourn Justice Antonin Scalia, TexasLawyer.com, Feb. 22, 2016.

Court Watch – U.S. v. Texas - Immigration case before the U.S. Supreme Court

View fullsize

Photo from the Library of Congress Photos, Prints and Drawings Collection

Since it is Immigration Law Resource Month here at the Harris County Law Library, we thought we would fill you in on one of the more important immigration law cases facing the State of Texas in recent memory. In February 2015, Texas took the lead in the case State of Texas, et al. v. United States of America, et al., in which 26 states sought a preliminary injunction to prevent the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other federal agencies from executing a DHS program titled “Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents” (DAPA). Under DAPA, four to five million undocumented immigrants who met certain criteria would be granted stays in deportation proceedings. After finding that at least one of the plaintiff states could suffer direct damage from DAPA and had Article III standing, the Court moved to the merits of the case, primarily whether the DAPA was constitutional and was legally adopted.  The Court granted the preliminary injunction, holding, among other things, that defendants had enacted a substantive rule without complying with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

After failing to get a stay, the Government appealed the preliminary injunction to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. (Search Doc. No. 15-40238). The Court affirmed the lower court’s order, finding that Texas not only satisfied the injury requirement for Article III standing, but also was likely to succeed on the merits of its APA claims. In January 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari. So far, no date has been set for oral argument, but it is worth keeping an eye on.

If you would like to read more about this case, check out SCOTUSblog for recent discussions or read the amicus briefs found on the website for the National Immigration Law Center.