Legal News for Weds 10/16 - Meta Faces Claims by 34 States, SCOTUS Rejects Uber's Challenge to CA Labor Law, Swift Election Litigation and Stolen Tax Refund Checks

Minimum Competence

This Day in Legal History: Nazi War Criminals Hanged

On October 16, 1946, ten high-ranking Nazi war criminals were executed by hanging after being convicted by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. This landmark trial held key figures of Adolf Hitler’s regime accountable for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide committed during World War II. Among those executed was Joachim von Ribbentrop, the former German Foreign Minister, who had played a significant role in Nazi diplomacy, including the negotiation of the non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union. Others included Wilhelm Keitel, head of the German Armed Forces, and Alfred Jodl, a top military strategist.

The Nuremberg trials were a historic moment in international law, establishing the precedent that individuals—even heads of state and military leaders—could be held criminally responsible for war crimes. The tribunal addressed the atrocities of the Holocaust, the invasion of neighboring countries, and the brutal treatment of civilians and prisoners of war. The executions followed months of legal proceedings and were seen as a step toward justice for millions of victims. Two of the condemned, Hermann Göring and Martin Bormann, avoided the gallows—Göring by committing suicide the night before the executions, and Bormann being sentenced in absentia, as he was never captured. These trials helped shape modern principles of international law, including the concepts of crimes against humanity and the rule of law in war.

Meta Platforms Inc. must face claims by 34 state attorneys general accusing the company of contributing to a youth mental health crisis by getting children hooked on Facebook and Instagram. A federal judge in California ruled that some claims in the lawsuit could proceed, while others were dismissed under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields internet companies from liability over user-generated content. The states allege Meta’s platforms cause mental health issues, like depression, in young users and that the company unlawfully collected data from children under 13.

The lawsuit is part of a broader legal push against social media companies like TikTok, YouTube, and Snap, all of which are accused of profiting from the addiction of young users. Meta’s spokesperson defended the company's actions, pointing to tools for parental controls and recent changes to Instagram’s teen accounts. However, the judge noted that Meta’s alleged “public campaign of deception” about the dangers of social media addiction could violate state and federal laws. The ruling also allows claims challenging features like “appearance-altering filters” but limits challenges to infinite scroll and likes. The decision comes alongside similar lawsuits by public school districts alleging social media companies create a public nuisance.

Meta Can’t Escape States’ Claims It Hooked Kids on Platforms (4)

The US Supreme Court declined to revive a challenge by Uber and Postmates to California’s employment classification law, AB 5, leaving in place a Ninth Circuit ruling. AB 5 requires most workers to be classified as employees, giving them broader protections and benefits compared to independent contractors. Although Uber and other app-based companies are exempt from AB 5 under Proposition 22, which voters approved in 2020, they faced penalties for alleged violations before Prop 22 took effect.

Uber and Postmates argued that AB 5 unfairly targeted their industries, claiming the law violated their equal protection rights by exempting other sectors. However, the Ninth Circuit ruled that lawmakers had rational reasons for distinguishing between industries, suggesting that ride-hailing companies were perceived as larger contributors to worker misclassification. The companies petitioned the Supreme Court, but the justices allowed the lower court's decision to stand, effectively ending their constitutional challenge to the law.

Supreme Court Stymies Uber's Challenge to California Labor Law

Courts in key battleground states are implementing procedures to expedite election-related lawsuits ahead of the November 2024 election to avoid delays in finalizing results. Arizona's Supreme Court recently ordered trial courts to prioritize election disputes, ensuring any challenges, such as those concerning recounts or presidential electors, are resolved quickly. This comes as both Republicans and Democrats have filed numerous lawsuits ahead of the election, and experts predict more legal battles on Election Day over vote counting and certification.

Similar measures have been adopted in other battleground states, including Pennsylvania, which shortened the timeframe for appeals to three days, and Michigan, which introduced protocols for handling emergency election-related rulings. These actions are seen as a proactive response to the legal chaos of the 2020 election, when former President Donald Trump and his allies unsuccessfully challenged results with claims of widespread voter fraud. Courts are also preparing for potential security risks, with warnings of increased threats to judges during periods of national tension. Legal experts praise these steps as a way to ensure smooth and timely election litigation.

Courts in US battleground states move to swiftly decide election cases | Reuters

My column for Bloomberg this week discusses how the IRS can solve the issue of stolen tax-refund checks, increasingly a major issue, by embracing technology. Despite the availability of direct deposit, many taxpayers still rely on paper checks, which are vulnerable to theft. I argue that the IRS should offer secure digital refund cards, similar to the electronic benefits transfer (EBT) cards used in welfare programs, for taxpayers without bank accounts. These cards can be mailed securely, with separate deliveries for the card and its PIN, reducing theft risks.

For those who prefer physical checks, I suggest allowing taxpayers to pick them up at secure locations like post offices, where the checks could be activated upon identity verification. This method would work like a software kill switch for smartphones, rendering checks useless if stolen before activation. Additionally, an optional mobile app could provide tracking, security, and refund management features for tech-savvy taxpayers.

These solutions would enhance refund security while ensuring flexibility and accessibility. The IRS should also collaborate with local organizations to help taxpayers navigate these new systems, ensuring no one is left behind in the transition to a more secure refund process.

Secure Digital Tax Refund System Can Solve Stolen Check Problem

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe