Tag Archive for: lawsuit

Lawsuits filed to determine Effectiveness of Women in Combat

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, has filed two different Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits in different federal district courts to obtain results from testing women for direct combat roles. One lawsuit was filed against the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, and the 2nd lawsuit was filed against the Department of Army in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Both lawsuits were filed on behalf of Elaine Donnelly and the Center for Military Readiness (“CMR”) to obtain records related to the effectiveness of women in direct combat roles which should have been provided as a result of previous Freedom of Information Act requests.

Thomas More Law Center Files Two Lawsuits to Obtain Military Documentation on Effectiveness of Women to Close-In and Kill the Enemy

Since the founding of CMR in 1993, Elaine Donnelly, as its president, has been researching and reporting on various aspects of social policy in all branches of military service. TMLC’s Senior Trial Counsel, Erin Mersino, has been assisting Donnelly’s efforts by filing numerous FOIA requests on all branches of military service. Commenting on the two lawsuits filed yesterday, Mersino stated, “Adherence to the FOIA is crucial because it allows the public access to our government.  The documents we requested under FOIA are time sensitive.  Permanent decisions regarding women in the infantry are projected to be made as soon as January 2016.  The public should be informed of such important matters that directly affect our national security.”

CMR has already prepared an analysis of the study conducted by the British Ministry of Defense, which tears to shreds the case for women in ground close combat.  One of the findings of the study was that under conditions of high intensity close quarter battle, “team cohesion is of such significance that the employment of women in this environment would represent a risk to combat effectiveness and no gain in terms of combat effectiveness to offset it.” The entire analysis can be found at:

http://cmrlink.org/data/sites/85/CMRDocuments/CMRPolicyAnalysisFebruary2015.pdf

In January of 2013, the Obama administration announced its decision to make female military personnel eligible for assignment to direct ground combat units, including the infantry, by January of 2016.  Since then the various departments of the military have been collecting data concerning the safety and effectiveness of women on the front lines. TMLC has submitted numerous FOIA requests on behalf of Elaine Donnelly and the CMR in an effort to obtain information prior to the conclusion of the military’s studies in January 2016.  The recent FOIA requests to the Army and to SOCOM were part of that concerted effort.

Although a small group of service women initially volunteered for tests, that number has dwindled.  Obtaining the documents asked for in the lawsuits will allow Elaine Donnelly to analyze the safety and effectiveness of allowing women in the infantry and provide its findings and analysis to the public and to the military at a crucial point in time.

Of particular interest to the Law Center is the attempt by the Pentagon to insert women into the one of the most grueling training regimens in the entire military establishment, the U.S. Army Rangers.  The deep concern now is that the Pentagon will reduce the physical requirements so that women will pass.

Richard Thompson, TMLC’s President and Chief Counsel, commented:

“The question is not whether women should serve in combat, they already do, and admirably. The question is whether women should purposely be placed in situations where they must close with the enemy in extremes of physical endurance, climate and terrain, brutal and violent death, injury, horror, and fear, just to satisfy the feminist agenda. Too many generals in the Pentagon know better, but they succumb to political pressure acting more like politicians than true military leaders. They already know that the end result will be compromised standards, destruction of the effectiveness of units like the Rangers and Navy Seals, and disruption of the warrior spirit and ethos so carefully nurtured over the years.”

Thomas More Law Center Helps Widow of Chris Kyle, American Sniper, Hit with $1.8 Million Jury Verdict

A friend of the court brief supporting Taya Kyle, the widow of Chris Kyle, the American Sniper, was filed yesterday afternoon in the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit by the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan.  In the highly controversial case, a Minnesota jury awarded former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura $1.8 million in damages in July 2014.  The verdict included $500,000 in damages for defamation and over $1.3 million dollars in “unjust enrichment” from the proceeds of Chris Kyle’s book, American Sniper.

Richard Thompson, TMLC’s President and Chief Counsel, commented on filing the brief supporting Chris Kyle’s widow:

“This is TMLC’s way of saying thank you to Taya. The Law Center, and especially our senior trial counsel Erin Mersino and her husband, Paul, worked together on the brief, not only to honor Chris Kyle’s heroic sacrifices in service to our nation, but also to honor Taya for the many hardships she had to endure while her husband was deployed defending our Nation. Too often we forget to thank the families of our deployed troops for the hardships and emotional strain they silently endure while their loved ones are deployed in harm’s way.”

The unusual case spawns from a brief passage in the book American Sniper, authored by Chris Kyle where he discusses a confrontation with Jesse Ventura in a California bar where the two men were attending a fellow Navy SEAL’s wake.  The book describes how a man (Ventura) was being loud and disrespectful at the wake, and made anti-American comments insulting the Navy SEALs, stating “You deserve to lose a few.”  Although Ventura is never mentioned by name in the book, Ventura sued Chris Kyle for defamation.  Chris Kyle was tragically murdered before the case was tried, but instead of dropping the lawsuit, Ventura went after Chris Kyle’s widow, Taya.  The Court replaced Taya Kyle as the Defendant in the case as the representative of Chris Kyle’s estate.

Although Chris Kyle could not testify in person on his own behalf due to his tragic death, when Ventura’s lawsuit went to a jury trial last year, his lawyers presented several witnesses who supported the truth of Chris Kyle’s words. The case is now on appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit.

The Thomas More Law Center filed a motion to be allowed to file the friend of the court brief with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on March 11, 2015.  Taya Kyle’s attorneys consented to the filing, while attorneys for Ventura refused to consent. Yesterday afternoon (March 17th), the Eight Circuit Court granted the motion.

While TMLC believes that the entire decision of the lower court should be reversed, its brief specifically focuses on why the $1.3 million dollar award for “unjust enrichment” must be reversed.  The brief describes why the lower court erred by allowing unjust enrichment damages in a defamation lawsuit, and that there have been no other cases in the history of our nation that have allowed such damages for a defamation claim.  Further, the brief states that “the damages award for unjust enrichment amount to an impermissible windfall for Ventura that, if permitted to stand, could create precedent that creates a chilling effect on free speech by expanding defamation damages.”

Chris Kyle is a true American hero. TMLC is proud to support Taya Kyle and to honor the memory of Chris Kyle. He is considered the most lethal sniper in U.S. military history with 160 confirmed kills.  He bravely served four tours in the Middle East, protecting our country as a Navy SEAL.  Chris Kyle left behind his wife, Taya, and their two children. Chris Kyle’s book American Sniper was adapted into the popular film released this past December and directed by Clint Eastwood. The film, which has obtained box office success, makes no mention of the confrontation with Ventura.

TMLC’s brief was written by the husband and wife team of Erin Mersino, Senior Trial Counsel at the Thomas More Law Center, and Paul Mersino, an attorney and Shareholder at the law firm of Butzel Long, P.C. in Detroit, Michigan, who worked pro bono on the brief.

Click here to read a full copy of the brief

Palm Beach GOP Chair: Don’t talk about Allen West

Jack Furnari in his BizPac Review column “GOP boss: Don’t talk about Allen West voter fraud or other ‘oddball issues’” reports, “[Palm Beach County Republican Party Chair Ira] Sabin told me he doesn’t want his board members to publicly discuss ‘voter fraud, birtherism, the St. Lucie County voter fraud suit’ or any other ‘oddball issues’ he deems off message.”

Furnari notes this can lead to conflict as his vice-Chair is part of the St. Lucie County law suit. Furnari notes, “[Vice-Chairman Michael] Barnett is one of the lawyers litigating the True the Vote lawsuit against St. Lucie County Elections Supervisor Gertrude Walker over the irregularities in Allen West’s loss to Patrick Murphy, and that’s one of the banned topics.

True the Vote is a non-partisan grassroots organization that focuses on election fraud. Lou Ann Anderson from Watchdog Wire – Texas reported, “Former Florida Congressman Allen West narrowly lost his November re-election bid and St. Lucie County was a standout locale in terms of alleged voting irregularities.  To protect future election integrity, Houston-based True The Vote is suing the St. Lucie supervisor of elections. In a recent video announcement, True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht emphasized the importance of learning the truth.  “The sanctity of our elections is too important to let this slide,” she said.

Watch True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht’s video announcement of the lawsuit:

Anderson reports Engelbrecht additionally noted, “We the people have a right and a responsibility to demand answers when our election process fails.  And that’s what we’re doing.  Demanding answers.”