menu_open Columnists
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close

Short Circuit: An inexhaustive weekly compendium of rulings from the federal courts of appeal

15 0
25.09.2026

The Volokh Conspiracy

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent

About The Volokh Conspiracy Editorial Independence Who we are Books Volokh Daily Email Archives Search DMCA RSS

Politics

Short Circuit: An inexhaustive weekly compendium of rulings from the federal courts of appeal

Bogus traffic stops, cell-site simulating, and chain refoulment.

John Ross | 9.25.2026 3:30 PM

Please enjoy the latest edition of Short Circuit, a weekly feature written by a bunch of people at the Institute for Justice.

"Technology may make surveillance more convenient, but it does not make the Fourth Amendment's protections any less important." So said IJ legislative counsel Alasdair Whitney this week at a congressional hearing on Flock and other automated license plate readers. Read all about it at The Hill. And then maybe check out our model legislation on the topic.

New on the Short Circuit podcast: We welcome on Robert Steinbuch, a professor at the University of Arkansas, to tell a tragic story of the upside-down world of federal remedies.

After Anthropic refused to relax contractual prohibitions on the use of Claude for lethal autonomous warfare or domestic surveillance, the DoD deemed it a supply-chain risk and prohibited any of its contractors from using it. D.C. Circuit: Which was fine. Dissent: Clearly not what Congress meant.  

In 2015, when Somerville, Mass. detective asks an informant to help locate a burglary suspect, the informant threatens to hurt the suspect (over an unrelated personal beef)—and then does, grievously, with a machete. City: We'd like to fire the detective for lack of candor about his role. Arbitrator: Not a chance. (The city's appeal is ongoing.) Detective (in a separate suit): Other officers have done worse and weren't fired; the city is retaliating against me. Jury: Yup, pay the detective $800k. First Circuit: More like $300k. (Some journalism.)

Some of a district court's ruling against DHS evaporates in a cloud of Article III standing in this First Circuit opinion. However, requirements for adequate notice regarding third-country removals of noncitizens remain. Less noticeable is the use in footnote 2 of the word "refoulment" (in the context of "chain refoulment"), which means "forcing a refugee or asylum seeker to return to a country or territory where they are likely to face persecution."........

© Reason.com