Androvett Legal Media and Marketing
2501 Oak Lawn Avenue  |  Suite 650  |  Dallas, Texas 75219
Tel: 214.559.4630  |  Fax: 214.559.0852


Androvett Blog

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:00:00 am

A new Texas “sanctuary cities" ban set to take effect Sept. 1 orders cities and counties not to stop law officers from asking about the immigration status of anyone they detain. It also would punish police chiefs, sheriffs and constables who fail to abide by the law or fail to comply with federal immigration detainer requests.

On Tuesday, the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas warned visitors that their constitutional rights could be violated when they’re in the state. A federal lawsuit has already been filed in San Antonio. On the other side, Attorney General Ken Paxton has also filed suit, asking a federal judge pre-emptively to uphold the constitutionality of the law.

Dallas attorney David Coale of Lynn Pinker Cox & Hurst, a trial and appellate lawyer, says the new law is vulnerable.

“States and cities can't be made to enforce federal law because of the 10th Amendment and federal preemption of immigration law. Period. Farmers Branch and Irving, Texas, went through similar issues several years ago with their local laws about immigration. A state law that tries to make cities enforce federal law is just as problematic. 

“Procedurally, I expect the plaintiffs in the San Antonio case to seek some kind of temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction to enjoin the law. On both sides, you have to separate the policy from the law. Both sides have points about the importance of immigration enforcement, on the one hand, and local control over local law enforcement, on the other. The legal question, though, is about the structure of our government, which is defined by the Constitution.”  

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Sophia Reza at 800-559-4534 or Sophia@androvett.com.

 

 

 

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:31:00 am

 

Unhappy with his boss and former friend’s close association with the Trump administration, David Magerman aired his concerns about Renaissance Technologies President Robert Mercer in a February interview with the Wall Street Journal. Although the hedge fund’s legal department had assured the research scientist that his interview would not violate company policy, Mr. Magerman was fired shortly after publication of the article, which labeled Mr. Mercer a racist.

The former partner is now fighting back with a wrongful termination lawsuit, which should serve as a cautionary tale for all companies, says Dallas labor and employment attorney Leiza Dolghih of Godwin Bowman & Martinez.

“It is important for a company to establish and enforce clear rules on media interaction, particularly in situations such as this where you have high profile leadership or there is a potential for controversy. Here you had an employee who claimed that the Chief Compliance Officer orally told him that his interview was authorized,” she says. “No matter how respected he may have been at the firm, Magerman was known to have divergent views that were likely to be explored during the course of the interview. Even in instances where an employee is allowed to talk with the media, you cannot give them blanket assurances about repercussions.”

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Rhonda Reddick at 800-559-4534 or rhonda@androvett.com.

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:25:00 am

Time off or overtime pay? Many employees who work extra hours have had that option for years. On Tuesday, the U.S. House passed a bill that would allow more employers to offer compensatory time off instead of overtime wages if the employee agrees. It’s unclear if the bill will make it through the Senate since many Democrats argue it could weaken worker protections.

Houston labor and employment lawyer Marlene Williams of Jackson Walker LLP says: “This bill simply amends the Fair Labor Standards Act so that private employers are allowed the same flexibility that public employers have had since 1985.

“Many companies, especially those in the energy sector with boom and bust cycles, would find this appealing to help manage labor costs. And the bill protects workers because the receipt of comp time in place of cash wages must be a voluntary choice. Given the increasing demands on family schedules, many employees these days prefer time off when offered as an alternative to cash wages for overtime hours.

“This proposal comes as we are waiting to see the outcome of a court challenge to an Obama administration rule that would expand overtime eligibility to higher-paid workers. Many companies have already adopted that rule, giving workers raises so that their salaries allow them to be exempt from overtime. It seems unlikely that larger employers would take back those salary increases now, no matter what the court rules.” 

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Kit Frieden at 800-559-4534 or kit@androvett.com.