The Arts & Business Council of Greater Nashville and its Volunteer Lawyers & Professionals for the Arts (VLPA) program will hold a clinic on Feb. 5 for those needing legal advice on issues surrounding their creative practice. The free 30-minute in-person appointments are available to income-qualified artists, musicians, creatives and arts organizations in the state. The clinic will run from 6-8 p.m. CST at the Belmont College of Law, Randall and Sadie Baskin Center, 1901 15th Ave. S., Nashville 37212. Those needing help should register by Jan. 31. To volunteer at the clinic email vlpa@abcnashville.org.

Combining the disciplines of history and law, Memphis attorney Bryce Ashby and Rhodes College history professor Michael J. LaRosa in a new book explore the economic and historical challenges present in each Latin American nation that force "out" migration. "Immigration, Policy and the People of Latin America: Seven Sending Nations" unpacks the contemporary socio/political and economic realities of the seven sending nations — Colombia, Cuba, Haiti, Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico and Venezuela — and explains the complexity of immigration laws (as passed by Congress), executive actions taken by individual presidents in the United States, and some state initiatives. Read an interview with the authors and Chapter 16.

The Association for Women Attorneys' (AWA) Annual Banquet will take place Jan. 23 at The Kent, 601 Kell Ave., Memphis 38107. A reception will begin at 6 p.m. followed by dinner at 7 p.m. CST. This year’s banquet will honor Shelby County Circuit Court Judge Rhynette Hurd. Tickets are available for purchase online. For more information contact Faith Watson.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has addressed allegations from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that the Tennessee Board of Law Examiners (TBLE) and the Tennessee Lawyers Assistance Program (TLAP) violated the Americans with Disability Act by discriminating against two bar applicants “due to a substance use disorder or mental health disorder.” In a news release, the court says it “strongly disagrees” with the assertion that either agency discriminated against applicants based on health status or disability. “Both TBLE and TLAP follow well-established administrative processes that are designed to avoid discrimination against any applicant.” The statement continues that the court, TBLE and TLAP “have been and remain committed to treating persons with disabilities, including bar applicants with disabilities, with dignity and respect, and in compliance with all legal rights afforded to such applicants.” Read the full statement.

RONALD LEE GILMAN, Circuit Judge. Shawn Lamar Peake-Wright, Jr. moved to suppress evidence that a gun was recovered from one of his jacket pockets during a traffic stop. The district court denied his motion. For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM.

MATHIS, Circuit Judge. This case comes before us for a second time. The district court sentenced Michael Mills to the statutory maximum for being a felon in possession of ammunition. We remanded the case to the district court to make additional factual findings about a sentencing enhancement that significantly increased Mills’s Sentencing Guidelines range. The district court made those factual findings and reimposed the same sentence. Mills once again challenges the application of the same sentencing enhancement and otherwise argues that his sentence is procedurally infirm because the district court considered an improper factor and did not consider one of his sentencing arguments. We affirm.

The Tennessee House of Representatives today adopted new rules governing operations of the chamber. The Tennessean reports that key changes include authority for the speaker to ban disruptive spectators from the gallery for up to two years, removal of members from the chamber for repeated violations of the rules, a new remote voting option for members who have been removed and a limit of 12 on the number of bills each rank and file member may introduce. In the next General Assembly, that number would drop to 10 bills each. For this session, leaders and committee chairs will be able to introduce 15 bills each. According to the paper, all House Democratic members and one Republican member voted against the package.

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Kentucky’s Open Records Act (“KORA”) provides access to public records. It distinguishes between requestors with commercial and non- commercial purposes and permits agencies to impose enhanced fees on requestors with commercial purposes. The statute provides, however, that commercial purposes do not include publication in a newspaper or periodical, use by a radio or television station in its news or informational programs, or use in litigation or claims settlement. Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment to Zillow, vacate the permanent injunction entered by the district court, and remand with instructions to grant summary judgment to the PVAs.

Defendant Eric King appeals his convictions for health care fraud, making false statements relating to health care matters, and aggravated identity theft. He moves for release pending appeal. The government opposes release. A person found guilty of an offense and sentenced to a term of imprisonment must be detained pending appeal unless a judicial officer concludes (1) by clear and convincing evidence that he is unlikely to flee or pose a danger to others and (2) that his appeal is not for delay and raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in a reversal, an order for a new trial, a sentence that does not result in imprisonment, or a lesser sentence sufficient to result in his release before the conclusion of his appeal. 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b); United States v. Chilingirian, 280 F.3d 704, 709 (6th Cir. 2002). “[A]n appeal raises a substantial question when [it] presents a ‘close question or one that could go either way’ and . . . the question ‘is so integral to the merits of the conviction that it is more probable than not that reversal or a new trial will occur if the question is decided in the defendant’s favor.’” United States v. Pollard, 778 F.2d 1177, 1182 (6th Cir. 1985) (quoting United States v. Powell, 761 F.2d 1227, 1233−34 (8th Cir. 1985) (en banc)).

CHAD A. READLER, Circuit Judge. This appeal does not lack for challenging features. The factual backdrop is the complex market for electricity generation, transmission, and distribution in the United States. And the chief legal doctrine at play, the so-called dormant or negative Commerce Clause, has been unflatteringly described as a “quagmire,” Nw. States Portland Cement Co. v. Minnesota, 358 U.S. 450, 458 (1959), “hopelessly confused,” Kassel v. Consol. Freightways Corp. of Del., 450 U.S. 662, 706 (1981) (Rehnquist, J., dissenting), and “inherently unpredictable,” Am. Trucking Ass’ns, Inc. v. Smith, 496 U.S. 167, 203 (1990) (Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment).

But in practice, today’s case turns on some relatively basic questions. Can the State of Michigan require someone selling a product in Michigan to procure that product from the state? Or, phrased in the language of the coin’s other side, can Michigan bar in-state retailers from obtaining their merchandise from outside the state? On these issues, negative Commerce Clause jurisprudence is straightforward. Whether the product at issue is milk, see Dean Milk Co. v. City of Madison, 340 U.S. 349, 352 (1951), or coal-based electricity, see Wyoming v. Oklahoma, 502 U.S. 437, 440 (1992), the Commerce Clause prohibits such state restrictions unless they clear strict scrutiny’s high bar, see Maine v. Taylor, 477 U.S. 131, 138 (1986). At issue here are Michigan electricity market regulations that expressly restrict where Michigan’s electricity retailers may procure their capacity. Accordingly, that regulatory regime must be evaluated through the lens of strict scrutiny. To allow the district court to engage in that analysis with the benefit of our views here, we reverse and remand.