U.S. District Court Judge Loren AliKhan ruled Friday that President Donald Trump’s executive order targeting Susman Godfrey violates the U.S. Constitution and must be permanently enjoined. AliKhan found that the order “constitutes unlawful retaliation against Susman for activities that are protected by the First Amendment, including its representation of certain clients, its donations to certain causes, and its expression of its beliefs regarding diversity.” It was the fourth ruling finding in favor of law firms targeted by executive order, Bloomberg Law reports. The firm sued over the order in April. In related news, the U.S. Justice Department said this week it will appeal another judge’s decision to strike down an executive order targeting Perkins Coie. In early May, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell ruled that order violated the constitution. Both AliKhan and Howell serve on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The U.S Supreme Court today agreed to hear a number of new cases in its next term, Bloomberg Law reports. These include a request from two Republican campaign committees to strike down federal caps on the money that can be spent on advertisements in coordination with congressional candidates; an appeal to shield an internet provider from a $1 billion lawsuit over customers’ unauthorized downloads of copyrighted works; the power of judges to sentence fugitives; and how much flexibility pension actuaries have when calculating money owed by companies withdrawing from a multiemployer plan. It also asked the government to comment on whether it should hear an appeal of the verdict rendered in the Roundup litigation.

Programs from last month's Immigration Law Forum are now available for purchase as on-demand courses, both individually and as a convenient 1-Click Package. Sessions include Hot Topics & Policies in Immigration Law; Past, Current & Future Immigration Bills in the Tennessee General Assembly; and Promoting Economic Inclusion and Immigrant Integration - Policy and Practice. In addition, the section has held three webcasts so far this year, and those also are available on demand.

The Tennessee Department of Correction (TDOC) will soon transition from physical mail to scanned, digitized personal mail for inmates at three facilities beginning Aug. 1. According to a press release, mail will be received at an off-site, centralized facility, where it will be processed, scanned and delivered in a digital format to inmates on their TDOC-issued tablets. The new process aims to reduce contraband and increase security while providing faster, more reliable mail delivery. Privileged mail — including correspondence from attorneys, court clerks, legal aid clinics and government officials or agencies — will not be affected and should continue to be sent directly to the facility where the inmate is incarcerated. Privileged mail sent to the scanning facility will be forwarded to the facility, and outgoing inmate mail will not be affected.

The Child Advocacy Center of Rutherford and Cannon Counties has secured a $1 million commitment to help fund a building project. The Rutherford County Commission on June 12 unanimously approved the capital funding for the center, which provides free services for children who have been victims and supports prosecution of child rape and abuse cases, The Tennessean reports. The decision followed a unanimous recommendation from the seven-member Rutherford County Budget, Finance and Investment Committee. The center contributes to prosecutions by providing trained experts to interview children, who tell their stories on video recordings.

SUTTON, Chief Judge. With the introduction of automatic transmissions in cars, clutch pedals became obsolete for drivers who do not enjoy using a stick shift. General Motors’ Hydra- Matic became the first readily accessible automatic transmission on the market in 1939. It had four gears. From 2015 to 2018, GM offered an eight-gear Hydra-Matic transmission. That version had two alleged problems. It led some GM cars occasionally to shudder, and it led some GM cars occasionally to lurch. The two problems had nothing to do with operator error, even if some of the symptoms called to mind the experience of getting a ride from a novice stick- shift driver. A group of car buyers filed a class action against GM to answer for the two defects under a range of state common law and statutory theories: express warranty, implied warranty, consumer protection laws, and fraudulent omission. The district court certified 26 state-wide subclasses with a total of 59 state-law claims on behalf of roughly 800,000 individual car buyers. Because the subclasses do not meet the rigorous requirements for handling all of these cases in one district court, whether as one case or as 26 cases, we vacate the class-certification order.

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. Rodney Higgins pled guilty to possession with the intent to distribute methamphetamine and fentanyl. On appeal, he challenges the search that led to his arrest. Because probable cause supported that search, we affirm.

Defendant, Richard Cole, pleaded guilty to one count of vandalism of property valued at $2,500 or more but less than $10,000, a Class D felony, and the trial court sentenced him as a Range II offender to eight years to be served on supervised probation. A probation violation warrant was subsequently issued. Defendant admitted to the violation and after a hearing, the trial court revoked his probation and ordered his sentence to be executed. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Timothy Aaron Baxter, Defendant, appeals from the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1. Because Defendant failed to attach a copy of each judgment order at issue, we affirm the summary denial of the motion.

After the death of Calvin Leroy Whitehead, his daughter, Regina Whitehead, petitioned to probate the decedent’s December 2015 will and for permission to sell the decedent’s residence. The probate court admitted the will to probate and letters testamentary were issued to Ms. Whitehead as the executrix. The court also granted permission to sell the residence. Thereafter, the decedent’s step-niece, Elizabeth Otto, filed an intervening petition to probate a purportedly more recent will, from March 2016. The estate answered the petition, alleging fraud and, in its amended answer, requested attorney’s fees in defending the petition. The estate then filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the proffered will was a copy, with no explanation as to the absence of the original, that the post-death affidavits were not valid. The day before her scheduled deposition, Ms. Otto filed a notice of voluntary nonsuit of her petition. The estate responded by moving for an assessment of attorney’s fees and costs against Ms. Otto. The trial court then issued an order that dismissed Ms. Otto’s petition and denied the estate’s motion for attorney’s fees in defending the intervening petition. The estate appeals, arguing that the request for attorney’s fees in its motion to dismiss is a claim for affirmative relief that survives the dismissal. The estate also requests attorney’s fees under alternative legal grounds. For the reasons below, we affirm the trial court’s dismissal of the intervening petition and, finding no abuse of discretion, affirm the denial of attorney’s fees. We also deny the estate’s post- appeal Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 11 motion for sanctions, as well as Ms. Otto’s claim for attorney’s fees incurred in this appeal.