The Tennessee state House Judiciary Committee has passed legislation — HB2079/SB1992 — that would make it a felony for a person to engage in “conduct intended to influence the outcome of an event” which that person has also bet on through a contract on a prediction market like Kalshi or Polymarket. The bill, which was amended by the committee, now goes to the House Finance, Ways and Means Committee. The Nashville Banner reports that prediction markets, which have exploded in popularity, have been under increased legal and media scrutiny after traders have made enormous profits off of bets made on national and world events. Both Kalshi and Polymarket currently offer users the opportunity to place wagers on the outcomes of upcoming Tennessee elections. 

Shelby County lawyer Theodore Iver Jones received a public censure from the Tennessee Supreme Court on April 1. Jones was hired to represent a client to obtain clear title on two separate properties. The court found that throughout the representation, Jones failed to act diligently on behalf of his client and misrepresented the status of the case to his client. These actions violated Rules of Professional Conduct 1.3 and 8.4.

On April 1, the Tennessee Supreme Court suspended Jeffrey Dennis Johnson from the practice of law for two years, with 30 days to be served on active suspension and the remainder on probation. The court conditioned probation on Johnson’s engagement of a practice monitor, completion of additional continuing legal education hours and payment of incurred litigation costs. Johnson represented a client in a criminal matter after representing the client in a separate criminal matter some years previously. The court found that the new representation was improperly conditioned upon the client making outstanding payments for the prior representation. In a subsequent motion to withdraw from the most recent representation, Johnson also made derogatory and disparaging statements about his client, and revealed confidential information related to the representation of the client without the client’s consent. These actions were found to violate Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct 1.6, 1.7, 1.9, 1.16, 3.5(e) and 8.4(d).

The Tennessee House Finance, Ways and Means Subcommittee voted to advanced voucher legislation with a wide-ranging amendment from the chair that reduced the expansion by 5,000 (authorizing 35,000 students rather than the 40,000 requested by Gov. Bill Lee) and added language that public school districts would benefit from a hold harmless clause of the program to the extent they verify the immigration status of students. According to the Nashville Banner, the subcommittee spent less than three minutes on the bill before voting 9-3 to recommend the amended bill for passage. Two Republicans — Rep. Gary Hicks, R-Rogersville, and Rep. Mark Cochran, R-Englewood, voted no.

Petitioner, Brian Howard, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing that the post-conviction court erred in concluding that he received the effective assistance of trial counsel. He argues trial counsel was ineffective in two ways: first, by failing to sever Petitioner’s trial from that of his co-defendant, or alternatively, failing to introduce the co-defendant’s pretrial statement to police during their joint trial; and second, by failing to waive lesser included offense instructions. He also raises a standalone due process claim, arguing that criminal defendants should have a constitutional right to affirmatively waive lesser included charges contrary to Tennessee law. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The Petitioner appeals from the order of the post-conviction court denying his petition seeking relief from his conviction for first-degree murder. In this appeal, the Petitioner argues (1) that trial and appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to object to or raise as an issue on appeal the admissibility Chamere Talley’s prior statement based on Tennessee Rule 803(26); (2) that the State and the trial court violated due process in failing to conduct a hearing pursuant to Rule 803(26); (3) that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to conduct an adequate closing argument; and (4) that the cumulative effect of trial counsel’s errors deprived the Petitioner of a fair trial.1 We affirm.

President Donald Trump announced today that U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi would leave the administration and move to “a much needed and important job in the private sector.” Trump called Bondi “a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend” and applauded her work driving down crime. Bondi’s deputy, Todd Blanche, was named acting attorney general. Blanche is a former New York prosecutor and white-collar defense attorney who was a partner at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft before joining the president’s legal team. He defended Trump against criminal charges related to payments to an adult film star and against the now-defunct election subversion and classified documents prosecutions brought by a former Justice Department special counsel. The Hill has more on his career.

U.S. Supreme Court justices heard oral arguments in a challenge to President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. According to SCOTUSblog, the justices appeared skeptical of the government’s argument that the 14th Amendment was adopted to give newly freed enslaved people and their children citizenship. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer also argued that the founders could not have imagined the rise of “birth tourism,” where women come to the United States to give birth so their children have U.S. citizenship. The ACLU’s Cecillia Wang represented the challengers. She argued that the constitution establishes a “fixed bright-line” rule for citizenship that is “workable” and “prevents manipulation.” Trump, in a first for a sitting U.S. president, attended the proceedings and remained for Sauer’s presentation.

SUTTON, Chief Judge. Ritu Gupta, an American, married Randy Ramgoolam, a Canadian, in 2017. Three years later, Ramgoolam applied for residency in the United States. Federal law allows an immigrant to become a permanent resident only if he can demonstrate that he will not end up on the public dole. To help her husband clear that hurdle, Gupta signed an Affidavit of Support, thereby committing to ensure that Ramgoolam’s income remains above 125% of the federal poverty line each year. The residency application was successful, but the marriage was not. When the couple divorced in 2022, they agreed that neither would pay spousal support to the other. Ramgoolam nonetheless filed this lawsuit against Gupta in federal court, claiming that she had failed to provide him the financial support promised by the Affidavit of Support. The district court dismissed the case, reasoning that the state court’s judgment of divorce precluded Ramgoolam’s claim. We affirm.

LARSEN, Circuit Judge. A state jury convicted Barbara Jean Mercer of second-degree murder, tampering with evidence, and third-degree arson after police found two gunshot-riddled bodies in a burning car. Mercer petitioned for habeas relief in federal court, arguing that the state court violated her due process rights when it failed to give a defense-of-others jury instruction, that her trial counsel provided ineffective assistance, and that the prosecutor committed misconduct in his closing statement. The district court granted Mercer habeas relief on the jury-instruction claim but denied relief on the rest. We REVERSE the district court’s grant of habeas relief and AFFIRM the denial of relief on all other grounds.