No. 22-954
Justin Marcus Zinman v. California
Response Waived
Tags: civil-rights establishment-clause first-amendment free-speech homeland-defense political-ideology second-amendment state-secrets takings
Key Terms:
Patent
Patent
Latest Conference:
2023-05-18
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether allowing a Progressive political ideology to
influence the law violates the Establishment clause of
the First Amendment?
Whether the State of California's assault and threat
laws adequately incorporate the Federal Constitutions
Speech provision under the Second Amendment?
Whether State Secrets should be upheld in this case
which involves an active United States Defense Consul
who is engaging in Homeland Defense activity?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether allowing a Progressive political ideology to influence the law violates the Establishment clause of the First Amendment?
Docket Entries
2023-05-22
Petition DENIED.
2023-05-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/18/2023.
2023-04-25
Waiver of right of respondent The People of the State of California to respond filed.
2022-12-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 1, 2023)
Attorneys
Justin Zinman
Justin Zinman — Petitioner
The People of the State of California
Rene Judkiewicz — California Attorney General's Office, Respondent