Legal News for Mon 9/30 - GOP Legal Efforts to Pre-Challenge Election Results, Epic Games Lawsuit vs. Google and Samsung, Judge's Rebuke in Patent-Funding Investigation

Minimum Competence

This Day in Legal History: Nazi Leaders Convicted at Nuremberg

On September 30, 1946, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg delivered its final verdicts, marking a pivotal moment in legal history. The tribunal, established by the Allied powers after World War II, tried 24 high-ranking Nazi officials for crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Of those tried, 22 were found guilty. These included prominent Nazi figures such as Hermann Göring, Rudolf Hess, and Joachim von Ribbentrop. The Nuremberg Trials were the first of their kind to hold government officials individually accountable for atrocities committed under state authority, laying the groundwork for modern international criminal law.

The court sentenced 12 of the defendants to death by hanging, while others received long prison sentences. Three were acquitted. These proceedings also set legal precedents, defining acts like genocide and war crimes more clearly in the context of international law. Nuremberg solidified the principle that following orders is not a defense for committing atrocities, a key doctrine in future human rights cases. The trials emphasized accountability, no matter how high the official’s rank, and underscored the need for justice following war and genocide.

Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Republicans have launched a wide-ranging legal campaign to challenge voting processes, with particular focus on states like Arizona, where the race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris is extremely tight. A lawsuit by the America First Legal Foundation, founded by Trump advisor Stephen Miller, seeks to empower courts to nullify election results due to procedural errors by local officials and order new rounds of voting. This case, which legal experts view as a long shot, reflects a broader Republican strategy to sow doubts about the election’s legitimacy before votes are cast. The Republican National Committee is involved in over 120 lawsuits across 26 states, aiming to impose stricter voting rules, which they argue will restore faith in election integrity.

Republicans, still asserting widespread fraud in the 2020 election despite court rejections, are pursuing these challenges earlier than in 2020, attempting to preemptively influence election outcomes. Legal experts warn that these lawsuits could cause chaos and confusion, potentially opening doors for political intervention in election results. Democrats argue the efforts are designed to undermine trust in the election system in case of Republican losses, while both sides are gearing up for further legal battles over voting restrictions and access.

Republicans lay legal groundwork for election challenges | Reuters

Epic Games has accused Google and Samsung of conspiring to limit competition in the app market, filing a lawsuit in U.S. federal court. The suit centers around Samsung's Auto Blocker, a mobile security feature that Epic claims discourages users from downloading apps outside of Google's Play Store and Samsung's Galaxy Store. Epic argues this reduces consumer choice and violates U.S. antitrust laws by making it harder for users to access potentially cheaper apps from rival sources. Epic CEO Tim Sweeney said Google falsely positions itself as protecting users by blocking apps from “unknown sources,” despite previously distributing "Fortnite" itself.

Samsung, which introduced Auto Blocker in late 2023 as a security measure, denies the allegations and claims the feature is designed for user safety. The company stated that users can disable Auto Blocker if desired. Epic believes the feature undermines a U.S. court ruling in December 2023, which was expected to increase app availability from third-party sources. Epic plans to raise these concerns with EU regulators, citing Google's long-standing scrutiny over anticompetitive practices. This follows Epic's earlier legal battles with Google and Apple over high app store commissions, which led to "Fortnite" being temporarily banned from both platforms.

Epic Games accuses Samsung, Google of scheme to block app rivals | Reuters

Judge Colm F. Connolly recently criticized lawyers in a patent-funding investigation, suggesting they were not truly representing their client, Lori LaPray, a Texas paralegal who owns Backertop Licensing LLC. LaPray owes a $53,000 contempt fine for failing to appear in court, linked to Connolly's probe into patent-monetization firm IP Edge LLC. The judge maintained the fine but implied LaPray was a pawn in a larger scheme orchestrated by IP Edge and advised her to seek independent legal counsel. Connolly's actions are rare, with legal experts noting that questioning an attorney's loyalty to a client in open court could lead to wider scrutiny of their conduct.

The investigation focuses on whether IP Edge and related entities, like Mavexar LLC, have violated court disclosure requirements designed to ensure transparency about who benefits from patent litigation. Connolly has already sanctioned multiple attorneys involved in IP Edge cases and warned that reducing LaPray's fine would signal tolerance for deception. The judge has referred several cases to the Justice Department, reflecting his broader effort to address misconduct in patent litigation, which critics say often obscures the real parties behind lawsuits. Connolly's approach contrasts with other judges who may not prioritize uncovering the true interests in litigation, despite concerns over transparency.

Judge's Rare Rebuke of Lawyers Shakes Up Patent-Funding Probe

This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe