Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Against Kiryas Joel

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit by Kiryas Joel dissidents accusing community leaders of discrimination and arguing that the village is an unconstitutional “theocracy” that should be dissolved.

Judge dismisses suit that sought to dissolve Kiryas Joel
By Chris Mckenna • Times Herald-Record

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit by Kiryas Joel dissidents accusing community leaders of discrimination and arguing that the village is an unconstitutional “theocracy” that should be dissolved.

Civil-rights attorney Michael Sussman brought the case this year on behalf of residents who claim that secular and religious authority are closely entwined in Kiryas Joel and that village officials discriminate against them because of a split in the Satmar Hasidic movement over leadership.

In a decision signed Monday, Judge Jed Rakoff rejected the patchwork of claims, concluding that some had already been addressed in previous cases and that others were lacking because the alleged victims weren’t parties to the case.

Among other things, the plaintiffs had accused the village’s public safety force of acting as enforcers for the community’s main congregation and failing to protect dissidents when they were menaced by young supporters of Grand Rebbe Aaron Teitelbaum.

Here is the judge's ruling as a PDF file:

Download Kiryas Joel Village Decision 11-28-11

[Hat Tip: Burich.]

Comments

[Aron Rottenberg]

now that i see Michael Sussman lost Kiryas Joel court by josef waldman, my feeling is he will also loose court against New Square village by Aron Rottenberg.

See Video of when Case of Kiryas Joel & New Square were filed Press Confrence:

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnrW97kw1h0

[seymour]

I wonder can I put a sighn on my block

in keeping with our values in our community one cannot wear fur even a stremel when walking in our community

I wonder how KJ would feel and would they comply?

[p]

Surprise, surprise!

At least some lawyers made some money!

[chussid]

Shamarya misses the main story here. Judge Rakoff delivered a stunning defeat to Obama and his SEC today just as he handed a lopsided victory to Aron Teitelbaum. Standing?? They can go daven somewhere else?! Res judicata? I mean, really, someone has stuck his finger in the political wind and decided that Aron is a better bet than Barack!

[WoolSilkCotton]

Chussid, you need to get your news and analysis from somewhere other than Faux News or Rush Limbaugh.

Sounds to me like the judge wanted to stick it to Citi, and so he echoed Obama and Occupy Wall Street, i.e. the Big Banks are screwing America.

And in case you totally just landed from Mars, the fact is that siding with the frumma in the KY case was also a very 'left wing liberal' thing to do.

[chussid]

Obama wanted a quick settlement and has pressured the SEC, where he appoints the people, to pursue one. It was an interesting juxtaposition. Don't watch Fox News, sorry!

[Bugsy]

Horrible decision

[Proton Soup]

i think i heard about the Citi decision on NPR. apparently, the judge has been asked to go along with the SEC before, but is having doubts about SEC effectiveness given the current economic SNAFU. maybe he's even having concerns about his own future or legacy here.

i can't really figure out where Obama stands on financial enforcement. it does seem they've been quietly going after some things like americans hiding income in overseas accounts. and campaign donations from wall street are reportedly down. but at the same time, the bailouts are just obscene. any chance this could be a case of picking winners and losers? probably they'll never go after goldman, considering chelsea clinton married a goldman boy.

[Wigmore]

I don't agree with Rakoff particularly in his analysis of Lemon and hope the Second Circuit will set things right.

Nevertheless, based on his opinion, it looks like a less than first class piece of lawyering on the part of plaintiffs' counsel

[MarkfromShortHills]

I do not like this result, but the Court's dispassionate analysis is excellent, as usual. Rakoff is a credit to our judiciary.

[rebitzman]

Think we have to accept that the judge ruled based on the facts, and seemed rather decisive. You have to prove discrimination - not just allege that it is taking place.

This appears that it was a civil suit - standard of proof is just a preponderance of evidence - it they couldn't meet that standard...........

[Adam Neira]

I trust Judge Jed Rakoff has made the right decision.

[Just Sayin]

Yes you have to prove discrimination, however it is a theocracy, one that is governed completely so, actually it is a cult, one that completely takes advantage of the welfare system, does not pay school tax, and tries to get as much as it can for nothing, soaking us dry, I say dissolve it, I live right there and am sick of them!

Yes my sign goes up "in keeping with our values in our community one cannot wear fur even a stremel when walking in our community"