News ReleasesFilter  

Firearms Outside the Home

Rutledge Denounces 9th Circuit’s Ruling Against Firearms Outside the Home

Thu, Jun 9, 2016

LITTLE ROCK – Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge disagreed with today’s decision from the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which essentially denies residents of San Diego County, California, the right of possession of a concealed handgun for self-defense outside the home.

“The idea that a State can completely ban or unfairly restrict the right of a law-abiding citizen to carry a concealed weapon ignores the written text and history of the Second Amendment and is unconstitutional,” said Attorney General Rutledge. “I believe states can create concealed carry permitting laws consistent with the Constitution, but such laws must be fair, even-handed and not unduly restrictive of the ability of citizens to actually obtain conceal and carry permits. San Diego County’s concealed carry permitting scheme amounts to a total or nearly total ban on concealed carry, which is why I joined an amicus brief in support of the gun owners in this case.”

Rutledge, along with 20 other states, filed an amicus brief in April 2015, challenging San Diego County’s effective prohibition of both open and concealed carry of firearms.

Rutledge and the other attorneys general said the Constitution clearly allows U.S. citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights to bear arms for lawful purposes, including for self-defense, both inside and outside the home.

Friar v. State of Arkansas

State Prevails in Friar v. State of Arkansas

Thu, Jun 9, 2016

LITTLE ROCK – The State of Arkansas today prevailed in Robert Friar v. State. Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge had presented the argument in this case in her hometown of Batesville as part of the Arkansas Supreme Court’s Appeals on Wheels program in April. Appeals on Wheels is a Supreme Court outreach program designed to educate students about their state government.

“As the State’s chief legal officer, I am pleased the State prevailed in this case and that Mr. Friar will remain behind bars for his heinous crimes,” said Attorney General Rutledge. “It was a tremendous opportunity for me to appear before the Arkansas Supreme Court and argue this case in my hometown. I want Arkansans to know that I am committed to protecting them from dangerous criminals and keeping those offenders locked away.”

Friar’s conviction was affirmed by Justices Courtney Goodson, Rhonda Wood, Robin Wynne and Karen Baker. Chief Justice Howard Brill and Justices Paul Danielson and Josephine Hart dissented.

Oral argument in this case was held at the University of Arkansas Community College at Batesville on April 28. Rutledge attended Southside Public Schools and was sworn in as an attorney by her father, then a circuit judge, Keith Rutledge, on Aug. 27, 2001, at the Independence County Courthouse in Batesville.

Meeting with CFPB Director
New and Dangerous Labor Rule

ICYMI: New and Dangerous Labor Rule Hurts Small Businesses

Wed, Jun 8, 2016

LITTLE ROCK – Today, an op-ed written by Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge appeared in the Washington Examiner, which explains why she has taken a leading role in fighting the Labor Department’s Persuader Advice Exemption Rule.

Claiming that it will be equitable for all parties even though it only applies to employer-side labor lawyers, and not union-side lawyers, the Labor Department released its Persuader Advice Exemption Rule. By ignoring more than 50 years of legal precedent, the Labor Department is thrusting a rule on businesses that is unlawful under the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, which has long preserved the confidentiality of attorney-client communications by exempting advice relating to labor relations issues from disclosure.

Small businesses, the job creators of our country, will be forced to disclose a great deal of sensitive information that is currently protected by the attorney-client relationship. The sanctity of an employer’s relationship with its legal counsel has, until now, been protected from disclosure regardless of which political party was in power. Preserving the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship benefits everyone – labor and management alike – and should not be a partisan issue. The Labor Department is quite simply putting the interests of labor unions before the common good and the need to grow jobs.

Under current law, an employer of any size must report when attorneys communicate directly with its employees. However, under this sweeping new rule, a business will have to file reports on any advice it receives from an attorney concerning efforts to influence its employees’ unionizing activities – triggering the disclosure requirement even if the attorney makes no contact with the employees.

In a February letter to the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, I raised this particular concern of small businesses because of the additional reporting requirement that applies specifically to outside counsel. Many large corporations employ in-house counsel and will be exempt from the new disclosure requirement. However, small businesses are less likely to employ in-house counsel; therefore, they would be required to report on confidential aspects of their relationship with outside attorneys, and failure to do so would result in serious penalties under the new rule.

While the Labor Department claims this rule will even the playing field and create more transparency, it actually jeopardizes the ability of employers to get the confidential legal advice needed to lawfully respond to such things as union bargaining, union elections and organizing campaigns. Job growth and economic development will be hindered at a time when we already have the lowest labor force participation rate in more than a generation.

What are job creators saying about this new rule? The National Retail Federation has called it “chilling.” The Associated Builders and Contractors fear it would discourage openness. And a senior counsel with the National Federation of Independent Business Legal Center concluded it would be next to impossible for lawyers to offer advice to business owners under the new rule.

Last month, I led a group of state attorneys general from across the country in filing a friend of the court brief in two federal cases, urging the courts to grant the plaintiffs’ motions for a preliminary injunction to stop the Labor Department’s new rule. And this month, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and I led a group of our colleagues in filing a motion to intervene in a Texas federal case challenging the rule. The American people would best be served by tabling this rule’s implementation until its full legality can be determined by a court of law.

As Arkansas’s chief legal officer, I will continue to work to protect Arkansans and all Americans from this harmful and unlawful rule. It’s time to put jobs, economic growth and small businesses’ ability to obtain attorney advice ahead of political posturing.

Disappointed in CFPB

Rutledge Disappointed in CFPB for Disregarding Her Request and Moving Forward with Controversial Rule

Thu, Jun 2, 2016

LITTLE ROCK – Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge expressed disappointment with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) for moving forward and proposing new federal standards for – and limitations on – credit lines, installment loans, deposit advances, automobile-title secured loans and payday loans. The CFPB disregarded Rutledge’s request to convene a conference of the states to discuss the potential impact and need for new federal regulations.

“By disregarding my request and the concerns raised by many others at the state and federal levels about sweeping federal standards that would govern small dollar lending, Director Richard Cordray has made it clear that he is not interested in cooperative federalism,” said Attorney General Rutledge. “This one-size-fits-all federal approach from an unaccountable bureaucrat and agency ignores the interests of the states and will negate reasonable policies that already exist to protect consumers while at the same time allowing the free market to function properly. My office will review this proposed rule from the CFPB and evaluate the best course of action.”

Rutledge noted in her letter last month that the potential rule would conflict with, constrict and otherwise unnecessarily interfere with existing state consumer protection laws, lending standards, licensing systems and regulatory enforcement mechanisms.

U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) said in a statement today, “When I asked Director Cordray to identify states he believes do not adequately protect consumers of small dollar lending, he declined to do so. He also ignored concerns raised by state leaders like Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge and Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller.”

Malvern Man Sentenced for Medicaid Fraud
Contact Us
Sign Up For Consumer Alerts