{"id":129205,"date":"2025-08-01T11:47:43","date_gmt":"2025-08-01T19:47:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/?p=129205"},"modified":"2025-08-01T11:47:43","modified_gmt":"2025-08-01T19:47:43","slug":"appeals-court-voids-nys-1000-fine-against-judges-who-deny-habeas-writs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/08\/01\/appeals-court-voids-nys-1000-fine-against-judges-who-deny-habeas-writs\/","title":{"rendered":"Appeals Court Voids NY&#8217;s $1,000 Fine Against Judges Who Deny Habeas Writs"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Second Judicial Department of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York said that the law\u2014Section 7003(c) of the Civil Practice Law and Rules\u2014violated the separation of powers, by incentivizing judges to decide one way while considering petitions for writs of habeas corpus.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" align=\"left\" border=\"0\" height=\"1\" width=\"1\" alt=\"\" hspace=\"0\" src=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/~\/i\/922561193\/0\/law\/legal-news\" title=\"\"><\/p>\n<div><a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/2\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/fbshare20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/28\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/fblike20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/29\/922561193\/law\/legal-news%2Chttps%3A%2F%2Fimages.law.com%2Fnewyorklawjournal%2Fcontrib%2Fcontent%2Fuploads%2Fsites%2F382%2F2023%2F09%2Fny_second_dept2.jpg?ssl=1\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/pinterest20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/12\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/stumble20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/24\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/x.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/20\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/rss20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0<\/div>\n<p>The Second Judicial Department of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York said that the law\u2014Section 7003(c) of the Civil Practice Law and Rules\u2014violated the separation of powers, by incentivizing judges to decide one way while considering petitions for writs of habeas corpus.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" align=\"left\" border=\"0\" height=\"1\" width=\"1\" alt=\"\" hspace=\"0\" src=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/~\/i\/922561193\/0\/law\/legal-news\" title=\"\"><\/p>\n<div><a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/2\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/fbshare20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/28\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/fblike20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/29\/922561193\/law\/legal-news%2Chttps%3A%2F%2Fimages.law.com%2Fnewyorklawjournal%2Fcontrib%2Fcontent%2Fuploads%2Fsites%2F382%2F2023%2F09%2Fny_second_dept2.jpg?ssl=1\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/pinterest20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/12\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/stumble20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/24\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/x.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/feeds.feedblitz.com\/_\/20\/922561193\/law\/legal-news\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" target=\"_blank\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" width=\"1080\" decoding=\"async\" height=\"20\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/assets.feedblitz.com\/i\/rss20.png?fit=1080%2C20&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" title=\"\"><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Second Judicial Department of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York said that the law\u2014Section 7003(c) of the Civil Practice Law and Rules\u2014violated the separation of powers, by incentivizing judges to decide one way while considering petitions for writs of habeas corpus. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Second Judicial Department of the Appellate Division [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":129206,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-129205","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-law-com"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/legal-news-zUVLdw.jpg?fit=620%2C372&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129205","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=129205"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129205\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":129213,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129205\/revisions\/129213"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/129206"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=129205"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=129205"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=129205"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}