|
|
|
In Supreme Court loss, death penalty foes see an opening
Topics in Legal News |
2015/07/01 15:58
|
A strongly worded dissent in the U.S. Supreme Court's narrow decision this week upholding the use of an execution drug offered a glimmer of hope to death penalty opponents in what they considered otherwise a gloomy ruling. One advocate went so far Tuesday as to call it a blueprint for a fresh attack on the legality of capital punishment itself.
But even those who see Justice Stephen Breyer's dissent as a silver lining think it will take time to mount a viable challenge.
And Breyer's words don't change the fact that the Supreme Court has consistently upheld capital punishment for nearly four decades. The five justices forming the majority in Monday's decision made it clear they feel that states must somehow be able to carry out the death penalty.
In disagreeing with the 5-4 ruling that approved Oklahoma's use of an execution drug, Breyer, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, called it "highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment," which protects against cruel and unusual punishment.
"It was a sweeping and powerful dissent that issues an invitation that we should accept, which is to make the case for why today the death penalty itself is no longer constitutional," said Cassandra Stubbs, director of the Capital Punishment Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court won't hear Nevada patient dumping case
Court Watch |
2015/06/30 15:58
|
The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from Nevada over a lawsuit that claims the state wrongfully bused indigent psychiatric patients to San Francisco without paying the costs of their medical care.
The justices on Tuesday let stand a lower court decision that said California state courts have authority to hear the case challenging Nevada's discharge policies.
San Francisco is seeking $500,000 in reimbursement costs for treating 29 patients who were given vouchers for one-way bus tickets to California. It also wants an order barring Nevada from sending over any more patients.
A California Superior Court judge ruled that Nevada could be sued in California because it knew San Francisco would have to spend money on the patients.
Nevada claims the lawsuit interferes with its sovereign powers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US court agrees Apple violated antitrust law in e-book entry
Court Watch |
2015/06/28 15:58
|
Apple violated antitrust laws by colluding with publishers to raise electronic book prices when it entered a market in 2010 that had been dominated by Amazon.com, a federal appeals court said Tuesday. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan ruled 2-to-1 that a lower court judge was right to find Apple Inc. violated the laws to upset Amazon.com Inc.'s control of the market. The appeals court also agreed that U.S. District Judge Denise Cote was right to order injunctive relief to ensure the Cupertino, California-based company didn't commit additional violations of antitrust laws. An Apple lawyer said in an email that comment would be issued soon. Cote ruled against Apple after a civil trial in summer 2013. She ordered the technology giant to modify contracts with publishers to prevent price fixing and appointed a monitor to review the company's antitrust policies. The appeals court weeks ago upheld the appointment of the monitor. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court upholds key tool for fighting housing bias
Court News |
2015/06/25 09:04
|
The Supreme Court handed a surprising victory to the Obama administration and civil rights groups on Thursday when it upheld a key tool used for more than four decades to fight housing discrimination.
The justices ruled 5-4 that federal housing laws prohibit seemingly neutral practices that harm minorities, even without proof of intentional discrimination.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, often a swing vote, joined the court's four liberal members in upholding the use of so-called "disparate impact" cases.
The ruling is a win for housing advocates who argued that the housing law allows challenges to race-neutral policies that have a negative impact on minority groups. The Justice Department has used disparate impact lawsuits to win more than $500 million in legal settlements from companies accused of bias against black and Hispanic customers.
In upholding the tactic, the Supreme Court preserved a legal strategy that has been used for more than 40 years to attack discrimination in zoning laws, occupancy rules, mortgage lending practices and insurance underwriting. Every federal appeals court to consider it has upheld the practice, though the Supreme Court had never previously taken it up.
Writing for the majority, Kennedy said that language in the housing law banning discrimination "because of race" includes disparate impact cases. He said such lawsuits allow plaintiffs "to counteract unconscious prejudices and disguised animus that escape easy classification" under traditional legal theories.
"In this way disparate-impact liability may prevent segregated housing patterns that might otherwise result from covert and illicit stereotyping," Kennedy said.
Kennedy was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
French court rules police illegally targeted minorities
Topics in Legal News |
2015/06/24 09:03
|
A French appeals court ruled Wednesday that police carried out unjustified identity checks on five minority men, ordering the government to pay them damages in an unprecedented ruling that activists hope will help reduce widespread discrimination.
The collective case was the first of its kind in France, where anti-racism groups say non-whites are unfairly targeted by police. Gratuitous ID checks have long been cited as a prime reason for troubled relations between police and residents of poor suburbs.
Thirteen men, all of black or Arab origin, originally filed suit in the case. None of the 13 men has a police record, but each said he was victim of multiple, humiliating ID checks, widely known as "stop and frisk" and considered by police as an important crime-fighting tactic.
A lower court ruled in 2013 that police didn't overstep legal boundaries with the ID checks. The Paris appeals court overturned part of that ruling, saying Wednesday that the checks against five men were illegal, and ordered the state to pay 1,500 euros ($1,680) euros to each man.
Lawyers say they haven't yet decided whether to appeal the other eight cases.
While the sum of damages is small, the significance of the ruling could be broad.
Lawyer Slim Ben Achour said that with this precedent they now plan to multiply such suits around France. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Law Firm Web Design Information |
| Law Promo has worked with attorneys, lawyers and law firms all over the world in designing beautiful law firm websites that look great on all devices, from desktop computers to mobile phones. Law Promo can construct your law firm a brand new responsive law firm website, or help you redesign your existing site to secure your place in the mobile world. Solo Practice Law Firm Website Design |
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
