Supreme Court puts Obama's climate change plan on hold
Legal Business | 2016/02/10 07:50
A divided Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to halt enforcement of President Barack Obama's sweeping plan to address climate change until after legal challenges are resolved.

The surprising move is a blow to the administration and a victory for the coalition of 27 mostly Republican-led states and industry opponents that call the regulations "an unprecedented power grab." By temporarily freezing the rule the high court's order signals that opponents have made a strong argument against the plan. A federal appeals court last month refused to put it on hold.

The court's four liberal justices said they would have denied the request. The plan aims to stave off the worst predicted impacts of climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions at existing power plants by about one-third by 2030. Appellate arguments are set to begin June 2. The compliance period starts in 2022, but states must submit their plans to the Environmental Protection Administration by September or seek an extension.

Many states opposing the plan depend on economic activity tied to such fossil fuels as coal, oil and gas. They argued that power plants will have to spend billions of dollars to begin complying with a rule that may end up being overturned.

Implementation of the rules is considered essential to the United States meeting emissions-reduction targets in a global climate agreement signed in Paris last month. The Obama administration and environmental groups also say the plan will spur new clean-energy jobs.



High court rejects appeal over Homeland Security records
Legal Business | 2016/01/12 07:31
The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from a public interest group seeking to get internal records from the Department of Homeland Security about its protocol for shutting down wireless networks during emergencies.

The justices on Monday let stand an appeals court ruling that said the agency could refuse to release the documents under an exception to the Freedom of Information Act for disclosures that could endanger lives.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center argued that the appeals court construed the law too broadly so that the government could conceal any records by claiming they concern security measures.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said the agency didn't need to specify exactly whose life would be endangered.




Japan court says requiring same surname in marriage is legal
Legal Business | 2015/12/18 17:29
Japan's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that requiring married couples to have the same surname is constitutional, dealing a blow to a longtime effort for gender equality in choosing names.

The law does not say which partner must give up his or her name in marriage. In practice it has almost always been the woman who took the husband's name. Some women say that is unfair and feel as though their identity is lost.

In traditional marriage, one person, usually the woman, enters the household of the partner and is registered as a member of that household. Men are seen as more powerful in Japanese traditional culture. But as women increasingly have careers, some argue that changing surnames is confusing.

Some Japanese women continue to use their maiden name professionally, even after their surnames are legally changed following marriage. Some couples simply don't register their marriages.


Court papers: Witness ID'd man in playground shooting
Legal Business | 2015/12/03 06:10
A witness's statement and photo identification led to the arrest of a man accused in a playground shootout that wounded 17 people, court papers show.

Joseph "Moe" Allen, 32, faces 17 counts of attempted murder in the Nov. 22 gunfight at Bunny Friend Playground after a neighborhood parade. He's being held in lieu of $1.7 million bond on those charges, and without bond on a Texas warrant accusing him of violating probation.

Defense attorney Kevin Boshea did not immediately return a call and email Monday. Allen's mother, Deborah Allen, told NOLA.com ' The Times-Picayune Sunday night that her son was in Texas the night of the gunfight. Calls to her home on Monday got repeated busy signals.

Police are still trying to identify other people involved in the shooting. Allen's arrest was based on a witness who gave the "name and nickname of one of the many shooters ... in this mass shooting," and then identified Allen in a "six-pack photographic lineup" at the local police station, New Orleans police Detective Chad Cockerham said in a sworn statement.

Allen "was observed walking into Bunny Friend Playground and firing a semi-automatic handgun into the crowd," Cockerham said.

Cockerham described hearing a "barrage of gunfire erupt" at Bunny Friend Playground as police headed there to break up an "unauthorized party."

"They were met with chaos and panic of citizens running in numerous directions across the park as well as throughout the surrounding streets," he wrote, adding that "tires ... were spinning and screeching."

For Allen, the Texas warrant was issued Nov. 25, based on the New Orleans allegations, since travel outside of Texas would violate Allen's parole, said Jason Clark, a spokesman for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.




Ruling gives Sandusky back $4,900-a-month Penn State pension
Legal Business | 2015/11/17 05:36
The state must restore the $4,900-a-month pension of former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky that was taken away three years ago when he was sentenced to decades in prison on child molestation convictions, a court ordered Friday.

A Commonwealth Court panel ruled unanimously that the State Employees' Retirement Board wrongly concluded Sandusky was a Penn State employee when he committed the crimes that were the basis for the pension forfeiture.

"The board conflated the requirements that Mr. Sandusky engage in 'work relating to' PSU and that he engage in that work 'for' PSU," wrote Judge Dan Pellegrini. "Mr. Sandusky's performance of services that benefited PSU does not render him a PSU
employee."

Sandusky, 71, collected a $148,000 lump sum payment upon retirement in 1999 and began receiving monthly payments of $4,900.

The board stopped those payments in October 2012 on the day he was sentenced to 30 to 60 years in prison for sexually abusing 10 children. A jury found him guilty of 45 counts for offenses that ranged from grooming and fondling to violent sexual attacks. Some of the encounters happened inside university facilities.

The basis for the pension board's decision was a provision in the state Pension Forfeiture Act that applies to "crimes related to public office or public employment," and he was convicted of indecent assault and involuntary deviate sexual intercourse.

The judges said the board's characterization of Sandusky as a Penn State employee at the time those offenses occurred was erroneous because he did not maintain an employer-employee relationship with the university after 1999.

The judges ordered the board to pay back interest and reinstated the pension retroactively, granting him about three years of makeup payments.



Mississippi Supreme Court narrowly grants same-sex divorce
Legal Business | 2015/11/07 22:25
The Mississippi Supreme Court voted to allow a lesbian couple to seek a divorce, even as two justices questioned the U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage and suggested that landmark ruling has no constitutional basis.
 
The decision Thursday came after DeSoto County Chancery Judge Mitchell Lundy Jr. ruled in 2013 that the Mississippi Constitution and state law prevented him from granting a divorce to Lauren Czekala-Chatham and Dana Ann Melancon because the state didn't recognize same-sex marriage.

Czekala-Chatham appealed, and it was initially opposed by Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, a Democrat. However, Hood asked the court to allow the divorce after the June 26 ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court.

On Friday, same-sex couples will be in federal court seeking to overturn Mississippi's last-in-the-nation ban on adoption by gay couples.

In the Mississippi court's divorce ruling, five of nine justices said in a two-page order that because Hood had reversed his position, "we find no contested issues remain" and sent the case back to DeSoto County for further action.

Justices Leslie King and James Kitchens agreed with the outcome, but dissented, calling for the court to issue a full opinion. King and Kitchens called for Mississippi to overturn its ban on same-sex marriage and grant the divorce in February.

Czekala-Chatham and Melancon were married in San Francisco in 2008 and bought a house in Mississippi before separating in 2010. Czekala-Chatham said she hopes to soon be divorced from her wife, who now lives in Arkansas.



California appeals court rejects right-to-die lawsuit
Legal Business | 2015/11/02 05:13
A California appeals court on Thursday rejected a lawsuit by three terminally ill patients that sought to clear the way for doctors to prescribe fatal medication to them and others like them who want the option of taking their lives.

A state law that makes helping someone commit suicide a crime clearly applies to physicians who provide patients lethal drugs, a division of the Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled.

"We believe prescribing a lethal dose of drugs to a terminally ill patient with the knowledge the patient may use it to end his or her life goes beyond the mere giving of advice and encouragement and falls under the category of direct aiding and abetting," Associate Justice Alex McDonald wrote.

The ruling affirmed a lower court decision that dismissed the lawsuit. The lawsuit was brought against the state by Christy O'Donnell and two other terminally ill California residents.

O'Donnell suffers from Stage IV cancer of the left lung and was given less than six months to live in May when the lawsuit was filed.

California has since approved right-to-die legislation, though it will not likely go into effect in time to benefit the three patients, the appeals court acknowledged.

John Kappos, an attorney for the patients, said they are considering all options, including an appeal to the California Supreme Court.






[PREV] [1] ..[27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35].. [40] [NEXT]
All
Headline Legal News
Legal Topics
Legal Business
Attorney News
Court News
Court Watch
Areas of Focus
Legal Interview
Opinions
Justice Clarence Thomas calls Was..
Gardena Employment Law Defense Le..
Trump faces prospect of additiona..
Retrial of Harvey Weinstein unlik..
Trump hush money trial: Trump hel..
Supreme Court will weigh banning ..
Court questions obstruction charg..
Korean Air Pilot Benefits - Why K..
What to know about abortion in Ar..
Mexico breaks diplomatic ties wit..
Retired Supreme Court Justice Ant..
Pennsylvania’s mail-in ballot da..
Former Georgia insurance commissi..
Spanish court grants bail to Dani..
A Supreme Court ruling in a socia..
Prosecutors seek from 40 to 50 ye..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money trial..
Sen. Bob Menendez enters not guil..
Hong Kong court affirms landmark ..
Prosecutors Drop Charges During ..




St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Chicago Truck Drivers Lawyer
Chicago Workers' Comp Attorneys
www.krol-law.com
Raleigh, NC Business Lawyer
www.rothlawgroup.com
Bar Association Website Design
Bar Association Member Management
www.lawpromo.com
Sunnyvale, CA truck accident Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
Raleigh, NC Business Lawyer
www.rothlawgroup.com
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Web Design For Korean American Lawyers
Korean American Lawyer Website Design
romeoproduction.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
Family Lawyer Rockville Maryland
Rockville Divorce lawyer
familylawyersmd.com
   Legal Resource
Headline Legal News for You to Reach America's Best Legal Professionals. The latest legal news and information - Law Firm, Lawyer and Legal Professional news in the Media.
 
 
 
Copyright © ClickTheLaw.com. All Rights Reserved.The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Click The Law. as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. By using the www.clickthelaw.com you agree to be bound by these Terms & Conditions.

A LawPromo Web Design