DIRS.INFO The most relevant business & tech news

☆ March for Life returns to DC with new post-Roe v. Wade focus
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-20 | by ( ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +5 min

Anti-abortion activists hold a banner as they walk in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building during the annual "March for Life", in Washington, January 21, 2022. One year ago, the annual March for Life protest against legal abortion took place in Washington amid a mood of undisguised triumph. With a fresh conservative majority on the Supreme Court, thousands of marchers braved bitterly cold weather to celebrate the seemingly inevitable fall of Roe v. Wade. Now, with the constitutional right to abortion no longer the rule of the land, the March for Life returns Friday with a new focus. Instead of concentrating their attention on the Supreme Court, the marchers plan to target the building directly across the street: the U.S. Capitol.

☆ Abortion opponents push post-Roe agenda at annual Washington march
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-20 | by ( Gabriella Borter | ) www.reuters.com time to read: +3 min

[1/2] Women's March activists hold signs outside the White House in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn the landmark Roe v Wade abortion decision in Washington, D.C., U.S., July 9, 2022. With that goal now accomplished after the U.S. Supreme Court threw out Roe's precedent and gutted federal abortion rights last June, the leaders of March For Life hope to galvanize support for state and federal legislation placing further limits on abortion. Michigan voters approved a state constitutional amendment last November to enshrine abortion rights. This year's national march will take place two days before Jan. 22, which would have been the 50th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision. Abortion rights advocates were marking the occasion by reflecting on the enormous disruption in reproductive healthcare that the United States has witnessed over the last year, and calling for more legislation to protect abortion rights at the state and national level.

Former President Donald Trump unleashed a slew of insults against writer E. Jean Carroll when he was deposed in her civil suit accusing him of rape, newly unsealed court filings show. During the lengthy deposition, Trump was asked about a post he wrote on Truth Social shortly before his testimony claiming that Carroll's story was "a hoax." Roberta Kaplan, Carroll's lawyer, then asked him about writing in the post that Carroll said Trump had "swooned her" inside the store. Didn’t she say that?” Trump continued, before indicating he was referring to Carroll's 2019 interview on CNN with Anderson Cooper. When Cooper said that most people think of rape as a violent assault, she responded, “Most people think of rape as sexy.

☆ South Carolina Supreme Court strikes down state abortion ban
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-06 | by ( The Associated Press | ) www.nbcnews.com time to read: +7 min

COLUMBIA, S.C. — The South Carolina Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a ban on abortion after six weeks, ruling the restriction enacted by the Deep South state violates a state constitutional right to privacy. With federal abortion protections gone, Planned Parenthood South Atlantic sued in July under the South Carolina constitution’s right to privacy. Currently, South Carolina bars most abortions at about 20 weeks beyond fertilization, or the gestational age of 22 weeks. In South Carolina, lawyers representing the state Legislature have argued the right to privacy should be interpreted narrowly. South Carolina Democratic House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford said any continuation of Republicans’ “war on women” is a deliberate waste of taxpayer dollars.

☆ South Carolina’s 6-Week Abortion Ban Ruled Unconstitutional
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-05 | by ( Jennifer Calfas | Laura Kusisto | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

The South Carolina court said laws limiting abortion access must allow enough time for women to determine whether they are pregnant and get an abortion. The South Carolina Supreme Court permanently blocked enforcement of the state’s ban on most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, ruling the 2021 law violated the right to privacy in the state constitution. In a 3-2 decision Thursday, the court ruled state constitutional protections for a person’s privacy included decisions about whether to get an abortion. The decision marks the first major victory for abortion-rights groups in a state high court since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, ending federal constitutional protections for the procedure.

The group of hard-line Republicans standing firm in opposing Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s bid for speaker has coalesced around an alternative: Rep. Byron Donalds, a conservative two-term lawmaker from Florida who is considered a rising star in the GOP but is still relatively unknown nationally. Donalds said the incident inspired him to change his life and eventually emerge from businessman to politician. In 2021, Donalds was denied membership in the Congressional Black Caucus and insisted it was because of his conservative views. Donalds’ wife, Erika Donalds, with whom he has three children, is also a conservative Republican and involved in state politics. Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., center right, speaks with a colleague in the House chamber at the U.S. Capitol, on Wednesday.

☆ South Carolina Supreme Court overturns state abortion ban
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-05 | by ( Dan Mangan | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +4 min

The decision by the South Carolina Supreme Court is based on the state's own constitution, which, unlike the U.S. Constitution, explicitly gives citizens a right to privacy. President Joe Biden's press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, in a tweet wrote: "We are encouraged by South Carolina's Supreme Court ruling today on the state's extreme and dangerous abortion ban." The South Carolina Supreme Court on Thursday overturned the state's ban on abortion after around six weeks of pregnancy, ruling that the law violated the state's constitutional right to privacy. South Carolina's abortion ban was again blocked in August, this time by the state Supreme Court, after a new lawsuit was filed seeking to invalidate it. The decision by the U.S. Supreme Court invalidating the federal right to abortion effectively left it up to individual states to regulate pregnancy terminations.

☆ South Carolina's top court strikes down six-week abortion ban
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-05 | by ( Gabriella Borter | ) www.reuters.com time to read: +1 min

Jan 5 (Reuters) - South Carolina's Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a state law banning abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy is unconstitutional because it violates a right to privacy, handing a major win to abortion rights supporters in the U.S. South. The 2021 law, which banned abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy and often before a woman knows she is pregnant, took effect after the U.S. Supreme Court in June eliminated the longstanding right to abortion that had been established by the 1973 Roe v. Wade case. Planned Parenthood challenged the law, and the state Supreme Court, comprised of five justices, blocked it in August pending a decision in the case. "We hold that our state constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman's decision to have an abortion," Justice Kaye Hearn wrote in the 3-2 opinion released on Thursday. The ruling will provide broader legal protections for abortion access in the Southern state, which is a neighbor to many states that have banned abortion in most cases since the overturn of Roe v. Wade.

They were victorious in all six states that featured ballot initiatives around abortion access this year. If approved, it would require a 60% threshold of support for future ballot measures to pass, as opposed to the current majority. Ballot initiative groups say that’s the point. Critics have alleged the measure amounts to a test run for a more comprehensive measure that would raise the threshold for all such constitutional ballot initiatives. “They’re trying to use ballot measures — to change ballot measures,” said Fields Figueredo of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center.

☆ Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dominated oral arguments and challenged conservative thinking in her first months on the Supreme Court, observers say
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-26 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +10 min

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has sat on the Supreme Court for a little more than two months. The Supreme Court of the United States on Thursday, Oct. 6, 2022 in Washington, DC. Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court during a formal group photograph at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. on Friday, Oct. 7, 2022. Some court observers say oral arguments can potentially be an opportunity for justices to sway their colleagues' thinking – though that doesn't happen often. During the three hours of oral arguments, Jackson frequently threw cold water on the idea.

☆ Six battleground states will hold the key to the White House in 2024
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-24 | by ( John L. Dorman | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +12 min

AP Photo/Andrew HarnikGeorgia2012 margin: Romney +7.8%2016 margin: Trump +5.1%2020 margin: Biden +0.2%For decades, Republicans could easily depend on the Peach State's electoral votes falling into their column. Two years later, Biden won the state by roughly 12,000 votes over Trump, followed by the dual 2021 runoff victories of Sens. AP Photo/Matt RourkePennsylvania2012 margin: Obama +5.4%2016 margin: Trump +0.7%2020 margin: Biden +1.2%Biden's hometown of Scranton is dear to his heart so Pennsylvania was always going to be a key state for the party in 2024. AP Photo/Andy Manis, FileWisconsin2012 margin: Obama +6.9%2016 margin: Trump +0.8%2020 margin: Biden +0.6%Wisconsin is one of the most politically-divided states in the country. But Trump flipped Wisconsin to the GOP in 2016, the first time it had supported a Republican presidential nominee since 1984.

Meanwhile, abortion-rights advocates and the ballot initiative groups they’re working with said preliminary efforts are also underway in Florida, Missouri and other states. Meanwhile, voters in two Democratic states, California and Vermont, chose to officially protect abortion rights in their constitutions. “Reproductive rights is a winning issue. The Dobbs decision had a huge impact,” said Chris Melody Fields Figueredo, the executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, which works with progressive organizations to help advance citizen-led ballot measures. “And what we know — that about a majority of Americans actually support reproductive rights and abortion access — means we have an incredible opportunity.”

☆ Trump lawyers argue that calling rape accuser E. Jean Carroll a liar doesn't defame her as a journalist
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-22 | by ( Michelle Mark | Jacob Shamsian | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +5 min

Former President Donald Trump has filed a motion to dismiss a second lawsuit from E. Jean Carroll. Trump's attorney argued he never defamed Carroll because he didn't disparage her professionally. Carroll previously sued Trump in 2019, alleging that the then-president defamed her by claiming she invented the rape allegations. Trump's court filing on Wednesday argued that Trump's October 12 statement didn't qualify as defamation because it doesn't disparage Carroll's "trade, business or profession." In response to Insider's request for comment, Carroll's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, said Carroll's team looks forward to going to trial in April 2023.

REUTERS/Carlo AllegriDec 21 (Reuters) - Donald Trump plans to argue that a New York law allowing a writer to sue the former U.S. president over claims that he raped her decades ago is unconstitutional, according to a court filing. Trump has denied Carroll's claim that he raped her in a dressing room in a Bergdorf Goodman department store 27 years ago. The former Elle magazine columnist is suing Trump for defamation and battery under New York's Adult Survivors Act. Carroll had sued Trump for defamation in 2019 for denying her allegations, and a trial is scheduled in that case for April. Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York; Editing by David GregorioOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[1/3] Anti-abortion demonstrators celebrate outside the United States Supreme Court as the court rules in the Dobbs v Women's Health Organization abortion case, overturning the landmark Roe v Wade abortion decision in Washington, U.S., June 24, 2022. REUTERS/Evelyn HocksteinDec 20 (Reuters) - Six months after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned its 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, the state of abortion rights around the country remains unsettled, thanks to a patchwork of lawsuits in state courts and emergency court orders. About half of all states are ultimately expected to adopt new abortion restrictions in the wake of the Supreme Court's June ruling on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health. The litigation has resulted in chaos for abortion providers and patients, according to people involved in the lawsuits and legal experts. In state after state, courts have issued emergency orders blocking the new bans while lawsuits unfold, only to be reversed weeks or even days later on appeal.

☆ DeSantis' latest education plan targets teachers' unions by ending automatic dues in favor of monthly mailed-in checks
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-19 | by ( Kimberly Leonard | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +6 min

DeSantis' latest so-called "Freedom Blueprint" proposal appears similar to a measure the Florida legislature considered in 2021 and 2022 that the state's largest teachers' union, the Florida Education Association, called "anti-freedom" and "anti-educator." Even Charlie Crist, a former congressman and DeSantis' failed 2022 challenger, picked Miami-Dade's teachers' union boss, Karla Hernández-Mats, as his running mate. State lawmakers and the governor gave teachers bonuses this past year and increased pay — though largely among new teachers, according to the Florida Education Association. DeSantis acknowledged during his speech that changes to union dues might emaciate the labor groups, but said if teachers aren't paying dues then they should be decertified. The last two versions of the anti-union died in committee under opposition from Florida AFL-CIO and the Florida Education Association.

In their appeal to the Supreme Court, the Republicans argued that North Carolina's top court usurped their authority by throwing out the map. In that context - a fight over counting ballots in Florida - Rehnquist said the U.S. Constitution limits the authority of state courts. "This court has never second-guessed state court interpretations of their own constitution," said Katyal. Thomas Wolf, an attorney at New York University School of Law's Brennan Center for Justice, said if the Supreme Court gives itself too much leeway to intervene in state court disputes, it risks appearing politically motivated and lawless. The Supreme Court's ruling is due by the end of June.

Another state court then replaced that map with one drawn by a bipartisan group of experts. Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts wondered whether such broadly worded provisions provide proper "standards and guidelines" for state courts to apply. The Republican lawmakers argued that the state court usurped the North Carolina General Assembly's authority under that provision to regulate federal elections. Justice Brett Kavanaugh emphasized the "historical practice" that "nearly all state constitutions regulate federal elections in some way." David Thompson, arguing for the North Carolina lawmakers, said the Constitution "requires state legislatures specifically to perform the federal function of prescribing regulations for federal elections.

The position of others including Chief Justice John Roberts was harder to read, raising the possibility of a ruling less broad than the Republican state lawmakers pursuing the appeal seek. The Republican lawmakers are asking the Supreme Court to embrace a once-marginal legal theory that has gained favor among some conservatives called the "independent state legislature" doctrine. The Republican lawmakers have argued that the state court unconstitutionally usurped the North Carolina General Assembly's authority to regulate federal elections. Thompson also argued that state constitutions cannot impose substantive limits on the actions of legislatures on federal elections. A lower state court subsequently rejected the legislature's redrawn map and adopted one drawn by a bipartisan group of experts.

The Supreme Court's eventual decision, due by the end of June, could apply to 2024 elections including the U.S. presidential race. The Republican lawmakers have argued that the state court unconstitutionally usurped the North Carolina General Assembly's authority to regulate federal elections. Kagan noted that in a series of cases over the years the Supreme Court expressed that state courts had a role to play in this area. A lower state court subsequently rejected the legislature's redrawn map and adopted a new map drawn by a bipartisan group of experts. The Supreme Court in March declined a Republican request to put those lower court actions on hold.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear a major case that could upend election law as the justices consider whether to reinstate Republican-drawn congressional districts in North Carolina. The case, which could have a broad impact on an array of election issues, is being closely watched for its potential impact on the 2024 presidential election. Republicans led by Tim Moore, the Republican speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, invoked the theory after the state Supreme Court in February struck down the congressional district map. Activists protest partisan gerrymandering at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. on Mar. Moore and other Republicans immediately asked the Supreme Court to reinstate the maps, saying the state court had overstepped its authority.

The Republicans are asking the Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, to embrace a once-marginal legal theory that has gained favor among some conservatives called the "independent state legislature" doctrine. The Supreme Court's eventual decision, due by the end of June, could apply to 2024 elections including the U.S. presidential race. The Republican lawmakers have argued that the state court unconstitutionally usurped the North Carolina General Assembly's authority to regulate federal elections. A lower state court subsequently rejected the legislature's redrawn map and adopted a new map drawn by a bipartisan group of experts. The Supreme Court in March declined a Republican request to put those lower court actions on hold.

☆ Supreme Court Weighs Blocking State Courts From Reviewing Congressional District Maps
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-07 | by ( Jess Bravin | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court on Wednesday considered stripping state courts of the power to review partisan gerrymanders for congressional districts, in a corollary to its 2019 decision foreclosing federal lawsuits over maps state lawmakers draw to entrench their party’s control of seats in the U.S. House. The case came from North Carolina, where the state Supreme Court applied free-elections and equal-protection provisions of the state constitution to invalidate a congressional map the Republican-controlled legislature drew in the expectation of producing GOP victories in 10 of the state’s 14 districts. The court-approved map used instead for November’s election resulted in seven seats apiece for Democrats and Republicans, roughly mirroring the state’s partisan makeup.

☆ The Supreme Court’s Elections Opening in Moore v. Harper
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-07 | by ( The Editorial Board | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

The Supreme Court’s argument Wednesday in Moore v. Harper is being called a case that will determine the fate of democracy. Or can state courts do it? The dispute in Moore v. Harper involves a House redistricting plan passed in 2021 by the North Carolina Legislature. That map was invalidated by the state Supreme Court, which said it was a partisan gerrymander and therefore prohibited under the state constitution. The North Carolina constitution says nary a word about partisan gerrymandering.

☆ Supreme Court justices grapple with a Republican challenge that could upend how elections are run: 'This is a theory with big consequences'
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-07 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +5 min

The Supreme Court heard three hours of oral arguments on a GOP-led challenge from North Carolina. Barrett said adopting the North Carolina Republicans' approach would mean judges would have "notoriously difficult lines to draw." The state supreme court ruled that the map was a partisan gerrymander that favored Republicans, deeming it a violation of the state constitution. Alito noted that in some places, like North Carolina, state supreme court judges are elected by voters. The Supreme Court is expected to hand down its decision in the case by June.

Search resuls for: "State Constitution"

25 mentions found