DIRS.INFO The most relevant business & tech news

☆ The Supreme Court allowed a transgender girl to continue playing sports, but a Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissent signals their willingness to review the hot-button issue
▼ + stars: | 2023-04-06 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +4 min

The Supreme Court allowed a transgender girl to continue playing on her school's girls track team. Yet two conservative justices — Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas — dissented from the decision, suggesting the court may soon wade into the Republican-led culture war over trans athletes. Her lawyers argued that the ban violated the Constitution's 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection, as well as Title IX, the 1972 federal law that prohibits sex-based discrimination. West Virginia then turned to the Supreme Court to lift that ruling. "Among other things, enforcement of the law at issue should not be forbidden by the federal courts without any explanation."

☆ Supreme Court justices privately said the abortion leak locked in their votes on overturning Roe v. Wade: report
▼ + stars: | 2023-03-23 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +3 min

Supreme Court justices privately revealed the leak locked their votes in on the abortion case. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the monumental case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, in December 2021. But on May 2, when Politico published a leaked draft opinion in the case, that debate stopped, Biskupic reported. Supreme Court investigators, after a months-long probe, failed to identify the source of the leak, according to report released in January. A Supreme Court public information officer did not respond to Insider's request for comment.

Jack Daniel's Properties Inc is owned by Louisville, Kentucky-based Brown-Forman Corp (BFb.N). "I'm concerned about the First Amendment implications of your position," conservative Justice Samuel Alito told an attorney for Jack Daniel's, referring to the constitutional provision enshrining free-speech protections. "Could any reasonable person think that Jack Daniel's had approved this use of the mark?" Jack Daniel's also contested a finding by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. "This is a standard commercial product," Kagan told a lawyer for VIP Products, Bennett Cooper.

☆ Biden's student loan forgiveness plan spurred these heated Supreme Court exchanges
▼ + stars: | 2023-03-02 | by ( Annie Nova | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +4 min

Justices on the bench hearing arguments about the student loan forgiveness program. Source: Bill HennessyThere were many tense moments Tuesday as the nine Supreme Court justices grilled the plaintiffs challenging the Biden administration's student loan forgiveness plan and the government attorney defending the policy. Six Republican-led states brought one lawsuit against the forgiveness plan, and conservative advocacy organization, the Job Creators Network Foundation, backed the second. Response to a 'once-in-a-century pandemic'The Heroes Act of 2003, which the Biden administration is using as its legal justification to carry out its student loan forgiveness program, authorizes the education secretary to "waive or modify" student loan programs during national emergencies to avoid borrower distress. Whether student loan forgiveness is 'fair'Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito became frustrated with Prelogar at one point, accusing her of not answering his question on the fairness of the forgiveness plan.

☆ The Supreme Court justices deciding whether to axe Biden's student loan relief program paid an average of $42,539 to go to college. Today, they'd have to pay around $320,531.
▼ + stars: | 2023-03-01 | by ( Sarah Al-Arshani | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +8 min

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments for Biden's student debt relief on Tuesday. The cost of getting an undergraduate degree was significantly cheaper when they graduated than now. When Roberts graduated in 1979, it cost $21,400; in 1992 when Jackson earned her undergraduate degree, it would have cost $75,360. When Roberts graduated in 1979, it cost $21,400; in 1992 when Jackson earned her undergraduate degree, it would have cost $75,360. Student loan borrowers gathered at the Supreme Court today to tell the court that student loan relief is legal on January 2, 2023.

☆ Supreme Court Signals Skepticism on Biden’s Effort to Forgive Student Debt
▼ + stars: | 2023-02-28 | by ( Jess Bravin | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

WASHINGTON—The Biden administration’s plan to forgive student loans held by 40 million Americans faced a skeptical Supreme Court Tuesday, with conservative justices at times incredulous that federal law allowing the education secretary to provide emergency relief to borrowers could be read to wipe $430 billion from the Treasury’s books. The administration apparently believes, said Justice Samuel Alito , that when it comes to handing out benefits, “a trillion dollars here, a trillion dollars there, doesn’t really make much difference to Congress,” adding that hardly seemed “very sensible.”

☆ How the Supreme Court could re-shape the internet as you know it
▼ + stars: | 2023-02-24 | by ( Brian Fung | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +11 min

Nearly 30 years of protectionsA view of the U.S. Supreme Court on February 21, 2023 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court isn't the only one reviewing Section 230; Congress and the White House have also proposed changes to the law, though legislation to update Section 230 has consistently stalled. For skeptics of the tech industry, and critics of social media platforms, more lawsuits would imply more opportunities to hold tech companies accountable. Allowing the courts to scrutinize the tech industry more would bring it in line with other industries, some have argued. Even a 'like' could trigger a lawsuitLiability could also extend to individual internet users.

The court in a 6-3 decision authored by liberal Justice Elena Kagan decided that because the rig supervisor, Michael Hewitt, was paid a daily rate of $963 and not a salary, an overtime pay exemption in federal wage law for highly paid workers did not apply to him. Circuit Court of Appeals that Helix must face Hewitt's 2017 lawsuit seeking overtime pay. A ruling favoring Hewitt would require companies to pay overtime premiums and invite a flood of lawsuits from highly paid workers, the groups added. That coupled with his management duties made him exempt from overtime pay, Kavanaugh said. Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch in a separate dissent said Helix's appeal should have been dismissed for procedural reasons.

☆ Supreme Court considers whether Twitter can be held liable for failing to remove terrorist content
▼ + stars: | 2023-02-22 | by ( Lauren Feiner | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +5 min

The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in a case that will help determine whether social media platforms can be held liable for aiding and abetting terrorism for failing to remove content and accounts promoting it. The case revolves around a specific international terrorist act, and contends that Twitter should be held accountable for not taking aggressive enough action against that content on its platform. Justice Elena Kagan at one point asked Waxman whether Twitter could be held liable if it actually didn't enforce any policy against terrorist content on its site. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked if it would be illegal to sell Osama bin Laden a phone without knowing it would be used for a terrorist specific terrorist act. Schnapper said it would not be necessary to prove the phone was used for a specific terrorist act, because it "aids the terrorist enterprise."

The Supreme Court for the first time in this case is scrutinizing the scope of a much-debated 1996 federal law called Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects internet companies from liability for content posted by their users. "These are not like the nine greatest experts on the internet," liberal Justice Elena Kagan said of the court's members, eliciting laughter in the courtroom. Kagan and conservative colleague Justice Brett Kavanaugh both suggested Congress might be better suited to adjust legal protections for internet companies if warranted. Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts questioned whether Section 230 should apply given that recommendations are provided by YouTube itself. President Joe Biden's administration urged the Supreme Court to revive the lawsuit by Nohemi Gonzalez's family.

☆ Supreme Court justices in Google case express hesitation about upending Section 230
▼ + stars: | 2023-02-21 | by ( Lauren Feiner | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +5 min

Supreme Court Justices voiced hesitation on Tuesday about upending a key legal shield that protects tech companies from liability for their users' posts, and for how the companies moderate messages on their sites. The current case was brought by the family of an American killed in a 2015 terrorist attack in Paris. Lower courts sided with Google, saying Section 230 protects the company from being held liable for third-party content posted on its service. Even conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, who has openly written that the court should take up a case around Section 230, seemed skeptical of the petitioners' line in the sand. Liberal Justice Elena Kagan suggested it's not necessary to agree completely with Google's assessment of the fallout from altering 230 to fear the potential consequences.

☆ Two Supreme Court cases this week could upend the entire internet
▼ + stars: | 2023-02-20 | by ( Brian Fung | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +7 min

Washington CNN —The Supreme Court is set to hear back-to-back oral arguments this week in two cases that could significantly reshape online speech and content moderation. The closely watched cases, known as Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh, carry significant stakes for the wider internet. Many Republican officials allege that Section 230 gives social media platforms a license to censor conservative viewpoints. In recent years, however, several Supreme Court justices have shown an active interest in Section 230, and have appeared to invite opportunities to hear cases related to the law. The Court last month delayed a decision on whether to hear those cases, asking instead for the Biden administration to submit its views.

☆ Judge suggests abortion might be protected by 13th Amendment despite Supreme Court ruling
▼ + stars: | 2023-02-06 | by ( Dan Mangan | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +2 min

A federal judge in Washington, D.C., on Monday suggested in a court order in a criminal case against a group of anti-abortion activists that the federal right to abortion — which was overturned last year by the Supreme Court — might still be protected by the Constitution's 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery. The 14th Amendment covers several rights, including citizenship rights and a prohibition against the government depriving "any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." The amendment's due process clause was a keystone of the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v. Wade that established the federal right to abortion. Kollar-Kotelly in her order, which was previously reported by Politico, wrote that the 13th Amendment "has received substantial attention among scholars and, briefly, in one federal Court of Appeals decision." A 1990 paper by a Northwestern University School of Law professor found that the 13th Amendment, with its prohibition against involuntary servitude, provides a textual basis for the right to abortion.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday belatedly issued the first ruling of its nine-month term that started in October, more than a month behind its normal schedule. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the court's first opinion, with the justices ruling unanimously against Navy veteran Adolfo Arellano in a technical dispute over disability benefits. The court dismissed a second case concerning the scope of attorney-client privilege without issuing a written ruling. With the court term running from October to June, the first opinions are usually released in November or December. Adam Feldman, who tracks Supreme Court statistics, found that this term is the first since 1917 that the court had not released a ruling by the beginning of December.

Five decades ago, Jim Ziglar witnessed the landmark Roe v. Wade decision take shape inside the Supreme Court chambers. Jim Ziglar, center left, clerked for Justice Harry Blackmun, center right, in 1972-1973, the session in which Blackmun wrote the landmark majority decision for Roe v. Wade. Blackmun, Frampton said, "really wanted to become an expert in the history of abortion and the history of abortion law." The Supreme Court clerks who served in the 1972-1973 session, in which the Roe v. Wade decision was handed down. Richard Hoffman and Rhesa Barksdale worked as clerks for Supreme Court Justice Byron White in the 1972-1973 session, in which White wrote the dissenting opinion in the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court justices spoke with the official in charge of the investigation into the leak of an unpublished draft of an opinion in a consequential abortion case, a court official confirmed Friday. Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley, who led the probe, said in a statement that she "spoke with each of the justices, several on multiple occasions." The justices "actively cooperated," Curley said, and after following up on all leads she concluded that neither the justices nor any spouses were implicated. "On this basis I did not believe that it was necessary to ask the justices to sign sworn affidavits," Curley added. The lack of signed affidavits suggests that the justices were not formally interviewed in the same way as court staff.

☆ Supreme Court Hasn’t Identified Who Leaked Draft of Opinion Overruling Roe v. Wade
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-20 | by ( Jess Bravin | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

The leak at the Supreme Court was an extraordinary breach of protocol at a court that tightly controls access to its deliberations. WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court said Thursday that a monthslong investigation has so far failed to identify who leaked in May the draft of the opinion overruling Roe v. Wade, the first public statement since Chief Justice John Roberts announced the probe a day after Justice Samuel Alito ’s draft opinion was published. “The team has to date been unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence,” the court’s unsigned statement said, using the legal term for the lowest standard of proof in a case.

☆ The Supreme Court's investigation raises questions about the justices' determination to find the abortion draft leaker
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-20 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +6 min

The Supreme Court could not determine who leaked a draft abortion ruling last May. Yet the 20-page report has raised concerns about the rigor of the court's investigation. "During the course of the investigation, I spoke with each of the Justices, several on multiple occasions," Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley, who conducted the investigation, said in a statement. An executive-branch investigation may have led to the justices speaking under oath, a line the Supreme Court marshal did not cross, according to her statement. The Supreme Court's marshal did not note any new leads in her report.

The report said investigators interviewed 97 court employees but was silent on whether the nine justices who sat on the court at the time of the leak were interviewed, prompting calls from Democratic lawmakers and others for clarity. "During the course of the investigation, I spoke with each of the justices, several on multiple occasions," Curley said in the statement, released by the court. "I followed up on all credible leads, none of which implicated the justices or their spouses," Curley added. Curley said on that basis she decided it was not necessary to ask the justices to sign sworn affidavits affirming they did not leak the draft, something court employees were required to do. Gabe Roth, executive director of the court reform group Fix the Court, said the fact that the report initially omitted the fact that the justices were interviewed "smells fishy."

☆ Supreme Court justices were questioned in probe of abortion ruling leak, investigator says
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-20 | by ( Dan Mangan | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +1 min

Anti-abortion demonstrators take part in the annual "March for Life" for the first time since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade abortion decision, in Washington, January 20, 2023. Each of the Supreme Court's justices was questioned — some of them multiple times — as part of an investigation into last year's leak of a draft opinion of the ruling that ended up overturning the court's landmark Roe v. Wade abortion decision, the head of that probe revealed Friday. The statement came a day after the Supreme Court refused to say whether the justices were among the nearly 100 court staffers and clerks who were questioned in the probe. None of the justices or their spouses were identified as potential suspects, according to Gail Curley, the marshal of the Supreme Court, who oversaw the leak probe. The June ruling tossed out the Supreme Court's five-decade-old decision in Roe v. Wade, which had established there was a constitutional right to abortion.

[1/2] U.S. Supreme Court police officers stand on the front steps of the Supreme Court building prior to the official investiture ceremony for the court's newest Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and the start of the court's 2022-2023 term in Washington, U.S. September 30, 2022. The report said the Supreme Court's information security environment was "built fundamentally on trust with limited safeguards to regulate and constrain access to very sensitive information." But it called the court's information security policies "outdated" and recommended that it overhaul its platform for handling case-related documents and remedy "inadequate safeguards" for tracking who prints and copies documents. The Supreme Court's IT systems operate separately from the rest of the federal judiciary. U.S. judiciary officials have said the systems used by federal appellate and district courts also are outdated and need modernization.

☆ Supreme Court Hasn’t Identified Who Leaked Draft Opinion in Abortion Case
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-19 | by ( Jess Bravin | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

The leak at the U.S. Supreme Court, while not necessarily unlawful, was an extraordinary breach of protocol at a court that tightly controls access to its deliberations. WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court said Thursday that a monthslong investigation has so far failed to identify who leaked in May the draft opinion overruling Roe v. Wade, the first public statement since Chief Justice John Roberts announced the probe a day after Justice Samuel Alito ’s draft opinion was published. “The team has to date been unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence,” the court’s unsigned statement said, using the legal term for the lowest standard of proof in a case.

☆ Supreme Court probe fails to find who leaked abortion ruling
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-19 | by ( Dan Mangan | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +2 min

Abortion rights demonstrators protest 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. An investigation into the leak of a bombshell Supreme Court ruling overturning the federal constitutional right to abortion — weeks before it was officially released — failed to identify the culprit, the court said Thursday. Investigators had interviewed nearly 100 Supreme Court employees in the probe, 82 of whom had access to electronic or hard copies of the draft opinion by conservative Justice Samuel Alito. In June, just as the leak report suggested, the Supreme Court in a majority opinion penned by Alito said there was no federal right to abortion. The opinion came in a case known as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which challenged Mississippi's restrictive abortion law.

[1/7] Abortion rights campaigners participate in a demonstration following the leaked Supreme Court opinion suggesting the possibility of overturning the Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision, in Washington, U.S., May 14, 2022. The report detailed an eight-month investigation conducted by Supreme Court marshal Gail Curley at the direction of Chief Justice John Roberts. The report did not identify a specific source of the leak, noting that none of the 97 court employees interviewed by investigators confessed to the disclosure. It was critical of some of the court's internal security protocols, and made clear that investigators would continue to pursue any new leads. "In time, continued investigation and analysis may produce additional leads that could identify the source of the disclosure," the report stated.

☆ Supreme Court again declines to block New York gun restrictions
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-18 | by ( ) www.nbcnews.com time to read: +3 min

The Supreme Court on Wednesday turned away a challenge by a group of firearms dealers in New York to numerous Democratic-backed measures adopted by the state last year regulating gun purchases that the businesses said hurt their businesses. Others were adopted in July after the Supreme Court the prior month struck down New York’s limits on carrying concealed handguns outside the home in a landmark ruling expanding gun rights. New York officials have said the new gun restrictions, which face numerous legal challenges in lower courts, are needed to protect public safety. The Supreme Court has broadened gun rights in three key rulings since 2008. Alito wrote that the New York law at issue “presents novel and serious questions” under the U.S. Constitution’s provisions on gun rights and free speech.

Search resuls for: "alito"

25 mentions found