DIRS.INFO The most relevant business & tech news

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. Nine individuals who sell firearms in upstate New York and a gun collectors association sued state officials in federal court to challenge a series of laws regulating purchases.

☆ Supreme Court Investigators Have Narrowed Leak Inquiry to Small Number of Suspects
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-13 | by ( Jess Bravin | Sadie Gurman | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

WASHINGTON—Supreme Court investigators probing the May leak of Justice Samuel Alito ’s draft opinion overruling Roe v. Wade have narrowed their inquiry to a small number of suspects including law clerks, but officials have yet to conclusively identify the alleged culprit, people familiar with the matter said. A day after the draft opinion was published last year by Politico, Chief Justice John Roberts assigned the Supreme Court’s marshal, Gail Curley , to investigate the leak. The court has released no information regarding the investigation since then. Little has emerged elsewhere, apart from a demand from investigators in June that justices’ law clerks sit for interviews and surrender their cellphones, prompting several of the three-dozen clerks serving in May to seek legal counsel.

☆ At least 1 law clerk is among a small group of suspects in Supreme Court investigation of abortion leak: report
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-13 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +3 min

Supreme Court officials have narrowed their abortion leak investigation to a small group of people, according to a WSJ report. A spokesperson for the Supreme Court did not immediately return Insider's request for comment. The unprecedented leak shattered Supreme Court norms, prompting outcry from several of the justices on both sides of the ideological spectrum. More recently, The New York Times reported in November on another alleged leak of a 2014 Supreme Court decision, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, a case concerning religious rights and reproductive health. Former anti-abortion leader Rob Schenck told The Times that he had gained advanced knowledge of the Supreme Court's decision weeks before it was released.

NEW YORK, Jan 11 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed New York to enforce a Democratic-backed gun control law adopted after the justices last year struck down the state's limits on carrying concealed handguns outside the home in a landmark ruling that expanded gun rights. Circuit Court of Appeals in December put that decision on hold while the state pursues an appeal. Wednesday's action may not be the last time the Supreme Court addresses New York's new gun law. New York state Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, praised the court's decision to keep the law in effect. Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law the Concealed Carry Improvement Act on July 1, a week after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling against a New York concealed carry permit restriction.

☆ Supreme Court allows New York gun law to remain in effect
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-11 | by ( Lawrence Hurley | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +2 min

Supporters of gun control and firearm safety measures hold a protest rally outside the US Supreme Court as the Court hears oral arguments in State Rifle and Pistol v. City of New York, NY, in Washington, DC, December 2, 2019. WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed a New York gun control law that was enacted in the wake of the high court's landmark ruling in June that dramatically expanded the right to bear arms outside the home to remain in effect while a legal challenge against it continues. The challenge was brought by Ivan Antonyuk and five other individuals who say they would like to carry firearms outside the home. Various gun owners have challenged provisions of the law, with three federal district courts ruling in favor of plaintiffs In each case, the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the law to remain in place in full pending appeals.

☆ How Anti-Abortion Activists Bought Access to the Supreme Court
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-07 | by ( Katherine Long | Jack Newsham | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +29 min

In exchange for as little as a few thousand dollars in contributions to the nonprofit, these people received easy access to events where Supreme Court justices would be. Supreme Court Historical society trustee Jay Sekulow, center, represented President Trump during the latter's impeachment trial in 2020. Anti-abortion advocates cheer in front of the Supreme Court after the decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores was announced in 2014. Alito did not respond to a request for comment on his involvement in the Supreme Court Historical Society. Supreme Court justices, though, aren't even required to stay within those weak guardrails because no code of ethics governs justices' behavior.

Sotomayor, who has dissented in major cases including the abortion decision as the court's 6-3 conservative majority has become increasingly assertive, described herself as "shell-shocked" and "deeply sad" after that term ended in June. The court's current term, which began in October, could be just as consequential as its previous one. In October, conservative Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the Dobbs opinion, warned against questioning the court's integrity. At Wednesday's conference, Chemerinsky noted that he had never before seen his law students so discouraged about the Supreme Court. Sotomayor, appointed to the court by Democratic former President Barack Obama in 2009, expressed optimism that the direction of the court will change in the future.

☆ Judges' safety is 'essential' to court system, Chief Justice John Roberts says
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-01 | by ( The Associated Press | ) www.nbcnews.com time to read: +4 min

Indeed, we judges frequently dissent — sometimes strongly — from our colleagues’ opinions, and we explain why in public writings about the cases before us,” Roberts wrote. Separately, in December, lawmakers passed legislation protecting the personal information of federal judges including their addresses. Davies’ decision followed the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education ruling that segregated schools were unconstitutional and rejected Arkansas Gov. Marshall, who argued Brown v. Board of Education, became the Supreme Court’s first Black justice in 1967. The Supreme Court is still grappling with complicated issues involving race.

☆ Judicial security focus of U.S. Chief Justice Roberts' annual report
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-31 | by ( Richard Cowan | Industry Insight | Saw Law Firms Move Past The Pandemic Into A More Client-Focused Service Environment | ) www.reuters.com time to read: +2 min

[1/2] Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts departs the Trump impeachment trial in Washington, U.S., January 29, 2020. REUTERS/Brendan McDermidWASHINGTON, Dec 31 (Reuters) - U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Saturday focused a year-end report on the judiciary on the need for stepped up security for federal judges, amid a surge in threats and as the United States is embroiled in a bitter debate over abortion. Roberts' nine-page annual report came just two weeks after the U.S. Congress approved legislation that aims to bolster security for Supreme Court justices and federal judges by allowing them to shield their personal information from being available online. "I want to thank the members of Congress who are attending to judicial security needs ... essential to run a system of courts," Roberts wrote in his 2022 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary. An armed California man was charged last June with attempted murder after being arrested near the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Both would be setbacks for the Biden administration. In another immigration-related case, the court has yet to rule on the Biden administration’s attempt to implement its immigration enforcement priorities. For Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, the administration’s top advocate at the court, arguing before such a conservative court is a constant uphill battle. The government similarly failed to convince the conservative majority not to expand gun rights in another major ruling issued that month. The Biden administration can point to some hard-fought victories.

☆ Gen Z is re-thinking college and career plans in post-Roe America: ‘I want to leave the country’
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-19 | by ( Morgan Smith | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +7 min

There is an endless list of factors students consider while choosing a college: size, cost, campus life, proximity to home. In post-Roe America, location has never been more important to prospective and current college students deciding where to pursue a degree or build their career. The 21-year-old, now a junior studying political science at the University of South Dakota, is the president of USD Students for Reproductive Rights. Lexi McKee-Hemenway and Kyshea Koehler at an event hosted by USD Students for Reproductive Rights. Harvard University freshmen rally in Harvard Yard on May 4, 2022 to defend abortion rights.

☆ Traditional Marriage Gets Some Respect
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-16 | by ( Daniel Frost | ) www.wsj.com time to read: +1 min

In the oral argument for Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), one exchange set off alarm bells among social conservatives. Justice Samuel Alito asked Solicitor General Donald Verrilli if the legalization of same-sex marriage could cause universities and colleges to lose their tax-exempt status if they didn’t recognize same-sex marriage—as Bob Jones University had for prohibiting interracial dating in the 1970s. Mr. Verrilli’s answer was ominous for institutions with traditional views on sex and marriage. “It is—it is going to be an issue.”Mr. Verrilli stumbled, but a simple one-word answer would’ve been enough: No. The hypothetical, which put opposition to interracial marriage on the same plane as opposition to same-sex marriage, was spurious.

Dec 15 (Reuters) - A New York appeals court on Thursday ruled that Yeshiva University must formally recognize an LGBTQ student group, rejecting the Jewish school's claims that doing so would violate its religious rights and values. The ruling by the Appellate Division in Manhattan marked the latest setback for the university in its fight to avoid recognizing Y.U. Pride Alliance, in a statement said the ruling affirmed that the school "cannot discriminate against its LGBTQ+ students by continuing its refusal to recognize the YU Pride Alliance." YU Pride Alliance agreed in September to hold off on forcing Yeshiva to recognize it while the school pursued its appeals after the school briefly halted all student club activities. read moreIt did so after the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision earlier that month declined to block the New York judge's June ruling requiring it to recognize the club.

☆ Tech groups ask Supreme Court to rule on hot-button Texas social media law
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-15 | by ( Brian Fung | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +3 min

Washington CNN —Two technology industry groups asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to review a hotly debated Texas law restricting social media platforms’ ability to moderate content, potentially opening the door to a sweeping reinterpretation of First Amendment precedent. The challenged state law, known as HB 20, would allow for lawsuits against tech companies accused of suppressing user posts or accounts. But Thursday’s petition brings the law back before the Court, this time for a possible ruling on the merits. That is why Texas’ law is unconstitutional, according to the trade organizations petitioning the Court on Thursday. Multiple Supreme Court justices have expressed interest in hearing cases that deal with content moderation, citing the enormous role that social media now plays in democratic discourse.

☆ Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh went to CPAC boss Matt Schlapp's holiday party, which Trump ally Stephen Miller and Rep. Matt Gaetz also attended: report
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-13 | by ( Rebecca Cohen | Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +2 min

Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh went to a holiday party at the home of Matt Schlapp Friday night. Schlapp is the chairman of the influential right-wing group Conservative Political Action Coalition. The appearance has sparked questions about possible conflicts of interest with a sitting Supreme Court justice attending a private party of right-wing leaders. Miller's conservative group, America First Legal, has filed briefs on cases that are pending before the Supreme Court, according to Bloomberg. Democratic lawmakers have introduced legislation to establish an enforceable code of conduct for the Supreme Court justices.

Alito authored that decision, called Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, and the Hobby Lobby one. Schenck said he was motivated to come forward out of fear Supreme Court staff could unfairly take the blame for this year's leak. Chief Justice John Roberts directed the Supreme Court's marshal to investigate the leak in the Dobbs case, calling it a "betrayal." Democratic lawmakers said Schenck's account underscored the need for legislation requiring the U.S. Supreme Court, which now has a 6-3 conservative majority, to adopt a code of ethics, which unlike lower-level federal courts the high court lacks. "I believe we pushed the boundaries of Christian ethics and compromised the high court's promise to administer equal justice," Schenck said.

REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File PhotoCompanies U.S. House of Representatives FollowWASHINGTON, Dec 8 (Reuters) - A pastor told a U.S congressional panel on Thursday he believed he pushed the boundaries of Christian ethics when he learned in advance of a landmark 2014 Supreme Court decision that exempted some companies from insuring employees for birth control. Prominent Democrats have called for increased oversight at the Supreme Court, which now has a 6-3 conservative majority that includes three appointees of Republican former President Donald Trump. U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts directed the Supreme Court's marshal to investigate the leak, calling it a "betrayal." Justice Alito, an intellectual hero for some conservatives, would later say the leak this year put him and his colleagues at risk of assassination. Schenck on Thursday said he was motivated to come forward out of fear that Supreme Court staff could unfairly take the blame for the Dobbs leak.

REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File PhotoWASHINGTON, Dec 8 (Reuters) - A U.S. House of Representatives committee will on Thursday hear the testimony of a former anti-abortion leader who has alleged he was told in advance about the outcome of a major 2014 Supreme Court ruling regarding contraceptives. Earlier this year, a majority opinion written by Alito and overturning the landmark 1973 Roe v Wade decision that had legalized abortion nationwide, was leaked to Politico. U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts directed the Supreme Court's marshal to investigate the leak, calling it a "betrayal." Justice Alito, an intellectual hero among some conservatives, would later say the leak this year put him and his colleagues at risk of assassination. Some Democrats have said the leaks show the Court needs more oversight and that the increasingly conservative body is susceptible to influence peddling.

☆ A Christian minister testified that he was involved in decades-long efforts to influence the Supreme Court: 'We pushed the boundaries of Christian ethics'
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-08 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +4 min

An evangelical Christian minister testified he was involved in an effort to influence Supreme Court justices' thinking. Robert Schenck told a congressional panel that he gained advance knowledge of a 2014 Supreme Court ruling. "I believe we pushed the boundaries of Christian ethics and comprised the high court's promise to administer equal justice," Schenck said. The allegations have prompted renewed calls from Democratic lawmakers for the Supreme Court justices to abide by an ethics code. "I don't believe a thing Mr. Schneck says," Paoletta, a former clerk for Justice Thomas, told the committee.

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.

☆ 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.

But first: The results from five counties will help tell us if Democrat Raphael Warnock is on track to win tonight’s Senate runoff in Georgia. Warnock got 56.9% of the vote in Cobb when he won the Jan. 2021 runoff, and he got just under that last November (56.8%). And in Gwinnett, Warnock got 60.6% of the vote in the 2021 runoff, compared with 58.9% last month against Walker. In rural Chattooga — one of NBC News’ “County to County” counties — Warnock got just 20.5% when he won the 2021 runoff, and he got less than that in the November general election (19.8%). Data Download: The number of the day is … $7.79 billionThat’s how much money was spent on political television, radio and digital ads this entire cycle (starting the day after the 2021 Georgia Senate runoff through today’s runoff), per AdImpact.

Under this doctrine, they contend that the U.S. Constitution gives state legislatures, and not other entities such as state courts, power over election rules and electoral district maps. The Republican lawmakers have argued that the state court unconstitutionally usurped the North Carolina General Assembly's authority to regulate federal elections. 'CONFUSION AND CHAOS'Jason Snead, a conservative elections expert who embraces the doctrine, said the North Carolina case gives the Supreme Court an opportunity to "shut down a lot of the confusion and chaos" occurring around elections. The North Carolina Supreme Court struck down the map on Feb. 4, finding the districts were crafted to dilute the "fundamental right to equal voting power" of Democrats. A lower state court then rejected a redrawn map by Republican lawmakers and adopted one devised by a bipartisan group of experts.

Search resuls for: "alito"

25 mentions found