DIRS.INFO The most relevant business & tech news

☆ Supreme Court Rejects Voting Map That Diluted Black Voters’ Power
▼ + stars: | 2023-06-08 | by ( Adam Liptak | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

The Supreme Court, in a surprise decision, ruled that Alabama had diluted the power of Black voters by drawing a congressional voting map with a single district in which they made up a majority. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote the majority opinion in the 5-to-4 ruling. He was joined by Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh and the court’s three liberal members, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Voting rights advocates had feared the decision would undermine the Voting Rights Act, which instead appeared to emerge unscathed. It simply holds that a faithful application of our precedents and a fair reading of the record before us do not bear them out here.”

Persons: John G, Roberts, Brett M, Kavanaugh, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, ” Locations: Alabama

[1/2] U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas poses during a group portrait at the Supreme Court in Washington, U.S., October 7, 2022. REUTERS/Evelyn HocksteinWASHINGTON, June 7 (Reuters) - Conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, under scrutiny following revelations that he did not disclose luxury trips paid for by a billionaire Dallas businessman, has received an extension to file his mandatory annual financial disclosure, the court said on Wednesday. Some congressional Democrats have proposed imposing new ethics standards on the Supreme Court following reporting on conduct by some of the justices, in particular Thomas. Supreme Court justices are not bound like other federal judges by a code of conduct that includes avoidance even of the "appearance of impropriety." The three conservative justices appointed by former President Donald Trump drew additional income as law professors.

Persons: Clarence Thomas, Evelyn Hockstein WASHINGTON, Samuel Alito, Thomas, Harlan Crow, Crow, Frederick Douglass, Neil Gorsuch, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Jackson, Oprah Winfrey, Sonia Sotomayor, Sotomayor, John Roberts, Donald Trump, Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, George Mason University's Antonin Scalia, Amy Coney Barrett, Roberts, Andrew Chung, John Kruzel, Will Dunham Organizations: U.S, Supreme, REUTERS, Conservative U.S, Judicial Conference, Politico, Liberal, Vogue, Random, Charter Communications, Texas, University of Notre Dame Law School, Thomson Locations: Washington , U.S, Dallas, Crow, Colorado, New York, Washington

☆ Opinion | There Is One Group the Roberts Court Really Doesn’t Like
▼ + stars: | 2023-06-06 | by ( Jamelle Bouie | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +2 min

Glacier’s non-unionized workers were able to remove the concrete before the trucks were significantly damaged, but the company sued the Teamsters in state court anyway for damages relating to lost revenue from the wrecked concrete. The Washington State Supreme Court dismissed the suit on the grounds that the dispute was “pre-empted by the National Labor Relations Act.”The Supreme Court took Glacier’s appeal. Under Garmon, employers must first receive a favorable ruling from the National Labor Relations Board if they want to sue a union for striking in state court. Tossing Garmon would bring labor law much closer to its pre-N.L.R.A. “They are employees whose collective and peaceful decision to withhold their labor is protected by the N.L.R.A.

Persons: Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Ketanji Brown Jackson, ”, “ Organizations: Teamsters, Washington, Court, National Labor Relations, Washington State, National Labor Relations Board, “ Workers Locations: Washington, San Diego

☆ Opinion | The Supreme Court Has Earned a Little Contempt
▼ + stars: | 2023-06-02 | by ( Josh Chafetz | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +2 min

In justifying this doctrine, the justices have raised the specter of out-of-control bureaucrats intruding on the liberty of citizens, undermining legal stability, serving only special interests and invading the domain of the states. In other words, the justices are paternalistically claiming to protect Congress from itself. ***In all of these areas and in plenty more, the justices have seized for themselves an active role in governance. When Mr. Roberts recently refused to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee, nothing stopped Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan or Ketanji Brown Jackson from volunteering to testify, but they did not. Nothing is stopping them from publicly calling for a binding ethics code or from questioning not just the correctness but also the legitimacy of their institution’s assertiveness, but they have not.

Persons: Beau Baumann, Neil Gorsuch, Roberts, —, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson Organizations: Republican, Democratic, Committee

☆ Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the rare lone dissenter in a union strike ruling that involved drivers walking off the job with trucks full of wet concrete
▼ + stars: | 2023-06-02 | by ( Lauren Steussy | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +3 min

The Supreme Court struck down a ruling over what union members can reasonably do during a strike. A local teamsters union in Washington walked off the job in 2017 with trucks full of wet concrete. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only dissenter, saying the decision jeopardizes union rights. The solo dissent was a first for the outspoken Biden-appointed justice, who wrote that the ruling would "erode the right to strike." "Workers are not indentured servants, bound to continue laboring until any planned work stoppage would be as painless as possible for their master," Jackson wrote.

Persons: Ketanji Brown Jackson, —, Biden, Jackson, Amy Coney Barrett, Barrett, Clarence Thomas, Harlan Crow, Samuel Alito, haven't shied, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Andy Warhol, Kagan Organizations: teamsters, Service, Washington Supreme, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Teamsters, Workers, GOP Locations: Washington, Northwest

☆ In pointed dissent, Justice Kagan accuses fellow liberal Justice Sotomayor of hypocrisy in Warhol decision, says the court is 'trying too hard' and anti-artist ruling will 'stifle creativity' and 'mak
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-21 | by ( Katherine Tangalakis-Lippert | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +5 min

In her dissent against the 7-2 majority, Justice Kagan accused her colleagues of hypocrisy. Lynn Goldsmith's photograph of Prince; Andy Warhol's silkscreen print of Prince, featured on the cover of a Condé Nast magazine. Quoting the 1965 film "The Sound of Music," Kagan wrote: "'Nothing comes from nothing,' the dissent observes, 'nothing ever could.' "The majority claims not to be embarrassed by this embarrassing fact because the specific reference was to his Soup Cans, rather than his celebrity images," Kagan wrote. "It will stifle creativity of every sort," Kagan wrote.

☆ Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch calls COVID-19 response "the greatest intrusion on civil liberties in peacetime history"
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-20 | by ( Sarah Al-Arshani | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +2 min

In a statement, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch made it clear where he stands on the pandemic-era emergency response. The US Supreme Court last week rejected a push by Republican-led states to keep it in place. In an eight-page statement in response to the case, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch didn't mince words. He called the country's response to the COVID-19 emergency "the greatest intrusion on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country." In Thursday's statement, Gorsuch warned that the "concentration of power in the hands of so few" won't lead to "sound government."

☆ David Axelrod: After Barack Obama, America will never be the same
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-20 | by ( David Axelrod | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +7 min

David Axelrod, a CNN senior political commentator and host of “The Axe Files,” was a senior adviser to former President Barack Obama and chief strategist for the 2008 and 2012 Obama presidential campaigns. CNN —In all the years I worked for Barack Obama, I didn’t think enough about the burdens of being America’s first Black president – in part because he bore them so gracefully. The president asked me to chat with her and assess how she would hold up under the pressures of the confirmation process and that weighty history. Jacob Philadelphia, the son of a White House staff member, touches then- President Barack Obama's hair in the Oval Office of the White House. It was a moving, spontaneous scene captured by the splendid White House photographer Pete Souza.

☆ Ruling Against Warhol Shouldn’t Hurt Artists. But It Might.
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-19 | by ( Blake Gopnik | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

It turned out that what the majority actually had problems with — what the decision was mostly about — was the Warhol Foundation’s failure to pay Goldsmith a licensing fee in 2016. It looked like the court had sidestepped the larger issue of whether Warhol should have used her image at all. Or that’s what this new ruling would let some artists and their lawyers argue. At the very least, the ruling won’t send museums rushing to consign the appropriations they own to the dark depths of the vaults, as a more sweeping ruling against Warhol might have done. So long as appropriation artists aren’t selling licenses for their creations to be reproduced — for instance, in a popular magazine — the Supreme Court’s new decision should not affect them.

☆ Supreme Court Rules Against Andy Warhol in Copyright Case
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-18 | by ( Adam Liptak | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: 1 min

The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that Andy Warhol was not entitled to draw on a prominent photographer’s portrait of Prince for a series of images of the musician, limiting the scope of the fair-use defense to copyright infringement in the realm of visual art. The vote was 7 to 2. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the majority, said the photographer’s “original works, like those of other photographers, are entitled to copyright protection, even against famous artists.”In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., wrote that the decision “will stifle creativity of every sort.”“It will impede new art and music and literature,” she wrote. “It will thwart the expression of new ideas and the attainment of new knowledge. It will make our world poorer.”

☆ Supreme Court rules against Andy Warhol Foundation in copyright case over Prince photo
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-18 | by ( Dan Mangan | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +1 min

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled against the Andy Warhol Foundation in a copyright dispute over the use of a celebrity photographer's image of the musician Prince for artwork created by Warhol. Goldsmith had sued the Warhol Foundation for copyright infringement over its licensing of an image called "Orange Prince" to Conde Naste, the parent company of Vanity Fair magazine, in 2016. Orange Prince is one of 16 Warhol silkscreens based on her photo, which Goldsmith only became aware of in 2016. Although a federal district court rule in the Warhol Foundation's favor, that ruling was overturned by the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. "Lynn Goldsmith's original works, like those of other photographers, are entitled to copyright protection, even against famous artists," the court said in the majority opinion. "

☆ 2 Supreme Court justices failed to recuse themselves from cases involving their publisher after receiving exorbitant amounts in book advances and royalties
▼ + stars: | 2023-05-05 | by ( Madison Hall | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +3 min

On two occasions, the Supreme Court has declined to take on cases involving publishing conglomerate Penguin Random House. There have been two cases that came before the Supreme Court involving publishing conglomerate Penguin Random House. In both situations, the Supreme Court declined to take on the copyright infringement cases, allowing the publisher to win at a lower court level. Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch was confirmed in 2017 and was also a member of the Supreme Court during the second case. Sotomayor and Gorsuch had both signed major book deals with the publisher before the cases occurred, and both justices declined to recuse themselves from the cases involving Penguin Random House.

The Supreme Court ruled to uphold FDA approval of the abortion pill on Friday. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito publicly dissented, with Alito writing an opinion. The ruling did not specify how most of the justices voted, or even how many justices voted in favor. For part of his reasoning, Alito focused on the "shadow docket" itself. I thought you were against using the shadow docket and changing things in these ways,'" Lemieux said.

WASHINGTON, March 27 (Reuters) - Conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices on Monday appeared inclined to uphold a federal law that made it a crime to encourage illegal immigration, signaling agreement with President Joe Biden's administration that the measure does not violate constitutional free speech protections. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out Hansen's conviction for violating the provision, which bars inducing or encouraging noncitizens "to come to, enter or reside" in the United States illegally, including for financial gain. The 9th Circuit upheld Hansen's convictions on mail and wire fraud charges. The 9th Circuit decision applies in the group of western states over which it has jurisdiction including Arizona and California, which border Mexico. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction of a group of other states, also ruled against the law in a separate case.

[1/2] U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivers remarks during a discussion hosted by the Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 12, 2019. A rare meeting of the Supreme Court Bar, comprised of attorneys admitted to practice law before the court, featured speeches from people who worked closely with Ginsburg including U.S. Trump also appointed conservative Justices Neil Gorsuch in 2017 and Brett Kavanaugh in 2018. Appointed to the Supreme Court by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1993, she provided key votes in landmark rulings securing equal rights for women, expanding gay rights and safeguarding abortion rights. Ginsburg was the second woman ever named to the court, after Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

☆ Will student loan forgiveness pass the Supreme Court? Here's what we know so far
▼ + stars: | 2023-03-02 | by ( Kamaron Mcnair | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +7 min

WASHINGTON, DC - People rally in support of the Biden administration's student debt relief plan in front of the the U.S. Supreme Court on February 28, 2023 in Washington, DC. This week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments from both supporters and opponents of President Joe Biden's student debt forgiveness plan. Student loan borrowers have the most immediately at stake, but the high court's ruling and rationale could have bigger implications for the government. Nebraska solicitor general, James Campbell, who represented the state plaintiffs, responded that "the state speaks for MOHELA." Will student loan forgiveness pass?

☆ 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.

☆ Sonia Sotomayor pushes back on conservative SCOTUS justices who questioned the fairness of Biden's student-loan forgiveness plan, saying the US is 'not a society of unlimited resources'
▼ + stars: | 2023-03-01 | by ( Azmi Haroun | Ayelet Sheffey | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +4 min

SCOTUS Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned efforts to gut the Biden student-loan forgiveness plan Tuesday. Sotomayor was among a few justices pushing back on common GOP arguments on the "fairness" of the program. Sotomayor was joined by justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Amy Coney Barrett in scrutinizing the cases' standing to sue. Every law has people who encompass it or people outside it," Sotomayor said, adding that "that's not an issue of fairness. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the liberal justices in challenging the standing of both of the cases, but it would require the vote of an additional conservative justice to uphold Biden's debt relief 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.

☆ Biden's student-loan forgiveness plan is in jeopardy. Here are 4 major takeaways from the Supreme Court's oral arguments.
▼ + stars: | 2023-02-28 | by ( Ayelet Sheffey | Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +11 min

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments for Biden's student-debt relief on Tuesday. The nation's highest court heard more than four hours of oral arguments in two high-profile cases that reviewed Biden's plan to cancel up to $20,000 in debt for federal borrowers, which lower courts temporarily paused in November. "We're talking about half a trillion dollars and 43 million Americans," Chief Justice John Roberts said, referring to the estimated costs of Biden's plan and the number of affected borrowers. Justice Elena Kagan raised a hypothetical national emergency of an earthquake and the education secretary responded by deciding to cancel student loans for those harmed. Still, even if Barrett and the court's three liberals find that the states and borrowers lack standing, they would need another conservative vote to uphold Biden's debt relief.

People rally in support of the Biden administration's student debt relief plan in front of the the U.S. Supreme Court on February 28, 2023 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court began hearing arguments Tuesday morning in the first of two cases challenging the Biden administration's plan to forgive an estimated $400 billion or more in federal student loan debt for tens of millions of Americans. President Joe Biden unveiled the plan, which would wipe out up to $20,000 in loans for certain borrowers, last year. "Do you think Congress shouldn't be surprised when half a trillion dollars gets wiped off the books?" Under that doctrine, the Supreme Court has said previously said that Congress must approve a federal agency's action on an issue of major national significance.

☆ 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."

☆ Supreme Court rules 9-0 that bankruptcy filers can't avoid debt incurred by another's fraud
▼ + stars: | 2023-02-22 | by ( Dan Mangan | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +4 min

"Innocent people are sometimes held liable for fraud they did not personally commit, and, if they de-clare bankruptcy, [the bankruptcy code] bars discharge of that debt," Barrett wrote. The couple was unable to pay the award or other creditors and filed for protection under Chapter 7 of the bankruptcy code, which normally allows people to void all of their debts. . . false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud,'" Barrett wrote. A U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge ruled in his favor, saying "that neither David nor Kate Bartenwerfer could discharge their debt to Buckley," the opinion by Barrett noted. "Based on testimony from the parties, real-estate agents, and contractors, the court found that David had knowingly concealed the house's defects from Buckley," Barrett wrote.

The Justice Department, in a Feb. 7 filing, told the Supreme Court: "The anticipated end of the public health emergency on May 11, and the resulting expiration of the operative Title 42 order, would render this case moot." The Supreme Court in December left in place the Title 42 policy, granting in a 5-4 vote the request by Republican state attorneys general to put on hold U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan's November decision invalidating the emergency public health order. Title 42 was first implemented in March 2020 under Trump, a Republican, when the COVID-19 pandemic began. Biden, a Democrat, kept Title 42 in place after taking office in January 2021 despite fierce criticism from within his own party. Biden's administration sought to lift the policy after U.S. health authorities said last year it was no longer needed to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

WASHINGTON — Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the Supreme Court is not as divided as members of the public might think, praising his liberal colleagues and highlighting rulings in which the justices were not divided on ideological lines during a recent public appearance. Kavanaugh had special praise for the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the recently retired liberal Justice Stephen Breyer and Breyer’s successor, liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, saying she “has hit the ground running" and is "thoroughly prepared." Ginsburg and Breyer "couldn't have been better at welcoming me to the court," Kavanaugh said, referring to his nomination by then-President Donald Trump in 2018. Kavanaugh this week appeared eager to counter any perceptions that the court is usually divided on ideological lines, pointing out several cases in which he had joined liberal justices in 5-4 decisions. Statistics compiled for the SCOTUSblog legal website showed, however, that in the previous court term only 29 percent of the decisions were unanimous, lower than at any time in the past two decades.

Search resuls for: "Sonia Sotomayor"

25 mentions found