Add To Favorites
Supreme Court blocks some redrawn North Carolina districts
Law Firm News | 2018/02/05 19:13
The U.S. Supreme Court told North Carolina officials late Tuesday they must use some but not all of the state's legislative districts that other federal judges redrew for this year's elections.

The justices partially granted the request of Republican lawmakers who contend the House and Senate maps they voted for last summer were legal and didn't need to be altered.

A three-judge panel determined those GOP-approved boundaries contained racial bias left over from maps originally approved in 2011 and violated the state constitution. So the lower-court judges hired a special master who changed about two dozen districts in all. The judges approved them last month.

The Supreme Court's order means more than half of those districts redrawn by Stanford University law professor Nathaniel Persily will revert to their shapes from last summer. The order said House district changes made in the counties that include Charlotte and Raleigh because of state constitutional concerns are blocked while the full case is appealed, but changes made elsewhere to alleviate racial bias must be used.

The maps containing the partial changes will be used when candidate filing for all 170 General Assembly seats begins next Monday.

Boundaries approved by the General Assembly last August kept Republicans in a position to retain veto-proof majorities in the chambers, which has helped them advance their conservative-leaning agenda this decade. But Democrats are bolstered after successful elections in other states last year. Tuesday's ruling means Democrats could find it harder to win more House districts than they hoped.

Dozens of North Carolina voters originally were successful in overturning the 2011 districts as racial gerrymanders. They subsequently asked Chief Justice John Roberts, who receives appeals from the state, to allow the lower court's directive and require the changes approved by the three judges be used.

The Republicans' request was considered by the entire court and the order reflected division among the justices. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito would have agreed to block all of the changes to the maps approved by the lower-court panel. Yet Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor would have denied the GOP's request entirely, according to the order.



Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor to speak in Tuscaloosa
Law Firm News | 2017/08/17 23:40
U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor will speak at the University of Alabama law school next month.

Sotomayor will participate in a discussion with dean Mark Brandon and U.S. District Judge Harold Albritton III on Sept. 12. Brandon says in a statement the school is honored to have her.

Former President Barack Obama appointed Sotomayor to the court in 2009. The New York native served on federal district and circuit courts before that.

Alabama isn’t an Ivy League university, but it has had a lot of success in luring Supreme Court justices to speak at its law school. Eleven justices have spoken in Tuscaloosa since a lecture series began in 1996.



Missouri Supreme Court rejects request to stop execution
Law Firm News | 2017/08/15 13:07
The Missouri Supreme Court on Tuesday denied a motion from attorneys seeking to halt the execution of a man scheduled to die next week but did not explain its decision.

Attorneys for Marcellus Williams had asked the state Supreme Court and Gov. Eric Greitens to stop the punishment, citing DNA evidence that they say exonerates him. Williams, 48, is scheduled to die by injection Aug. 22 for fatally stabbing former St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Lisha Gayle in 1998 during a robbery at her University City home.

In a filing to the Missouri Supreme Court and a clemency request to the Republican governor, Williams' attorneys said testing conducted in December using techniques that were not available at the time of the killing shows DNA found on the knife matches an unknown man, but not Williams.

"That means in our mind the actual killer is not him," one of Williams' lawyers, Kent Gipson, told The Associated Press in a phone interview Tuesday ahead of the court's decision. "It certainly would give most reasonable people pause to say, 'Should you be executing somebody when you've got reasonable evidence suggesting another man did it?'"

After the ruling, Gipson told St. Louis Public Radio that he was surprised by the quick decision and planned to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Certainly something involving a claim of innocence that is this substantial, you would think they would at least write an opinion or at least a short opinion giving the reasons why they denied it," Gipson said, "because that makes it more difficult to take it up to a higher court because they don't know exactly on what basis the ruling was made."

Loree Anne Paradise, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Josh Hawley, said the office remains confident that Williams is guilty based on other evidence in the case. Greitens' spokesman, Parker Briden, declined comment, saying only that the claim will need further review.



Former Pakistan PM challenges disqualification by court
Law Firm News | 2017/08/13 13:07
ent Minister Mushahidullah Khan, who is in Sharif's party, said Tuesday that the former prime minister's lawyers filed three petitions to review the verdict.

The court disqualified Sharif after documents leaked from a Panama-based law firm showed that his family held previously undisclosed overseas assets. A five-judge panel last month disqualified Sharif, accusing him of concealing assets.

Last week Sharif held a series of rallies across the country, criticizing the court ruling and seeking to whip up popular support.

German court sends ECB challenge to European court

Germany's top court has declined to hear a series of challenges to the European Central Bank's bond-buying stimulus program, referring them instead to the European Court of Justice.

The dpa news agency reports Tuesday that those against the program claimed it constituted illegal budget financing and that Germany's central bank should not be participating.

The Federal Constitutional Court ruled that because the challenge was about European Union regulations, it was up to the European court to decide.

The ECB's 2.28 trillion euro ($2.7 trillion) bond-purchasing program is only due to run through 2017, raising the question of whether the case can be heard before the program has already ended.



[PREV] [1][2][3][4][5].. [21] [NEXT]








All
Legal News
Law Firm News
Attorney News
Headline Legal News
Lawyer Blog Post
Videos for Legal Insight
Legal Business
Court News
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Topics in Legal News
Press Release
Opinions
Legal Marketing
Politics & Legal
Law School News
Court leaves black judge on case aga..
Delay in Nevada gun buyer law draws ..
California parents face new charges ..
Pennsylvania congressional map battl..
Supreme Court sides with Chicago mus..
Supreme Court asked to review 'Makin..
Supreme Court: Dodd-Frank Whistleblo..
Catalan politicians in Spanish court..
Wisconsin Supreme Court primary will..
Kushner firm seeks court change to k..
Court: Ex-West Virginia judge inelig..
Court: Idaho nuclear waste documents..
Supreme Court blocks some redrawn No..
Court allows Pennsylvania to redraw ..
Suspect in U Penn student's murder d..
UN court: Nicaragua must pay Costa R..
Kenya's High Court orders government..
Court error unmasks person of intere..
Cambodian court again rejects bail f..
   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
Canton Criminal Lawyer
Canton DUI lawyer
www.cantoncriminalattorney.com
Bankruptcy Attorney Eugene
Eugene Bankruptcy Attorney
www.willamettevalleybankruptcy.com
Personal Injury Website Designs
www.webpromo.com
Oregon Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer Eugene. Family Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
  Facebook/lawfirmwebdesign
 
 
Disclaimer: The content contained on the web site has been prepared by legalmarketinginsight.com 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. Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. The Legal Marketing Firm is a specialized internet marketing agency that has been providing the legal community with internet legal marketing services. Small Law Firm Website Design by Legal Web Design That Works