The supreme court put an end to five years of legal wrangling that landed the state's public school system with millions more dollars from the state and teachers with a pay raise.

The state's courts said the additional $548 million the legislature provided its schools this year is still not enough to ensure a constitutionally adequate education.

While the court said the state is moving in the right direction, it also said it doesn't feel comfortable closing a funding lawsuit and wants to make sure the state keeps up with the costs of inflation.

Kansas' highest court has declared that the state finally is spending enough money on its public schools under a new education funding law but refused to end a lawsuit filed nearly a decade ago because it wants to monitor future funding by the legislature.

In a case implicating the use of schools as voting locations as well as free speech in education, the justices said Minnesota went too far.

The justices agreed to decide whether the Eighth Amendment requires a trial court to find that a juvenile is permanently incorrigible before imposing a sentence of life without parole.

A group of Texas high school cheerleaders filed a petition with the state Supreme Court over an ongoing dispute about the display of banners with religious messages at high school football games.

The battle stems from Varsity Brands' efforts to gain copyright protection for the design of stripes, chevrons, zigzags, and color blocks that are on its uniforms.

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court sided with four iPhone owners who contend the company has been inflating the prices on the App Store. Current antitrust laws allow the plaintiffs to recover three times the amount of damages.

On the first week of its new term, the U.S. Supreme Court held two hours of intense arguments about whether the main federal job-discrimination law protects gay, lesbian, and transgender employees.

The justices hear arguments Nov. 12 on the Trump administration's effort to end deportation relief under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, in a case pitting the administration and GOP-leaning states against a host of education and advocacy groups.

The Colorado Supreme Court decided Douglas County's Choice Scholarship Program is unconstitutional.

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Apr 20, 2020 / 09:25 am (CNA).- On Friday, Brazil’s Federal Supreme Court will hold a virtual hearing to consider whether to decriminalize abortion for pregnant women infected with the Zika virus.

The legal intervention, called “Direct Action on Unconstitutionality-ADI 5581,” was filed with Brazil’s highest court by the National Association of Public Defenders. Supreme Court Justice Cármen Lúcia Antunes Rocha will present the legal action to the court, whose 11 members will have until April 30 to vote on the issue.

Several pro-life organizations have come out strongly against efforts to expand abortion, which is illegal in Brazil but is considered a “non-punishable crime” in cases of rape, a proven risk to life of the mother and, as of 2012, babies diagnosed with anencephaly.

“It’s a usurpation of powers because the Supreme Court does not have competency to rule on this matter,” said jurist José Miranda de Siqueira, president of the National Association of Citizens for Life. “This is a crime against the Federal Constitution of Brazil which in Article V guarantees the inviolability of the right to life.”

“We’re working with the Union of Catholic Jurists of Rio de Janeiro and will soon issue a strong statement on the issue,” continued Miranda, who is also a bioethics professor and authored a book on euthanasia, “O Poder sobre a Vida” (The Power over Life), which specifically addresses ADI 5581.

“Life is a preeminent right in the legal world. I’m asking people to pray and publicize this serious situation which is going on,” the lawyer added.

In an open letter to all Brazilians, the National Network for the Defense of Life and Family argued that the court challenge is “part of a strategy to introduce abortion in case of disabilities in general, or even abortion on demand, with the weak justification that the pregnant woman would be in a state of distress.”

“Eugenic abortion carries an enormous burden of prejudice and discrimination towards people with disabilities, sending an unseemly message that it would be better if they did not exist,” the pro-life organization added.

The Zika virus garnered international attention in 2015 after areas of Brazil noted a spike in cases of the birth defect microcephaly – a condition marked by abnormally small heads, brains, and developmental delays – following a recent outbreak of the virus in areas of northeastern Brazil.

Research on the virus suggested a link between Zika virus infection during pregnancy and severe neurological birth defects, including microcephaly and incomplete brain development.

A CitizenGo petition addressed to the Supreme Court justices called for the case to be removed from the docket and for the lives of the unborn to be respected. The petition was launched April 16. Within 24 hours, it had garnered 35,000 signatures and as of April 20 has 85,000.
 

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Apr 27, 2020 / 04:35 pm (CNA).- A majority of Brazil’s Supreme Federal Tribunal has voted against an intervention seeking to decriminalize abortion for expectant mothers diagnosed with the Zika virus.

The judges convened a virtual plenary session April 24 to hear arguments for and against the “Direct Action on Unconstitutionality-ADI 5581,” a legal intervention filed with the court by the National Association of Public Defenders.

While the court has until April 30 to vote on the matter, 7 of its 11 members have already voted in opposition, effectively rejecting the measure.

Abortion is illegal in Brazil but previous Supreme Court rulings have declared it a “non-punishable crime” in cases of rape, a proven risk to life of the mother and, as of 2012, babies diagnosed with anencephaly.

The Zika virus garnered international attention in 2015 after areas of Brazil noted a spike in cases of the birth defect microcephaly – a condition marked by abnormally small heads, brains, and developmental delays – following a recent outbreak of the virus in areas of northeastern Brazil.

Research on the virus suggested a link between Zika virus infection during pregnancy and severe neurological birth defects, including microcephaly and incomplete brain development.

However, some experts criticized what they described as technical and scientific flaws of the premise behind ADI 5581.
The Union of Catholic Jurists of Rio de Janeiro issued an official statement arguing that a causal relationship was never established between Zika virus and the microcephaly outbreak that occurred in Brazil.

Raphael Câmara, an obstetrician at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, said that when an attempt was made in 2016 to allow abortion in Zika cases, little was known about the virus.

“Since then, we have answers to many of the issues raised in ADI-5581 in support of allowing abortion,” Câmara said. “The first fact is that recent studies show that fetuses of infected mothers are affected only 5 to 14% of the time, with the majority having mild problems, as shown by research from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

“In addition, a study recently released by the CDC showed that 73% of Brazilian labs have a low accuracy rate for diagnosing the Zika virus, so the request is meaningless because we cannot talk about someone 'infected with Zika', but rather 'maybe infected by Zika.’ Is it based on this inaccuracy that we will kill fetuses?” the obstetrician continued.

Ahead of the Supreme Court ruling, pro-life groups in Brazil had spoken out against efforts to expand abortion in the country. A CitizenGo petition against the legal action drew more than 184,000 online signatures.

The Brazilian Bishops’ Conference had also opposed the attempt, calling on Catholics to defend life and oppose abortion. The conference wrote an open letter and also wrote privately to the Supreme Court, reiterating the duty to value the inviolable gift of life.

In 2017, the conference stated, “It does not belong to any public authority to selectively recognize the right to life or who will live or die. This discrimination is evil and exclusionary.”

 

This article was originally published by our sister agency, ACI Digital. It has been translated and adapted by CNA.

 

Penn State Law in University Park will host "A Take on the Term" with Sarah Harrington and Erin Murphy, beginning at 4:30 p.m. Thursday, March 5, in the Sutliff Auditorium of the Lewis Katz Building.

The Penn State Law in University Park Civil Rights Appellate Clinic recently filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court. Biel v. St. James, a religious liberty case that was granted certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a case from Montana, conservative justices suggested they were inclined to rule for parents who seek to reinstate a state tax credit funding scholarships for use at religious schools.

Governor Markell has ordered the American and Delaware flags lowered in honor of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

With the passing of former U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, President Trump has ordered U.S. flags at all government buildings and facilities be flown at half-staff the day of his interment, Tuesday, July 23rd as a mark of respect for the memory of Justice Stevens and to honor his service to our country. […]

DOVER – The Delaware Supreme Court, by decision dated Dec. 7, 2017 in the matter of Bridgeville Rifle & Pistol Club, LTD, overturned a Superior Court ruling and ended a ban on visitors’ possessing firearms in Delaware’s state parks and state forests. Pursuant to the ruling, visitors may now possess firearms unless they are prohibited by law due to a past conviction for a violent crime, active Protection from Abuse Order, or mental health commitment. Following the Court’s decision to invalidate the existing regulations limiting firearms in state parks and forests, and some Division of Fish & Wildlife properties, the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control and the Delaware Department of Agriculture (DDA) anticipate issuing interim firearm regulations. The interim regulations would respect the State Constitutional provisions on firearms cited by the Court, by implementing the State’s interest in ensuring the safety of the public in a less restrictive manner.

In its status report submitted earlier, the Centre had said that all the steps were being taken for the welfare and benefit of migrant workers.

Seeking setting aside of the orders, the exporter said that directing private establishments to compulsorily pay 100% wages during lockdown is “illegal, unconstitutional” and violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India.

Since 2009-10, the SMP has been replaced with fair and remunerative price (FRP) and some states like Uttar Pradesh continue to announce state-advised prices which are higher than FRPs.

The association also said hundreds of crores of unclaimed provident fund and employees state insurance corporation contribution lie in banks attracting interest.

However, the Bench refused to interfere in the matter after the petitioners informed the judges that they were not personally affected and had filed the PILs in public interest.

It is irrational to treat all private establishments alike irrespective of profit, loss, debt, or turnover, the petition said, adding that a blanket direction by MHA is akin to a tax without any statutory backing.

The plea which has been filed by the Pravasi Legal Cell has also requested the court to declare the action of the airlines not refunding the full amount illegal and violative of the Civil Aviation Requirement.

In 2010 recruitment of third gred teacher in Sanskrit Department of Rajasthan the rajasthan High court passed a order on 2 august to dismiss 3rd gred teachers after servicing more than 6 month in sanskrit dept.due to merit list changed by RPSC.This order challenged in supreme court & honorable bench of judge G S SINGHVI ,GOPAL GOWDA & C. NAGAPPaN passed stay order in september 2013 against high court`s dismiss order& issued notice .How Can i know what will happened the final decision of supreme court since it has been long time .

In a recent plea by Bar Council of India chairman to Chief Justice of India, it was advised against continuation of hearing via video-conferencing after the lockdown ends, to maintain judicial transparency. The Supreme Court in a press report has sai

Pakistan Supreme Court has passed an Order on 30th April to make amendments in the Gilgit Baltistan Order of 2018 to conduct the general assembly elections in that area.India has lodged a strong protest with Islamabad against these directions of the

The U.S Supreme Court's experiment in conducting oral arguments by teleconference this week - a change forced by the coronavirus pandemic - went rather smoothly right up until what sounded...

In recent years few, if any, lenders will have escaped the experience of borrowers challenging the enforceability of arrears administrations’ fees and regulators requesting that the level of such fees be justified, for example: credit card l...

The Supreme Court has ruled on what has been acknowledged as an issue of critical importance to the application of national planning policy, namely the proper interpretation of paragraph 49 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This requ...

In Edenred (UK Group) Ltd v (1) Her Majesty’s Treasury (2) Her Majesty’s Commissioners for Revenue and Customs (HMRC) (3) National Savings and Investments [2015] UKSC 45, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Edenred’s challenge ...

In Edenred (UK Group) Ltd v (1) Her Majesty’s Treasury (2) Her Majesty’s Commissioners for Revenue and Customs (3) National Savings and Investments [2015] UKSC 45, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Edenred’s challenge to Her ...

...

The Supreme Court has issued an important decision which considers whether land can be registered as a town or village green where that land has been acquired by a statutory undertaker and is held for purposes that are inconsistent with the use of t...

Summary: The Supreme Court handed down its long anticipated judgment in the case of Travellers Insurance Company Limited v XYZ [2019] UKSC 48 on 31 October 2019. The appellant, Travelers Insurance Company Limited (“Travelers”) was succes...

It has been reported that on 27 June 2019, the Supreme Court denied the Government’s request for permission to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision in the cases of McCloud and Sargeant regardi...

On 13 September 2017, EDF and ERDF lost their fight to declare null and void the contracts they entered into further to bids that were rigged by Nexans France (“Nexans”), Prysmian Energies Câbles et Systèmes (“Prysmian...

On 28 April 2020, the Russian President issued Decree No. 294 On Prolonging Measures To Ensure Sanitary and Epidemiological Wellbeing of the Population in the Russian Federation due to the Spread of the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19). The following da...

The Supreme Court’s decision in Zurich Insurance PLC UK Branch v International Energy Group Limited provides some clarity to the position of Clubs who face long-tail work related illness claims where multiple employers or insurers were involve...

Second Vice Chairman of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA), Monday Onyekachi Ubani has reacted to the Supreme Court’s nullification of the conviction of a former governor of Abia State, Orji Uzor Kalu. Also nullified was the judgement against his firm, Slok Nigeria Limited and Jones Udeogu, a former Director of Finance and Account of Abia […]

Supreme Court verdict on Orji Kalu right, sound – Monday Ubani