Category:

Federal court backs voter ID law in North Carolina, reversing decision of lower court | Govt-and-politics

Republican lawmakers applauded the ruling Wednesday.

“Now that a federal appeals court has approved North Carolina’s voter ID law and constitutional amendment, they must be implemented for the next election cycle in our state,” N.C. House Speaker Tim Moore, a primary sponsor of the voter ID law, said in a statement on his website.

Senate Leader Phil Berger called Biggs an activist judge who he said overturned “the will of millions of North Carolinians who added a voter ID requirement to their own constitution.”

“I’m heartened by the Fourth Circuit’s unanimous decision in support of the basic principle of self-governance under the rule of law,” Berger said in a statement.

The court’s decision Wednesday does not mean the photo ID law can immediately be implemented. A preliminary injunction was issued in the state lawsuit, and trials will be held next year in both the federal and state lawsuits.

And the

Read More
Posted On :
Category:

Boston Municipal Court Judge Serge Georges Jr. would bring district court, property law background to Supreme Judicial Court, supporters say

If appointed to the state’s highest court, Boston Municipal Court Judge Serge Georges would bring expertise in real estate law, substance use disorders and the daily churn of the state’s district courts — a perspective Gov. Charlie Baker says is sorely needed at the top.

Loading...

Load Error

“This is a chance to put somebody who has presided over a drug court, who’s been deeply involved in the busiest district court in the Commonwealth of Mass. in a position where he can engage his colleagues in discussions about how their decisions affect the actual practice and delivery of justice every single day in the working courts across the commonwealth,” the Republican governor said Wednesday morning.

As the Governor’s Council heard remarks from and about Georges, they weighed not only whether the district court judge has the qualifications and character to serve on the Supreme Judicial Court, but whether the benefits outweigh

Read More
Posted On :
Category:

U.S. Supreme Court debates Louisiana split-jury law’s impact as it weighs applying it retroactively | Courts

Whether the verdicts rendered by non-unanimous juries are less accurate than ones built on consensus – and just what accuracy means with a racially discriminatory law – drew a spirited debate at the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday as the nine justices considered applying the court’s recent ban on split verdicts retroactively.

The justices, including famously mum Clarence Thomas and the court’s newest member, Louisiana native Amy Coney Barrett, were vocal as they wrestled with where jury unanimity fits in with previous rulings that the court has refused to make retroactive, such as with the right to race-neutral jury selection.

Some of the same six justices that agreed in April that divided juries are unconstitutional, declaring a Jim Crow-era anomaly of Louisiana law a mistake, cast doubt on the case for applying it to inmates who have exhausted their appeals.



U.S. Supreme Court to consider whether ban on split jury verdicts should be retroactive

About 1,500 Louisiana convictions hang in the balance

Read More
Posted On :
Category:

Supreme Court wrestles with non-unanimous juries case

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Supreme Court on Wednesday struggled with whether to require new trials for potentially thousands of prisoners who were convicted by non-unanimous juries before the court barred the practice earlier this year.

The high court ruled 6-3 in April that juries in state criminal trials must be unanimous to convict a defendant. Previously, Louisiana and Oregon as well as the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico had allowed divided votes to result in convictions. In striking down the practice, the court said Louisiana and Oregon had originally adopted their rules for racially discriminatory reasons. Now, juries everywhere must vote unanimously to convict.

But the Supreme Court‘s decision affected only future cases and cases in which the defendants were still appealing their convictions when the high court ruled. The question for the court now is whether the decision should be made retroactive. That would benefit prisoners convicted by non-unanimous

Read More
Posted On :
Category:

Court upholds North Carolina’s voter identification law

A federal appeals court Wednesday upheld North Carolina’s law requiring voters to present photo identification before casting ballots, even as it acknowledged the state’s “long and shameful history of race-based voter suppression.”

A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said North Carolina’s past practice does not indefinitely prevent the state from enacting new voting restrictions.

The panel said a lower-court judge had improperly considered the state’s “past conduct to bear so heavily on its later acts that it was virtually impossible for it to pass a voter-ID law that meets constitutional muster,” according to the opinion from Judge Julius N. Richardson, who was nominated by President Trump.

Richardson was joined by Judges A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr., also a Trump nominee, and Pamela A. Harris, a nominee of President Barack Obama.

[Court examines North Carolina’s new law that requires photo IDs for voting]

Read More
Posted On :
Category:

Appeals court gives OK to North Carolina voter-ID law

North Carolina can demand voters show a photo ID before being able to cast ballots at polling places, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday, rejecting a lower judge’s injunction that found the state legislature’s history of discrimination tainted any such attempt.

The ruling isn’t the final word on the state law, with legal battles still raging in both federal and state courts. But the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision is significant because it said state voters and lawmakers can’t be penalized for past actions.

In that, it marks a significant win for voter integrity advocates and a setback for Democrats, who are trying to remove ID requirements in states across the country.

North Carolina had been a key battleground in the fight, with state voters approving a constitutional amendment on ID and the legislature then passing a law to carry that out in 2018. An earlier ID requirement

Read More
Posted On :
Category:

The Supreme Court Is Ruling On an Anti-Hacking Law

The US Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday for a case that could change how the nation treats hacking and cybercrime.

The ruling will come sometime later this year or early next year, and it could be either way. Best case scenario: We’ll start being more fair to white-hat hackers who locate and warn of major security vulnerabilities. Worst case? Lying about your height on Tinder becomes a federal crime.

That’s right, the stakes are high on this one. Here’s what to know about the last 30-plus years of US hacking law.

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

Since 1986, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) has been the single biggest cybercrime law in the US. It’s widely considered outdated, as you might expect from a law about the internet that was passed just a year after the last season of Stranger Things was set.

Because it’s so old

Read More
Posted On :
Category:

Ohio Supreme Court disbars Columbus lawyer Jason Sarver for sexual affair

Randy Ludlow
 
| The Columbus Dispatch

Writing that his “pants are charred” from the volume of his lies, the Ohio Supreme Court disbarred a Columbus lawyer Wednesday for practicing law while suspended for having a sexual affair with a court-appointed client.

Jason Sarver’s law license was revoked by the court in a unanimous ruling, with Justice Patrick Fischer writing that Sarver manipulated vulnerable clients and violated their trust “to pursue his own objectives.”

Sarver was convicted of misdemeanor charges and received a suspended 180-day jail sentence in Hocking County in 2016 related to engaging in sex with a woman he was appointed to represent in court. He originally was charged with sexual battery, but maintained the affair was consensual.

The Ohio Supreme Court suspended him for two years, with 18 months stayed, on Nov. 28, 2018, for violating lawyer conduct rules by engaging in a sexual affair with a client.

Read More
Posted On :
Category:

Court rules famous marriage vows mean nothing i

Justice Janet Mulwa held the court had no powers to force a broken marriage to hold together merely because the couple exchanged vows

– The judge said the famous marriage vows were not meant to enslave one and subject him or her to a torturous life

– A magistrate court had dismissed the petition on grounds that the couple had vowed to stay together for better, for worse, unless the marriage turned irretrievably broken

A High Court judge has ruled marriage vows do not hold water when a dispute or divorce case is filed before a court of law.

For better, for worse: Court rules famous marriage vows mean nothing in law

Justice Janet Mulwa. Photo: Daily Nation.
Source: UGC

Justice Janet Mulwa who delivered the ruling on Monday, November 31, said a court of law has no powers to force a broken marriage to hold together merely because the couple exchanged vows.

While bringing to a closure a divorce case of a

Read More
Posted On :