|
|
|
U.S. Supreme Court blocks Wisconsin voter ID law
Attorney News |
2014/10/13 23:27
|
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday blocked Wisconsin from implementing a law requiring voters to present photo IDs, overturning a lower court decision that would have put the law in place for the November election.
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared the law constitutional on Monday. The American Civil Liberties Union followed that up the next day with an emergency request to the Supreme Court asking it to block the ruling.
On Thursday night, the U.S. Supreme Court did so, issuing a one-page order that vacated the appeals court ruling pending further proceedings. Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented, saying the application should have been denied because there was no indication that the 7th Circuit had demonstrably erred.
The voter photo identification law has been a political flashpoint since Republican legislators passed it in 2011. The GOP argues the mandate is a common sense step toward reducing election fraud. Democrats maintain no widespread fraud exists and that the law is really an attempt to keep Democratic constituents who may lack ID, such as the poor, minorities and the elderly, from voting.
The law was in effect for the February 2012 primary but subsequent legal challenges put it on hold and it hasn't been in place for any election since.
The ACLU and allied groups persuaded a federal judge in Milwaukee to declare the law unconstitutional in April.
Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen asked the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn the decision. A three-judge panel ruled last month that the state could implement the law while it considered the merits of the case, sparking outrage from the ACLU, its allies and Democrats who contended that state election officials couldn't re-implement the law in time for the Nov. 4 elections and that chaos would reign at the polls.
A flurry of legal jousting ensued. The ACLU asked the Supreme Court last week to take emergency action to block the appeals panel's decision. On Monday the 7th Circuit issued a full ruling declaring the law constitutional, a decision that was all but certain given the initial order allowing the state to move ahead, promoting the ACLU to follow Tuesday with another emergency request to the Supreme Court. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court-martial for Missouri drill sergeant resumes
Attorney News |
2014/09/29 20:10
|
The military court-martial of a Missouri sergeant accused of sexually assaulting eight female soldiers has resumed.
A verdict is expected Wednesday after a three-day trial for 30-year-old Army Staff Sgt. Angel M. Sanchez, who is accused of using his supervisory position with the 14th Military Police Brigade to threaten some of the women he was tasked with training.
Sanchez pleaded guilty to three charges at the outset of the military judicial hearing. His accusers said the incidents took place in the bathroom of the female barracks as well as in an office shared by drill sergeants.
Most of the allegations involved women at Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri, but some involved women in Afghanistan and Fort Richardson, Alaska. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
San Francisco Copyrights Lawyer - The Onu Law Firm
Attorney News |
2014/09/22 21:45
|
The Onu Law Firm can assist you in obtaining a copyright registration for your original work. We also provide advice and procurement services concerning US copyright matters such as searching, registration, licensing, policing and copyright enforcement.
The Onu Law firm will help you with license development and distribution agreements in order to maximize your copyright value. The Onu Law Firm has a firm grasp on copyright law: enforcement, protection and defense. With our experience, we will help prevent copyright infringement, defend you against infringement claims, and should the need arise, seek damages from infringement through litigation or settlement.
If you’re in need of our Copyright expertise, contact our San Francisco Copyrights Lawyers at the Onu Law Firm for assistance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Massachusetts Eviction Attorney – Law Office of Alan Segal
Attorney News |
2014/08/27 19:27
|
Landlord and Tenant relationships have a tendency to be complicated and challenging when it comes to Massachusetts Laws. Failure to properly notify tenants of late rent or other issues will result in the dismissal of an eviction case and the whole process must begin again. A Massachusetts Attorney must represent a Corporate Landlord as they cannot use an employee or agent in Eviction Proceedings.
The Massachusetts Eviction Attorneys at our firm have represented a number of Landlord and Tenants for many years. We’ve covered the entire State of Massachusetts and look forward to assisting you.
Massachusetts Eviction Process
November 8, 2004: Massachusetts Law providing important rights to tenants facing eviction/have been evicted has went into effect. A Massachusetts Eviction lawyer can help with most aspects of the Massachusetts eviction process.
Understand this law to ensure your property is protected and stored where you want it to be stored. The Massachusetts Law Reform Institute has created a booklet answering basic questions about the new eviction storage law. Learn more on how a Massachusetts eviction attorney can help you by visiting our evictions page.
Contact our Massachusetts Eviction Lawyers today for legal assistance with a Massachusetts Eviction Process. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court rulings add urgency to state exchange decisions
Attorney News |
2014/08/11 17:57
|
As states ready their health insurance exchanges for a second open enrollment season in November, many have more to worry about than the computer glitches that plagued them last year.
Last month’s federal appeals court ruling that said language in the Affordable Care Act allows only state-run exchanges to give consumers tax credits to help pay for policy premiums is spurring several states to solidify their state-based credentials.“Until now, it was inconsequential what you were called,” said Larry Levitt, vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation.
“All of a sudden, it may matter.”Only the District of Columbia and 14 states — California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington — have established state exchanges and are on firm legal ground, according the decision,
Halbig v. Burwell.Consumers in the remaining 36 states that use the federal exchange ultimately could be blocked from future premium subsidies if the U.S. Supreme Court sides with Obamacare opponents.
At stake is discounted insurance coverage for more than 7 million people and access to federal subsidies amounting to $36 billion in 2016, according to a study by the Urban Institute. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Firm & Attorney Directory |
| Law Firm PR News provides the most current career information of legal professionals and is the top source for law firms and attorneys. |
| Lawyer & Law Firm Directory |
|
|
Law Firm PR News RSS
