|
|
|
Bangladesh Supreme Court removes Lady Justice statue
Lawyer Blogs |
2017/05/25 10:11
|
A statue depicting the Greek goddess of justice was removed from the front side of Bangladesh's Supreme Court building early on Friday following pressure from religious groups that termed it “un-Islamic,” according to local media and the attorney general.
The controversy over the Lady Justice statue had been brewing for several months, with many religious groups staunchly opposed to its installation.
Even Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina stepped into the controversy, who to the surprise of all, had backed the move to remove the statue.
Only policemen were allowed to enter the court premises when it was being moved.
Attorney General Mahbube Alam told Anadolu Agency the statue had been moved to another place within the court premises. “I heard the decision came from the full court to remove it from the present place and to replace it somewhere else in the court premise,” he said.
Hefazat-e-Islam and Bangladesh Olama League were among the Islamic groups who had been demanding the statue’s removal since it was installed in December 2016.
Hefazat-e-Islam leaders met Hasina on April 11 demanding the removal of the statue of Greek goddess Themis, who is depicted blindfolded with a sword in one hand and the balanced scales of justice on the other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico seeks court's help to save public pension system
Headline Legal News |
2017/05/22 16:30
|
Puerto Rico's governor says he'll ask a court to restructure the debts of the U.S. territory's public pension system, which is projected to run out of money this year.
Gov. Ricardo Rossello says the government has been unable to reach a deal with creditors to whom it owes some $3 billion.
Rossello said late Sunday that retired workers will still receive their pensions. He says the government will dip into its general fund once the pension system itself runs out of money. The pension system is underfunded by some $50 billion.
The previous administration already had trimmed benefits and a federal control board overseeing the island's finances is seeking more cuts. It says the system will switch to pay-as-you-go funding. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court strikes down 2 NC congressional districts
Court Line News |
2017/05/22 16:30
|
The Supreme Court struck down two congressional districts in North Carolina Monday because race played too large a role in their creation.
The justices ruled that Republicans who controlled the state legislature and governor's office in 2011 placed too many African-Americans in the two districts. The result was to weaken African-American voting strength elsewhere in North Carolina.
Both districts have since been redrawn and the state conducted elections under the new congressional map in 2016. Even with the new districts, Republicans maintained their 10-3 edge in congressional seats.
Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the court, said the state did not offer compelling justifications to justify its reliance on race in either district.
The issue of race and redistricting one is a familiar one at the Supreme Court and Kagan noted that one of the districts was "making its fifth appearance before this court."
States have to take race into account when drawing maps for legislative, congressional and a host of municipal political districts. At the same time, race can't be the predominant factor without very strong reasons, under a line of high court cases stretching back 20 years.
A three-judge federal court had previously struck down the two districts. The justices upheld the lower court ruling on both counts.
The court unanimously affirmed the lower court ruling on District 1 in northeastern North Carolina. Kagan wrote that the court will not "approve a racial gerrymander whose necessity is supported by no evidence."
The justices split 5-3 on the other district, District 12 in the southwestern part of the state. Justice Clarence Thomas joined the four liberal justices to form a majority. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Anthony Kennedy dissented. Justice Neil Gorsuch did not part in the case.
The state insisted that race played no role at all in the creation of one district. Instead, the state argued that Republicans who controlled the redistricting process wanted to leave the district in Democratic hands, so that the surrounding districts would be safer for Republicans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Former County Sheriff Joe Arpaio loses another round in court
Legal Interview |
2017/05/21 16:30
|
An appeals court has rejected former Sheriff Joe Arpaio's bid to have a jury, rather than a judge, decide whether he is guilty of a criminal contempt-of-court charge for disobeying a court order in a racial profiling case.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that Arpaio didn't show that his request warranted its intervention in the case.
The former six-term sheriff of metro Phoenix faces the misdemeanor charge for defying a 2011 court order in a racial profiling case to stop his signature immigration patrols.
Arpaio has acknowledged prolonging the patrols, but insists his disobedience wasn't intentional. If convicted, the 84-year-old could be sentenced up to six months in jail. His trial is scheduled to begin on June 26.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Family of Colorado man killed by police settles lawsuit
Court Line News |
2017/05/21 16:30
|
Court documents show the family of a Colorado man killed by police has settled its lawsuit against the city and the officer.
The Pueblo Chieftain says it obtained documents Thursday which showed the settlement resolved “all pending claims” against officer James Ashby and the city of Rocky Ford.
Reports say Ashby fatally shot 27-year-old Jack Jacquez. He was sentenced to 16 years in prison for the murder.
Jacquez’s mother, his estate and the mothers of his minor children filed a lawsuit against Ashby and the city in October.
The settlement is waiting on the approval of the Otero County Probate Court judge to include the children in it.
A court filling from this week does not show the terms of the settlement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 judges on Venezuela's Supreme Court hit with US sanctions
Court Line News |
2017/05/19 16:31
|
The U.S. imposed a new round of sanctions on high-level Venezuelan officials, this time targeting eight Supreme Court judges that Washington accused of damaging their nation's democracy by steadily stripping the opposition-controlled congress of any authority.
The executive order issued Thursday marked the second time the U.S. has sanctioned leaders of Venezuela's socialist government since Donald Trump became president this year. In February, the U.S. announced it was freezing the assets of Vice President Tareck El Aissami, accusing him of playing a major role in international drug trafficking.
Those blacklisted under the latest decree include Maikel Moreno, the president of the government-packed Supreme Court, as well as all seven justices who signed a ruling in late March nullifying congress. The ruling was later partially reversed amid a surge of international criticism, but it sparked a protest movement that has seen almost daily street demonstrations for nearly two months — sometimes violent unrest that recorded its 45th death Thursday.
"By imposing these targeted sanctions, the United States is supporting the Venezuelan people in their efforts to protect and advance democratic governance in their country," U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin said.
Venezuelan Foreign Minister Delcy Rodriguez decried the U.S. sanctions on Twitter as "outrageous and unacceptable." She said the order was one more example of U.S. attempts to destabilize Venezuela's government, adding that Maduro strongly backs the Supreme Court magistrates who are "victims of U.S. imperial power."
Trump's administration has repeatedly raised concerns that Maduro is moving toward one-party, authoritarian rule. Earlier Thursday, the U.S. leader expressed dismay about Venezuela's troubles, asking aloud how a nation holding the world's largest oil reserves could be stricken by so much poverty and turmoil. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
