A federal court in San Francisco Tuesday struck down Arizona's ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law violates a string of U.S. Supreme Court rulings starting with Roe v. Wade that guarantees a woman's right to an abortion before a fetus is able to survive outside the womb. That's generally considered to be about 24 weeks. Normal pregnancies run about 40 weeks
Several states have enacted similar bans starting at 20 weeks. But the 9th Circuit's ruling is binding only in the nine Western states under the court's jurisdiction. Idaho is the only other state in the region covered by the 9th Circuit with a similar ban.
A trial judge had ruled that the ban could take effect. U.S. District Judge James Teilborg ruled it was constitutional, partly because of concerns about the health of women and possible pain for fetuses.
But abortion-rights groups appealed that decision, saying the 20-week ban would not give some women time to carefully decide whether to abort problem pregnancies.
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Evidence challenged: Miss. court blocks execution
The Mississippi Supreme Court has indefinitely delayed Tuesday's scheduled execution of Willie Jerome Manning amid questions involving evidence in the case, intervening hours before he was set to die for the slayings of two college students.
Manning, who had challenged errors involving evidence analysis, was originally set to receive a lethal injection at 6 p.m. CDT at the state prison in Parchman. But with mere hours remaining, the high court blocked the execution until it rules further in the case.
Manning was convicted in 1994 in the shooting deaths of two Mississippi State University students, Jon Steckler and Tiffany Miller. Their bodies were found in a rural area in December 1992.
The FBI has said in recent days that there were errors in agents' testimony about ballistics tests and hair analysis in the case.
Manning's lawyers had argued in recent filings before the Mississippi Supreme Court that the execution should be blocked based on the U.S. Justice Department's disclosures about testimony that it says exceeded the limits of science.
The court ruled 8-1 on Tuesday for a stay. The court had previously split 5-4 in decisions in the case.
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
LulzSec hacker pleads guilty to cyberattacks
A British computer hacker affiliated to the group Lulz Security pleaded guilty Tuesday to cyberattacks on institutions including Sony, Britain's National Health Service and Rupert Murdoch's News International.
Ryan Ackroyd admitted one count of carrying out an unauthorized act to impair the operation of a computer.
Prosecutors say the 26-year-old accessed websites belonging to Sony, 20th Century Fox, the NHS, Nintendo, the Arizona State Police and News International between February and September 2011.
He will be sentenced May 14 at Southwark Crown Court in London. Other charges against him are being dropped.
Three other British hackers — 18-year-old Mustafa Al-Bassam, 20-year-old Jake Davis and Ryan Cleary, 21 — had previously pleaded guilty to launching distributed denial of service attacks on organizations including the CIA and Britain's Serious Organized Crime Agency. Denial of service attacks work by overwhelming sites with traffic.
Ryan Ackroyd admitted one count of carrying out an unauthorized act to impair the operation of a computer.
Prosecutors say the 26-year-old accessed websites belonging to Sony, 20th Century Fox, the NHS, Nintendo, the Arizona State Police and News International between February and September 2011.
He will be sentenced May 14 at Southwark Crown Court in London. Other charges against him are being dropped.
Three other British hackers — 18-year-old Mustafa Al-Bassam, 20-year-old Jake Davis and Ryan Cleary, 21 — had previously pleaded guilty to launching distributed denial of service attacks on organizations including the CIA and Britain's Serious Organized Crime Agency. Denial of service attacks work by overwhelming sites with traffic.
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Law Offices of Robert W. Jackson - Automobile Accidents
A car accident is one of the most common types of personal injuries. A car accident occurs when a road vehicle collides with another moving vehicle, a parked vehicle, pedestrian, road debris, or objects. Motor vehicle accidents can involve all types of automobiles including: everyday cars, commercial trucks, semi or tractor trailer trucks, delivery automobiles, motorcycles or passenger vans. Many times, these collisions involve multiple parties and can get complicated if you do not act quickly. The process can take long and involve weeks of investigation to find contributing factors to figure out who was at fault. Contributing factors may include but are not limited to: vehicle design, road design, driver distraction, driving while intoxicated, and driving speed.
Insurance companies may take advantage of you when they know you are in a vulnerable position. They could use what you say against you and take it out of context. Don't make the mistake of talking to an insurance company before seeking the help of a personal injury lawyer. We are able to assist you if you were injured or have lost a family member in a car accident.
http://www.jacksontriallawyers.com/index.php/california/car-accidents
Insurance companies may take advantage of you when they know you are in a vulnerable position. They could use what you say against you and take it out of context. Don't make the mistake of talking to an insurance company before seeking the help of a personal injury lawyer. We are able to assist you if you were injured or have lost a family member in a car accident.
http://www.jacksontriallawyers.com/index.php/california/car-accidents
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Court won't stop embryonic stem cell research
The Supreme Court won't stop the government's funding of embryonic stem cell research, despite some researchers' complaints that the work relies on destroyed human embryos.
The high court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from two scientists who have been challenging the funding for the work.
The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia earlier this year threw out their lawsuit challenging federal funding for the research, which is used in pursuit of cures to deadly diseases. Opponents claimed the National Institutes of Health was violating the 1996 Dickey-Wicker law that prohibits taxpayer financing for work that harms an embryo.
Researchers hope one day to use stem cells in ways that cure spinal cord injuries, Parkinson's disease and other ailments.
The high court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from two scientists who have been challenging the funding for the work.
The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia earlier this year threw out their lawsuit challenging federal funding for the research, which is used in pursuit of cures to deadly diseases. Opponents claimed the National Institutes of Health was violating the 1996 Dickey-Wicker law that prohibits taxpayer financing for work that harms an embryo.
Researchers hope one day to use stem cells in ways that cure spinal cord injuries, Parkinson's disease and other ailments.
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Limits on class-action lawsuits at Supreme Court
The Supreme Court appeared divided Monday in two cases in which businesses are trying to make it harder for customers or investors to band together to sue them.
The justices heard arguments in appeals from biotech company Amgen Inc. and cable provider Comcast Corp. that seek to shut down class-action lawsuits against the businesses.
Amgen is fighting securities fraud claims that misstatements about two of its drugs used to treat anemia artificially inflated its stock price. Comcast is facing a lawsuit from customers who say the company's monopoly in parts of the Philadelphia area allowed it to raise prices unfairly.
Last year, the Supreme Court raised the bar for some class-action suits when it sided with Wal-Mart against up to 1.6 million of its female employees who complained of sex discrimination. In the Wal-Mart case, the court said there were too many women in too many jobs at the nation's largest private employer to wrap into one lawsuit.
Class actions increase pressure on businesses to settle suits because of the cost of defending them and the potential for very large judgments.
Connecticut pension funds that sued Amgen said lower courts correctly ruled that the case could move forward as a class action. The issue at the Supreme Court is whether the pension funds have to show at an early stage of the lawsuit that Amgen's claims about the safety and effectiveness of the drugs Aranesp and Epogen affected the stock price.
Several justices indicated they had no problem with the idea that, unlike in the Wal-Mart case, all the Amgen investors were in the same boat and could clear an early hurdle that tripped up the Wal-Mart employees.
The justices heard arguments in appeals from biotech company Amgen Inc. and cable provider Comcast Corp. that seek to shut down class-action lawsuits against the businesses.
Amgen is fighting securities fraud claims that misstatements about two of its drugs used to treat anemia artificially inflated its stock price. Comcast is facing a lawsuit from customers who say the company's monopoly in parts of the Philadelphia area allowed it to raise prices unfairly.
Last year, the Supreme Court raised the bar for some class-action suits when it sided with Wal-Mart against up to 1.6 million of its female employees who complained of sex discrimination. In the Wal-Mart case, the court said there were too many women in too many jobs at the nation's largest private employer to wrap into one lawsuit.
Class actions increase pressure on businesses to settle suits because of the cost of defending them and the potential for very large judgments.
Connecticut pension funds that sued Amgen said lower courts correctly ruled that the case could move forward as a class action. The issue at the Supreme Court is whether the pension funds have to show at an early stage of the lawsuit that Amgen's claims about the safety and effectiveness of the drugs Aranesp and Epogen affected the stock price.
Several justices indicated they had no problem with the idea that, unlike in the Wal-Mart case, all the Amgen investors were in the same boat and could clear an early hurdle that tripped up the Wal-Mart employees.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Tech titans face off in court over iPhone, iPad
Two tech titans will square off in federal court Monday in a closely watched trial over control of the U.S. smartphone and computer tablet markets.
Apple Inc. filed a lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. last year alleging the world's largest technology company's smartphones and computer tablets are illegal knockoffs of its popular iPhone and iPad products. The Cupertino-based company is demanding $2.5 billion in damages, an award that would dwarf the largest patent-related verdict to date.
Samsung counters that Apple is doing the stealing and that some of the technology at issue — such as the rounded rectangular designs of smartphones and tablets — has been industry standards for years.
The U.S. trial is just the latest skirmish between the two over product designs. A similar trial began last week, and the two companies have been fighting in courts in the United Kingdom and Germany. The case is one of some 50 lawsuits among myriad telecommunications companies jockeying for position in the burgeoning $219 billion market for smartphones and computer tablets.
In the United States, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose last month ordered Samsung to pull its Galaxy 10.1 computer tablet from the U.S. market pending the outcome of the trial, though the judge barred Apple attorneys from telling the jurors about the ban.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)