Ads 468x60px


Showing posts with label ruling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ruling. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Court upholds gay judge's ruling on Proposition 8

Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling on California's Proposition 8 was upheld in a ruling Tuesday.Proposition 8 supporters who filed motion say they will appealCourt upholds former Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling in California caseWalker ruled the law unconstitutional and later revealed he was gayProp. 8 supporters' motion said Walker "plainly had an interest" in the ruling's outcome

(CNN) -- A federal judge who ruled against a ban on same-sex marriage in California and later revealed that he is gay showed no evidence he was prejudiced in the case, according to a ruling Tuesday.


U.S. District Court Judge James Ware upheld former colleague's Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling on California's Proposition 8. Questions had been raised about Walker's ability to impartially decide the controversial question of same-sex marriage.


"It is not reasonable to presume that a judge is incapable of making an impartial decision about the constitutionality of a law, solely because, as a citizen, the judge could be affected by the proceedings," Ware ruled.


Ware, based in San Francisco, backed the original ruling by Walker that the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage in the state was unconstitutional. The new order keeps the issue on track to an expected Supreme Court challenge, perhaps by next year.


On April 6, several weeks after retiring, Walker ended months of speculation by publicly disclosing "that he is gay and that he has been in a committed relationship for more than 10 years," according to a motion filed by Proposition 8 backers, who said they would appeal Ware's ruling.


The previous August, Walker ruled that Proposition 8 violated the Constitution's equal protection clause.


"Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples," Walker wrote in his 136-page opinion.


The motion said Walker should have either recused himself from the case or disclosed his sexual orientation "so that the parties could consider and decide, before the case proceeded further, whether to request his recusal."


Walker told reporters in April he didn't think it was appropriate for any judge's sexual orientation, ethnicity, national origin or gender to stop them from presiding over a case, according to a Reuters report.


The motion argued that if Walker and his partner ever wanted -- or thought they might want -- to marry, he "plainly had an 'interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding,' " it said, citing federal law regarding disqualification of judges.


"Only if Chief Judge Walker had unequivocally disavowed any interest in marrying his partner could the parties and the public be confident that he did not have a direct personal interest in the outcome of the case," the motion said.


Same-sex marriage advocates decried the motion.


"Supporters of Proposition 8 are grasping at straws because they don't like the outcome," Michael Cole-Schwartz of the Human Rights Campaign said in April. "If their real intent was to 'protect marriage,' they should argue that a straight, married judge be disqualified since he would conceivably have an interest in protecting his own marriage. The argument is simply ridiculous on its face."


Judge Ware wrote that the presumption that "all people in same-sex relationships think alike" is unreasonable.


"The presumption that Judge Walker, by virtue of being in a same-sex relationship, had a desire to be married that rendered him incapable of making an impartial decision, is as warrantless as the presumption that a female judge is incapable of being impartial in a case in which women seek legal relief," Ware said. "On the contrary: it is reasonable to presume that a female judge or a judge in a same-sex relationship is capable of rising above any personal predisposition and deciding such a case on the merits."


Equality California, which argues for civil rights protection, hailed the ruling, saying it "reaches far beyond the LGBT community and is a cause for elation."


Protectmarriage.com said it disagreed with Ware's decision.


"Our legal team will appeal that decision and continue our tireless efforts to defend the will of the people of California to preserve marriage as the union of a man and a woman," attorney Charles J. Cooper said.


In New York, meanwhile, Gov. Andrew Cuomo proposed a bill Tuesday that would legalize same-sex marriage, effectively delivering on a promise he has made since taking office in January.


The Marriage Equality Act would grant same-sex couples equal rights to marry "as well as hundreds of rights, benefits and protections that are currently limited to married couples of the opposite sex," according to a news release from Cuomo's office.

.

CNN's Ashley Hayes and Augie Martin contributed to this report.


CNN

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Turkey's state TV: Ruling party wins election (AP)

ISTANBUL – Turkey's state-run television says the ruling party of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has won a third term in parliamentary elections.

The website of the television station, TRT, is carrying a headline that says: "Turkey decides to continue with AK Party."

AKP is the Turkish acronym of the ruling Justice and Development Party.

State TV says that with 98 percent of the results counted Sunday, the ruling party has 50 percent of the votes. The Republican People's Party, the main opposition group, has 26 percent and another opposition party, the Nationalist Action Party, has 13 percent.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

ISTANBUL (AP) — Turkey's ruling party led by a wide margin in nearly complete returns from parliamentary elections on Sunday, state-run television reported, setting the stage for a third term in which the government is expected to seek an overhaul of the military-era constitution.

However, results indicated that the Justice and Development Party of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was not heading for a two-thirds majority in parliament, a shortcoming that would force it to seek support for constitutional change from other political groups.

With 97 percent of votes counted, Erdogan's party had won 50 percent of the votes, TRT reported. It said the Republican People's Party, the main opposition group, had 26 percent of the vote.

TRT said another opposition party, the Nationalist Action Party, had 13 percent of the vote, signaling it could stay in parliament by crossing a 10 percent vote threshold designed to keep out smaller parties.

According to the tally, the ruling party stood to win 327 seats in the 550-seat parliament, a comfortable majority that would ensure the continuation of its single-party rule. It had 331 seats in the outgoing parliament. Lawmakers serve four-year terms.

Several thousand supporters gathered Sunday night outside the ruling party headquarters in Ankara, chanting pro-government slogans and waving Turkish flags as they awaited Erdogan, who has made it a tradition to deliver a victory speech from the building's balcony.

About 50 million Turks, or two-thirds of the population, were eligible to vote.

For the first time, voters cast ballots in transparent plastic boxes in which the yellow envelopes could be seen piling up. The measure was designed to prevent any allegations of fraud. In past elections, wooden boxes were used.

"We have spoken, and now it is time for the people to speak," Erdogan said at a polling station Sunday morning in Istanbul. "For us, this will be the most honorable decision and one that we will have to respect. As far as I know, the election process is continuing through the country without any problems."

The Anatolia news agency reported later that police detained 34 people in the southeast province of Batman for allegedly trying to coerce people into voting for the Peace and Democracy Party, a Kurdish party accused by officials of links to Kurdish rebels.

The party is fielding independent candidates in order to work around the 10 percent vote threshold for Turkey's parliament. It seeks more rights and autonomy in the southeastern strongholds of the ethnic minority, which makes up about 20 percent of Turkey's 74 million people.

Turkey, a NATO ally with a mostly Muslim population, stands out in a region buffeted by popular uprisings as a rising power with traditional Western alliances as well as growing ties in the east and elsewhere. In the past decade, the government has sharply reduced the political clout of the military, and taken some steps to ease restrictions on minorities, though reforms have slowed in recent years.

Despite its successes, Turkey's government faces opposition accusations that it seeks to consolidate power at the expense of consensus-building.

Erdogan has promised that a new constitution would include "basic rights and freedoms," replacing a constitution implemented under the tutelage of the military in 1982. However, he has provided relatively few details on a possible new draft.

The government has Islamic roots, long a source of suspicion among secular circles that once dominated Turkey and fear that Erdogan seeks to impose religion on society.

Turkey's leaders, however, describe themselves as moderates and "conservative democrats" who are committed to the ideals of Western-style democracy. After winning election in 2002, they implemented economic reforms that pulled the country out of crisis. The growth rate last year was nearly 9 percent, the second highest among G-20 nations after China.

Still, political reforms faltered in the ruling party's second term. Turkey's bid to join the European Union has stalled, partly because of opposition in key EU nations such as Germany and France. Critics point to concerns about media freedom and the Turkish government's plans for Internet filters as signs of intolerance toward views that don't conform to those of Turkey's leadership.

Four people were detained Sunday in the southeast province of Sanliurfa for allegedly voting more than once with other people's ballot papers. In the capital, Ankara, police fired in the air and used pepper spray to break up scuffles at a polling station where a group of voters wrongly accused another group of having fake ballot papers, the Anatolia agency said.

But for all of Turkey's challenges, Sunday's vote was an indicator of stability in a country that suffered fractious coalition politics and military coups in past decades. Most voting was peaceful and orderly, with large crowds gathering early to cast ballots.

"We have come to the end of a long marathon," Kemal Kilicdaroglu, head of the opposition Republican People's Party, said after arriving at a polling station with his wife and son. "Today is the time for a decision by the people. We will respect their decision. There is a good mood. There is a democracy feast."

___

Suzan Fraser and Gulden Alp contributed from Ankara, Turkey.


Yahoo! News

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Google, Facebook lose social network patent ruling (Reuters)

CHICAGO (Reuters) – Google Inc and Facebook Inc failed to win dismissal of a lawsuit by a New York company related to software designed to let people take part on social networks through their mobile phones.

Wireless Ink Corp, which runs the Winksite service, may pursue claims that Google Buzz and Facebook Mobile infringed its October 2009 patent, U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel in Manhattan wrote in a ruling made public on Friday.

The patent related to a method to help novice mobile phone users create mobile websites that other phone users can see. Wireless Ink is seeking a halt to the alleged infringement, and compensatory and triple damages.

Jeremy Pitcock, a lawyer for Wireless Ink, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Facebook and Google did not immediately return requests for comment.

According to an amended complaint filed in December, Wireless Ink's application for its so-called '983 patent became public in January 2004.

It said this was three years before Facebook, the world's most popular social networking website, launched its first mobile website, and six years before Google launched Buzz to compete with Facebook.

"If two of the most resource-rich, patent-savvy and technologically advanced companies leading the Internet were not aware of the '983 patent, despite its potential ramifications upon a major segment of the defendants' business," Wireless Ink wrote, "this was solely due to a deliberate indifference on the part of defendants."

Wireless Ink said Winksite had more than 75,000 registered users, while Facebook Mobile has tens of millions of users, and Google said tens of millions of people had "checked Buzz out" in the service's first two days.

In his ruling, Castel said Wireless Ink "does not allege any facts that are inconsistent with the existence of a viable claim." He also dismissed counterclaims seeking to invalidate the Wireless Ink patent.

Facebook is based in Palo Alto, California, and Google in Mountain View, California.

Analysts now generally consider Google Buzz a failure. Google raised privacy concerns when it at first used email lists from users' Gmail accounts to build social networks of Buzz contacts. It later changed the settings so that Gmail contacts are kept private by default.

The case is Wireless Ink Corp v. Facebook Inc et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 10-01841.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel; Additional reporting by Alexei Oreskovic in San Francisco; Editing by Richard Chang)


Yahoo! News


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Saturday, April 30, 2011

Appeals court ruling restores NFL lockout

Ryan Mundy of the Pittsburgh Steelers reports to the team's training facility on Friday, before the court ruling was announced.Two judges backed the temporary stay, while one dissentedA federal appeals court grants a temporary stay, meaning the NFL lockout can resumeOn Monday, a lower court judge had ruled NFL owners couldn't lock out their playersThe legal wrangling threatens the scheduled September start of the NFL season

(CNN) -- A federal appeals court on Friday granted a temporary stay of an April 25 lower court order that had ruled that National Football League owners could not lock out their players.

The 2-1 ruling by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis allows NFL owners to again suspend football operations, as they seek to revise the current system and negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement with the league's players.

"We are back to a lockout," said 8th Circuit court clerk Michael Gans, who confirmed the court's ruling.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said clubs were notified of the ruling Friday night.

"As a result, the clubs have been told that the prior lockout rules are reinstated effective immediately," he said.

The football league's owners imposed a lockout last month, after talks aimed at forging a new agreement broke down and the players officially disbanded their union.

Nine players -- including star quarterbacks Tom Brady, Drew Brees and Peyton Manning -- instigated a lawsuit filed against the owners, saying the owners had no legal right to impose a work stoppage that threatens the scheduled September 8 start of the upcoming season.

The players also want a future trial to determine if the NFL lockout is in violation of federal antitrust laws.

In her ruling Monday, U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson said that the decision by the players to disband their union meant the case no longer came under federal labor law that prohibits injunctions, as claimed by the owners.

The NFL then asked the federal appeals court in St. Louis to lift Nelson's ruling. That led to Friday's announcement, which became public during the second round of the NFL Draft -- the last element covered under the previous agreement between the two sides.

Appeals court judges Duane Benton and Steven Colloton voted for the temporary stay, writing that they wanted to "give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the merits of the motion for a stay pending appeal."

The lone dissenting judge, Kermit Bye, said that the temporary stay shouldn't be granted -- arguing unsuccessfully that such an order should apply only to an "emergency situation."

If games don't start on time late this summer, it would be the first NFL work stoppage since 1987. This comes after several months already of testy labor and legal maneuvering that has left many fans confused about how arguably America's most popular sports league lacks enough money to satisfy everyone.

The heart of the issue between the players and the owners is how to divide the league's $9 billion in revenue.

Right now, NFL owners take $1 billion off the top of that revenue stream. After that, the players get about 60%.

The owners say that the current labor deal doesn't take into account the rising costs related to building stadiums and promoting the game. The players argue that the league has not sufficiently opened up its books to prove this.

In addition, the owners also want to increase the season by two games, which the players are against because it might increase the risk of injuries.

While star players earn millions of dollars each year, the median NFL salary is $790,000 and the average career lasts about four years.

CNN's Justin Lear contributed to this report.


CNN


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Monday, April 4, 2011

Obama Justice Department Appeals Judge's Health Care Ruling

AP

Attorney General Eric Holder speaks during a news conference in Washington March 9.

ATLANTA -- The Obama administration has appealed a judge's ruling that found the federal overhaul of the health care system unconstitutional. 

The Justice Department filed a 62-page motion Friday to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta that said there's clear and well-established precedent that Congress acted within its authority in adopting the overhaul. It said Congress mad "detailed findings establishing a foundation" for exercising the authority. 

Florida and 25 other states filed the lawsuit that said Congress exceeded its authority by requiring all citizens to purchase health insurance or face tax penalties. U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson agreed in a Jan. 31 ruling that said Obama's entire health care overhaul is unconstitutional. It is considered the most sweeping ruling against the health care law. 

Some states, including Alaska, have cited the decision in refusing to cooperate with the health care law. But Vinson issued another ruling last week ordering states to continue implementing the law while the case makes its way through the courts. 

Either way, the broad challenge seems certain to be resolved only by the Supreme Court. Two other U.S. district judges have previously upheld the law, both Democratic appointees to the federal bench. 

Vinson's rulings have found that lawmakers do not have the power to penalize citizens for not doing something. But he has acknowledged that the 11th Circuit could disagree with him. 

"It is likely that the Court of Appeals will also reach divergent results and that, as most court-watchers predict, the Supreme Court may eventually be split on this issue as well," he wrote in the March 3 ruling. 

Other states that joined Florida in filing the lawsuit were: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Print Email Share Comments Recommend Tweet View ArticleLeave a CommentSort: NewestSort: Oldest Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. You must login to comment.

View Article

View All Comments

Latest Politics VideosMore »



View the Original article

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Administration appeals judge's health care ruling

usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

ShareWe've updated the Conversation Guidelines. Changes include a brief review of the moderation process and an explanation on how to use the "Report Abuse" button. Read more.

Advertisement

Most Popular E-mail Newsletter

View the Original article