Podcasts about Amicus curiae

The Court is entering its final stretch of oral arguments for the 2024-2025 term and they will be hearing four important cases with significant First Amendment implications, particularly when it comes to the separation of church and state.  Hirsh Joshi joins Lindsay Langholz to discuss the tension between public policy goals and religiously motivated exemptions in each of these cases.Join the Progressive Legal Movement Today: ACSLaw.orgHost: Lindsay Langholz, Senior Director of Policy and ProgramGuest: Hirsh Joshi, Attorney and Patrick O'Reiley Legal Fellow, Freedom From Religion FoundationLink: Episode 155: Livin' On a Prayer As States Push Church Into Classrooms featuring Elizabeth CavellLink: We Dissent Podcast Link: Brief of the Freedom From Religion Foundation as Amicus Curiae in Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review CommissionVisit the Podcast Website: Broken Law PodcastEmail the Show: Podcast@ACSLaw.orgFollow ACS on Social Media: Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | LinkedIn | YouTube-----------------Broken Law: About the law, who it serves, and who it doesn't.----------------- Production House: Flint Stone Media Copyright of American Constitution Society 2024.

A Tennessee law prohibits transgender minors from receiving gender transition surgery and hormone therapy. Professor Kurt Lash of the University of Richmond and David Gans of the Constitutional Accountability Center join Jeffrey Rosen to debate whether the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Resources: Kurt Lash, Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents, U.S. v. Skrmetti David Gans, Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner and Respondents in Support of Petitioner, U.S. v. Skrmetti  Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) Geduldig v. Aiello (1974) Loving v. Virginia (1967) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcasts@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate

NotiMundo Al Día - Arturo Moscoso - Amicus Curiae Ante Suspensión De Verónica Abad by FM Mundo 98.1

In this episode we speak with Dr. Kevin Boston from the University of Arkansas at Monticello to discuss a recent landmark Supreme Court decision Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) that overturned a long-standing precedent for federal agency authority on interpreting intent of Congressional legislation.  Dr. Boston received a Ph.D. In Forest Engineering at Oregon State University (1996) and has a JD, from the Northwest School of Law at Lewis and Clark College (2016). Dr. Boston has been working in the field of forestry as a registered forester across the globe since the early 80s and has submitted an Amicus Curiae to the Supreme Court for Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center case from 2012-2013. For questions or comments, email us at timberuniversity@gmail.com.

In this episode we speak with Dr. Kevin Boston from the University of Arkansas at Monticello to discuss a recent landmark Supreme Court decision Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) that overturned a long-standing precedent for federal agency authority on interpreting intent of Congressional legislation.  Dr. Boston received a Ph.D. In Forest Engineering at Oregon State University (1996) and has a JD, from the Northwest School of Law at Lewis and Clark College (2016). Dr. Boston has been working in the field of forestry as a registered forester across the globe since the early 80s and has submitted an Amicus Curiae to the Supreme Court for Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center case from 2012-2013.  For questions or comments, email us at timberuniversity@gmail.com.  

Nos encontramos en un momento sin precedentes en la vida pública de México.  Solo esta semana, atestiguamos la renuncia y declinación de 8 ministras y ministros de la Suprema Corte y la de 859 personas juezas y magistradas; además de la aprobación de una reforma constitucional  que establece que las adiciones o reformas constitucionales no se pueden impugnar. A la par, se publicó el proyecto de una sentencia que busca declarar la inconstitucionalidad parcial de una reforma constitucional, la cual es la raíz de todos estos acontecimientos.  La reforma al poder judicial publicada el 15 de septiembre del presente año, establece que las y los ministros de la SCJN; así como magistrados y jueces federales deben de ser electos por voto popular. Al mismo tiempo, la reforma elimina al Consejo de la Judicatura Federal y delega sus funciones a un órgano de administración y un tribunal disciplinario.  A partir de su publicación, surgieron amparos, acciones de inconstitucionalidad y controversias constitucionales presentadas por partidos políticos y personas juzgadoras. Esto nos ha llevado a reflexionar sobre los límites  a los cambios constitucionales que deberían existir en una democracia constitucional como la nuestra.  El 18 de octubre pasado,  académicas y académicos mexicanos y de otras nacionalidades firmaron un Amicus Curiae en torno a las controversias y acciones presentadas, abordando la cuestión del control de constitucionalidad de las reformas constitucionales.  Este tema ha generado discusiones y debates acalorados que han despertado un interés por parte de la comunidad estudiantil por comprender a profundidad a qué nos referimos cuando decimos que una reforma constitucional puede ser declarada inconstitucional.  Por ello, la asociación de estudiantes de la licenciatura en derecho del CIDE y Upstanders organizaron un webinar, en el que académicas y académicos nos compartirán sus reflexiones en torno al amicus curiae que han presentado a la SCJN y que fue citado en el proyecto de sentencia del ministro Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá.

En entrevista para MVS noticias con Manuel López San Martín, Francisco Burgoa, abogado constitucionalista y profesor en la Facultad de Derecho de la UNAM, habló sobre ¿Qué implica la renuncia de ocho ministros de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación?.  "Esta reforma ha generado amplio debate, especialmente respecto a la facultad de la Suprema Corte para declarar la invalidez de reformas constitucionales que infringen principios fundamentales, como la independencia judicial y la división de poderes. El especialista en materia jurídica, señaló que la afirmación de la presidenta de que la Corte no puede intervenir en este decreto "es incorrecta", ya que, "La Corte, como máximo tribunal constitucional, sí puede revisar reformas y, si es necesario, declarar su invalidez en caso de violación a principios fundamentales". Además, recordó el documento “Amicus Curiae”, respaldado por más de 50 juristas de todo el mundo, el cual aboga por el derecho de la Corte a intervenir desde una perspectiva jurídica. Conflicto en la SCJN genera crisis constitucional   Según Francisco, aunque el derecho permite interpretaciones variadas, la situación actual está llevando al país a una "crisis constitucional sin precedentes". "Estamos viviendo tiempos inéditos, y lo que podría ocurrir es que esta crisis se profundice si no hay disposición por parte de las autoridades para acatar una eventual declaratoria de invalidez". También hizo referencia a la posibilidad de que algunos senadores se nieguen a aceptar las renuncias de ministros, lo cual sería una situación “indebida”.  Finalmente, respecto al trasfondo de la reforma, Francisco Burgoa destacó que Morena incorporó un transitorio en el que se establece que los ministros deben renunciar para conservar sus prestaciones si no desean contender en elecciones populares, un discurso con el que pretende seguir desacreditando a la Corte.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Docentes e investigadores presentas un Amicus Curiae contra Reforma Judicial; Huracanes más recientes revirtieron sequía en México; Reunión del FMI ¿y que le toca a México?; Encuestas rumbo a la elección presidencial; Piso peatonal en Tlalpan; Gemini Live con Ricardo Zamora; Deportan a mexicano por infiel.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Glossip v. Oklahoma, a case challenging the constitutionality of Richard Glossip's conviction and sentencing to death for a 1997 murder. In this episode, Paul Cassell of the University of Utah and Andrea Miller of the Oklahoma Innocence Project join Jeffrey Rosen to recap the oral arguments and debate whether or not Glossip's conviction should stand in light of newly revealed documents that allegedly suggest prosecutorial misconduct.    Resources:  Glossip v. Oklahoma, Supreme Court oral argument (audio via C-SPAN; transcript)   Brief of Amicus Curiae the Innocence Project in Support of Petitioner Richard Eugene Glossip, Glossip v. Oklahoma    Paul G. Cassell, “Brief of Victim Family Members Derek Van Treese, Donna Van Treese, and Alana Mileto as Amici Curiae in Support of Affirming the Judgment Below,” Glossip v. Oklahoma Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate

# Señora bonita, véngase a lo más cancelado, lo más desinformado, lo más ‘funado' del internet, de este mundo y los que vienen. Aquí está la Radio de la República, el peor noticiero con su tuitero favorito.

Los 31 gobernadores y gobernadoras, así como el jefe Gobierno capitalino presentaron un amicus curiae en el que solicitan a la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación no eliminar la prisión preventiva oficiosa. En el escrito, los mandatarios estatales advirtieron que la eliminación de dicha medida cautelar provocaría un grave impacto en la seguridad pública, además de que implicaría un colapso para los tribunales federales, ya que estarían obligados a analizar todas y cada una de las solicitudes de cambios de prisión oficiosa.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hakim MK Diminta Pertimbangkan Amicus Curiae | Jokowi Singgung Aset Kripto sebagai Modus Baru Pencucian Uang | Gunung Ruang Naik Status Menjadi Awas *Kami ingin mendengar saran dan komentar kamu terkait podcast yang baru saja kamu simak, melalui surel ke podcast@kbrprime.id

Mudik 2024, Menko PMK: Kecelakaan dan Kematian Turun | Terima 21 Amicus Curiae, MK: Otoritas Hakim | Kena Efek Vaksin Covid, Warga Gugat Pemerintah Jepang *Kami ingin mendengar saran dan komentar kamu terkait podcast yang baru saja kamu simak, melalui surel ke podcast@kbrprime.id

Ketua Umum PDI Perjuangan, Megawati mengajukan diri sebagai Amicus Curiae dalam perkara hasil Pemilu 2024.

Berita pilihan Tempo hari ini: Konsekuensi perubahan penyebutan KKB di Papua menjadi OPM;  Megawati hingga mahasiswa kirim amicus curiae ke Mahkamah Konstitusi; Admin akun medsos jadi tersangka setelah posting dugaan perselingkuhan seorang anggota TNI. III Kunjungi ⁠s.id/tempo199⁠ untuk promo berlangganan Tempo Digital Rp 199 ribu setahun. Unduh aplikasi⁠ Tempo⁠ untuk membaca berbagai liputan mendalam Tempo.

Veronica Manquel coordinadora de género y diversidad sexual PPN, nos comenta el caso de una mujer lactante privada de libertad que solicitó a la justicia el arresto domiciliario y la PPN la apoyó mediante la presentación de un Amicus Curiae.

Besides charging interim body of 'serious mismanagement', senior advocate claims there is lack of transparency & procedural impropriety in functioning of India's football body.

La canciller mexicana, Alicia Bárcena, aseguró que la ley SB4 de Texas es profundamente inconstitucional porque el tema migratorio en EE.UU. es de competencia del gobierno federal. Para los nostálgicos del cine de los años 80 y 90, los populares cazafantasmas vuelven a su lugar de origen en “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire”.

La canciller mexicana, Alicia Bárcena, aseguró que la ley SB4 de Texas es profundamente inconstitucional porque el tema migratorio en EE.UU. es de competencia del gobierno federal. Para los nostálgicos del cine de los años 80 y 90, los populares cazafantasmas vuelven a su lugar de origen en “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire”.

Campamento de migrante ya tiene 5 días en Ciudad Juárez frontera con Taxas EEUU En Nuevo León se encontraron al menos 11 cuerpos en Pesquería cerca de un balnearioAjith Sunghay, alertó sobre la “incapacidad de los trabajadores humanitarios” de distribuir la ayuda en Gaza ONUMás información en nuestro podcast

In this thirty-ninth episode of Learned Hands, the Official Podcast of the Westerosi Bar Association, Merry & Clint ask: Did Jon Snow's choice to ride south to Winterfell kill the Night's Watch? What responsibility, if any, does Jon have to maintain constitutional norms and structures?Our analysis this episode includes:We go back to the Wall to discuss what unmakes a government!Discussion of whether Jon's breaking of Nights Watch norms constitutes a crossing of the Rubicon.A dramatic reading of the Shieldhall Speeches with musical accompaniment courtesy LittleWolfBird (find her patreon here)!Merry talking at length about her favorite doomed sad boi and why the show's treatment of the moment was not actually bad.Your Hands debate whether law can be used as a tool to change broken institutions.Clint does some stupid accents and talks about how the Senate sucks (rinse and repeat).Much discussion as to whether or not the Night's Watch was gonna die, and whether they had it comin'.We announce our 2024 dues drive and call for Amicus Curiae!Supplemental reading:Merry's essay: The Last Temptation of Jon Snow Pt. 1, Kill the BoyMerry's essay: The Last Temptation of Jon Snow Pt. 2, The ChoosingAdam Feldman's essay: Jon's Noble Heart and Greater DutyWhy are men obsessed with the Roman Empire?A Lawyer's Role in Contemporary Democracy, ForewardBumpers by Dr. Kavita Mudan Finn. Extensive audio engineering by LittleWolfBird. Intro & Outro music courtesy Sid Luscious & The Pants. None of this should be construed as legal advice OBVIOUSLY. Support the show

लैटिन भाषा के शब्द Amicus Curiae जिसका मतलब फ्रेंड ऑफ कोर्ट होता है, वो कोर्टरूम के लिए अहम क्यों होता है? इस पोज़िशन पर क्या काम करता है अपॉइन्ट हुआ व्यक्ति और उसकी नियुक्ति कैसे की जाती है, सुनिए 'ज्ञान ध्यान' के एपिसोड में चेतना काला से. साउन्ड मिक्स: सौरभ कुकरेती

The Star-Tribune's Wyoming beat writer, Ryan Thorburn, welcomes "Legends of Laradise" member Rob Jarosh and former UW tight end Jackon Marcotte to preview the Pokes' 2023 opener against Texas Tech on this episode of the Pokecast.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Allan Parker, President of The Justice Foundation, who filed two Amicus Curiae briefs in the Dobbs case, reacts to the Supreme Court's abortion pill decision.

In 1944, George Stinney Jr. was wrongfully convicted of murder and executed by the state of South Carolina. The 14 year old was the youngest person to be executed in 20th century America. Want more Southern Mysteries?  Hear the Southern Mysteries show archive of 60+ episodes along with Patron exclusive podcast, Audacious: Tales of American Crime and more when you become a patron of the show. You can immediately access exclusive content now at patreon.com/southernmysteries Connect Website: southernmysteries.com Facebook: Southern Mysteries Podcast Twitter: @southernpod_ Instagram: @shannonballard_ Email: southernmysteriespodcast@gmail.com  Episode Sources Court Acknowledges Wrongful Execution of 14-Year Old George Stinney, Accessed March 30, 2023. https://eji.org/news/george-stinney-exonerated/ State v. Stinney, Brief of Amicus Curiae, Accessed April 10, 2023. Justice is Done: George Stinney Jr.'s 70 Year Old Conviction is Vacated, April 10, 2023.  https://lawlibrarybarrister.wordpress.com/2014/12/17/justice-is-done-george-stinney-jr-s-70-year-old-conviction-is-vacated/ New details emerge about an alternate suspect in Alcolu girls' murders. Accessed April 11, 2023. https://www.postandcourier.com/news/special_reports/new-details-emerge-about-an-alternate-suspect-in-alcolu-girls-murders/article_2b2069f0-2933-11e8-9997-7b67df562df5.html Episode Music Dark Times by Kevin MacLeod. Licensed under Creative Commons; Theme Song “Dark & Troubled” by Pantherburn. Special thanks to Phillip St Ours for permission for use

La Federación Argentina de la Magistratura y la Función Judicial (FAM) aprobó recientemente, en una asamblea desarrollada en la ciudad de La Plata, pedir al Jurado de Enjuiciamiento ser “amicus curiae” en el jury que se le pretende iniciar a la jueza Ana Clara Pérez Ballester por su actuación en la tenencia de Lucio Dupuy, el niño que fue asesinado en noviembre de 2021 en Santa Rosa. “Frente a la situación que se vive en la provincia de La Pampa, donde se ha iniciado proceso de destitución a una magistrada -sin fundamento de hecho que involucre mal desempeño- la Federación expresa su voluntad de constituirse en amicus curiae en dicho proceso. El respeto a la institucionalidad hace necesario tomar parte en un proceso a fin de cooperar para una solución adecuada a los valores del sistema judicial”, aprobó en el punto 5 la federación. “Amicus curiae” es una expresión latina que significa “Amigo del Tribunal”. Es un instituto jurídico que ha ganado gran presencia en el derecho contemporáneo en general y en el derecho argentino en particular. La finalidad de la figura es que en determinados procesos judiciales participen terceros -ajenos a la causa- que puedan ofrecer una opinión basada en argumentos de carácter jurídico, técnico o científico a los fines de ilustrar a los magistrados -en el caso de este jury, a los diputados, jueces y abogados de la matrícula- en cuestiones de trascendencia colectiva o interés general. Pablo Rodríguez Salto pasó por el aire de Radio 5 para hablar sobre la situación de su representada y expresar su punto de vista.

Allan Parker, President of The Justice Foundation, who filed two Amicus Curiae briefs in the Dobbs case, discusses the possibility of making abortion illegal in all 50 states and talks about the Justice Foundation's efforts to help combat forced abortions.

A breaking-news emergencies podcast right after the oral arguments in the Biden Student Debt cases: Nebraska v. Biden and Dept of Education vs. Brown, joined by:Liza Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty & National Security Program, and a nationally expert on presidential emergency powers. She wrote immediately after the Biden plan was announced for the Washington Post: “Biden Using Emergency Powers for Student Debt Relief? That's a Slippery Slope,” linked here.And we're joined by Nestor Davidson, Albert A. Walsh Chair in Real Estate, Land Use, and Property Law; Faculty Director, Urban Law Center.Jed explains his amicus brief (and essay proposing an "Emergency Question Doctrine" to limit the Major Question Doctrine), which Justice Kavanaugh mentioned in oral argument, linked here.Materials Mentioned in this Episode:Materials Mentioned in this Episode:Biden v. Nebraska Department of EducationDocket         Oral ArgumentDepartment of Education v. BrownDocketOral ArgumentBrief of Jed Handelsman Shugerman as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents. Linked here.Jed Shugerman, "Major Questions and an Emergency Question Doctrine: The Biden Student Debt Case Study of Pretextual Abuse of Emergency Powers." 2023. Linked here.Jed Shugerman, “The Biden Student Debt Plan is a Legal Mess,” The Atlantic, Sept. 2022. Linked here. Subscription required. Elizabeth Goitein, “The Alarming Scope of the President's Emergency Powers,” The Atlantic, January/February 2019.  Linked here. Subscription to the Atlantic required.West Virginia v. EPA, 597 U.S. ___ (2022). Linked here. Zephyr Teachout. Corruption in America: From Benjamin Franklin's Snuff Box to Citizens United. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (2016).  Buy on Amazon. Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007). Linked here.Andrew Kent, Ethan J. Leib, Jed Handelsman Shugerman, “Faithful Execution and Article II, 132 Harvard Law Review 2111 (2019). Linked here.

The Supreme Court recently heard oral argument in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, a case billed as the sequel to the 2018 case Masterpiece Cakeshop. Both cases involve businesses wanting to discriminate against LGBTQ+ couples in defiance of Colorado's Anti-Discrimination law. On this episode, Christopher Wright Durocher speaks with Professor Kent Greenfield about the oral argument in 303 Creative and the nefarious effort to use the First Amendment to justify discrimination. Join the Progressive Legal Movement Today: ACSLaw.org Today's Host: Christopher Wright Durocher, Vice President of Policy and Program Guest: Kent Greenfield, Professor and Dean's Distinguished Scholar at Boston College Law School Link: Supreme Court oral argument in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis Link: Brief of Professor Kent Greenfield as Amicus Curiae in support of neither party Visit the Podcast Website: Broken Law Podcast Email the Show: Podcast@ACSLaw.org Follow ACS on Social Media: Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | LinkedIn | YouTube ----------------- Production House: Flint Stone Media Copyright of American Constitution Society 2022.  

This 75th Independence Day is Amrit alright! But there is plenty of vish slushing around in this Amrit. In this special episode, we mark our independence by looking at the loss of our privacy with the insidious Aadhar card, which started without a statutory law. We also look at how the Supreme Court has transformed into an institution that has obstructed justice, rather than provided access to it, and took a good hard look at the role of the amicus curiae. On the AADHAR card and privacy: Parker, Ian (2011), “The I.D. Man” Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/10/03/the-i-d-manKhera, Reetika, “The Different Ways in Which Aadhaar Infringes on Privacy”, Available at: https://thewire.in/government/privacy-aadhaar-supreme-courtOn the PIL: Bhuwania, Anuj, Courting the People: Public Interest Litigation in Post-Emergency India, Cambridge University Press: New Delhi, Chapter 2. On Amicus Curiae: Desai Ashok H. and S. Muralidhar, “Public Interest Litigation: Potential and Problems” in B.N. Kirpal et al. eds, Supreme but not Infallible – Essays in Honour of the Supreme Court of India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2000). Available at: https://www.ielrc.org/content/a0003.pdf.You can follow Priya on social media:Instagram: (https://www.instagram.com/thelongestconstitution_/ )Twitter: (https://twitter.com/fundamentallyp )Linkedin: ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/priya-mirza-73666310/ )You can listen to this and other awesome shows on the IVM Podcasts app on Android: https://ivm.today/android or iOS: https://ivm.today/ios, or any other podcast app. You can check out our website at https://shows.ivmpodcasts.com/featuredDo follow IVM Podcasts on social media.We are @IVMPodcasts on Facebook, Twitter, & Instagram.Follow the show across platforms:Spotify, Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, Gaana, JioSaavan, Amazon MusicSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

All rise, all rise, for the inaugural episode of Infosec Court, brought to you live from RSA Conference. Judge Wendy Nather presides, and three infosec experts (Helen Patton, Dave Lewis and Dennis Fisher) all have a ‘hot take' that they want to be more widely accepted in the infosec industry.Their task as plaintiffs is to try to persuade Judge Wendy and a jury of their peers that their hot take deserves to become infosec canon. Come for the chance to hear Wendy in her element. Stay for the outrageous objections ("What even is Non Zero Trust?) and the unexpected turn of events when Wendy introduces an Amicus Curiae, handed to her shortly before proceedings began...

Allan Parker, President of The Justice Foundation, represents Melinda Thybault, the Co-Founder of The Moral Outcry Petition, acting on behalf of over 500,000 Signers. www.themoraloutcry.com. He also represents thousands of women hurt by abortion. See www.operationoutcry.org. Mr. Parker represented Norma McCorvey, formerly “Roe” of Roe v. Wade, and Sandra Cano, the “Doe” of Doe v. Bolton., in their efforts to overturn the two landmark cases that brought legalized abortion on demand to America.   Roe v Wade, apparently reversed by Two Amicus Curiae Briefs filed by Justice Foundation

NYS Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence K. Marks discusses a plan to streamline and modernize New York's convoluted, cumbersome and inefficient court structure. The interview was conducted by Daniel K. Wiig, host of the New York County Lawyers Association's Amicus Curiae podcast.

QUESTION PRESENTED:Whether the Supreme Court should issue a stay of OSHA's vaccine-or-testing regime for all businesses with 100 or more employees.Date                   Proceedings and Orders Dec 17 2021  | Application (21A244) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.Dec 20 2021 | Response to application (21A244) requested by Justice Kavanaugh, due by 4 p.m., Thursday, December 30, 2021.Dec 20 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by Washington Legal Foundation.Dec 22 2021 | Application (21A244) referred to the Court.Dec 22 2021 | Consideration of the applications (21A244 and 21A247) for stay presented to Justice Kavanaugh and by him referred to the Court is deferred pending oral argument. The applications are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. The applications are set for oral argument on Friday, January 7, 2022.Dec 22 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by Former OSHA Administrators Charles Jeffress, David Michaels, and Gerard Scannell. VIDED.Dec 23 2021 | Because the Court has consolidated these applications for oral argument, future filings and activity in 21A244 and 21A247 will now be reflected on the docket of No. 21A244. Subsequent filings in No. 21A244 and/or 21A247 must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 21A244. Any document submitted in connection with either of these applications must include on its cover the application number and caption for each application in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in only one application, the docket entry will reflect that; a document filed in both applications will be noted as “VIDED.”Dec 23 2021 | Motion for divided argument filed by applicants. VIDED.Dec 23 2021 | Replies, if any, shall be filed by 10 a.m., Monday, January 3, 2022. VIDED.Dec 23 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by Constitutional Accountability Center. VIDED.Dec 27 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by National Employment Lawyers Association and Jobs With Justice Educational Fund. VIDED.Dec 28 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by Tore Says LLC. VIDED.Dec 28 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by Liberty, Life and Law Foundation. VIDED.Dec 29 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed byDefending The Republic, Inc. VIDED.Dec 29 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by Standard Process Inc. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for divided argument filed by applicants GRANTED. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for Leave to File and Brief of Amici Curiae of Members of Congress not accepted for filing. (January 03, 2022)Dec 30 2021 | Response to application from respondents Occupational Safety and Health Administration, et al. filed. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by American Public Health Association, et al. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by Local Unions 1249 and 97 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Response to application from respondents American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations filed. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by America's Frontline Doctors. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by We The Patriots USA, Inc. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by American Medical Association, et al. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by Center for Medical Freedom, et al. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by Advancing American Freedom. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by National Disability Rights Network, et al. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by Small Business Majority, et al. VIDED.Dec 30 2021 | Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief filed by the IU Family for Choice, not Mandates, Inc. VIDED.Jan 03 2022 | Reply of applicant National Federation of Independent Business, et al. filed.Jan 03 2022 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by Texas Values, et al. VIDED.Jan 03 2022 | Motion for leave to file amici curiae brief filed by Members of Congress. VIDED.Jan 03 2022 | Reply of Ohio, et al. in support of application submitted.Jan 05 2022 | Motion of Jason Feliciano , et al.Jan 06 2022 | Motion of Alsco, Inc. for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae in Opposition to Emergency Applications for a Stay or Injunction Pending Certiorari Review; For Leave to File Without 10 Days' Notice; and For Leave to File in Paper Format of Alsco, Inc. submitted.Jan 06 2022 | Motion of 400 Physicians, Surgeons, Nurses, and Medical Professionals Opposing OSHA's Unconstitutional Overreach Leave to File Attached Brief as Amicus Curiae in Support of Applicants of 400 Physicians, Surgeons, Nurses, and Medical Professionals Opposing OSHA's Unconstitutional Overreach submitted.Jan 06 2022 | Motion for Leave to File; and Amici Brief of Two Unnamed Workers in Support of Application for Stay, Grant of Certiorari, and Reversal of Two Unnamed Workers submitted.Jan 06 2022 | Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief and Brief of American Commitment Foundation, Inc. submitted.Jan 07 2022 | Argued. For applicants in 21A244: Scott A. Keller, Washington, D. C. For applicants in 21A247: Benjamin M. Flowers, Solicitor General, Columbus, Ohio. For respondents: Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED.★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

This episode is also available as a blog post: https://youarewithinthenorms.com/2021/12/26/in-dr-xiulu-ruan-v-united-states-of-america-health-law-and-policy-support-of-petitioner-brief-of-amicus-curiae-no-20-1410/ --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/norman-j-clement/support

This episode is also available as a blog post: https://youarewithinthenorms.com/2021/12/25/medical-science-vs-prosecutorial-pill-mill-propaganda-and-dea-intimidation-is-before-supreme-courts-ruan-vs-united-statesbrief-of-amicus-curiae-compassion-and-choices-in-support-of-the-petit/ --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/norman-j-clement/support

This episode is also available as a blog post: https://youarewithinthenorms.com/2021/12/23/deas-gestapo-actions-come-before-supreme-court-in-ruan-vs-united-states-of-america-case-no-20-1410-amicus-curiae/ --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/norman-j-clement/support

Starting with a quick 2L update, breaking down the 500 female athletes unafraid to simply "stick to sports", and then the current state of the N.W.S.L. abuse scandal.

Em nosso Episódio 31 conversamos com Damares Medina – que é Doutora em Direito pela Universidade Mackenzi, pós-doutora pela Universidade de Coimbra, professora do IDP – Instituto de Direito Público e advogada – sobre o tem AMICUS CURIE: DEMOCRATIZAÇÃO DO STF? A conversa foi comandada por Paulo Ricardo Schier, Bruno Lorenzetto e Helô Câmara. Paulo Ricardo Schier é Doutor em Direito Constitucional pela UFPR e Professor do PPGD em Direitos Fundamentais e Democracia do Centro Universitário UNIBRASIL. Bruno Lorenzetto é Doutor em Direito pela UFPR e Professor do PPGD em Direitos Fundamentais e Democracia do Centro Universitário UNIBRASIL. Helô Câmara é Doutora em Direito do Estado pela UFPR e Professora de Teoria do Estado da UFPR. Bom café para todas e todos!!! Gostou do episódio? Quer dar sugestões de pauta ou criticar? Entre em contato pelo e-mail: cafedemocraticopodcast@gmail.com #cafedemocratico #direitoepolitica #democracia #crisedademocracia #teoriadademocracia #unibrasil #schier #lorenzetto #helocamara #DAMARESMEDINA #AMICUSCURIE #STF #supremotribunalfederal Temporada #03 Introdução: Discursos de Mário Covas, Lula, Benedita da Silva e Ulysses Guimarães. Música de fundo: "Vai Ser Assim", Criolo. Encerramento: "Trem das Onze", Adoniran Barbosa e Demônios da Garoa.

The law against Triple Talaq or The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, was passed two years ago amid protests from the opposition who blamed the government for targetting only the Muslim community. On 30th July 2019, this law was passed in the parliament with 99 votes in its favor. Giving triple talaq would be a non-bailable and cognizable offense, meaning the police would not need a warrant for arrest. The victim will get the right to alimony and the magistrate will decide the issue. This law criminalizes the Islamic practice called 'Talaaq-e-biddat' that grants instant divorce when a husband utters the word 'talaq' three times for his wife. Now, on the two-year anniversary of The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, we spoke to two women who filed their cases under this law. Joining us in the podcast is the managing partner of LCZF(Law Firm), Firdouse Qutb Wani, who has also been the Amicus Curiae, Hon'ble National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, New Delhi. We are also joined by Wajeeh Shafiq, advocate on record, the Supreme Court of India. He is also the standing counsel for Delhi Waqf Board, Delhi High Court. He has also represented Rizwan Ahmad, the husband of Shayara Bano, in Writ Petition (C) no.118/2016 ( Shayara Bano vs. Union of India & ors ) (Triple Talaq case). Rizwan Ahmad was respondent no. 5 in that case.

... or so Weer'd says, anyway. Erin isn't convinced. In This Episode: Erin and Weer'd discuss: David Chipman and his endless woes; a Massachusetts man who was denied a concealed carry permit because of circumstances absent a conviction; and the big news that Operation Blazing Sword/Pink Pistols has filed an Amicus Curiae brief in the case of NYSRPA v. Bruen! Xander brings us some of his Independent Thoughts on the Massachusetts Right To Repair law, and how it compares to gun control; David lists some DYI recipes for gun care products; and finally, Weer'd interviews Tom Knighton of Bearing Arms on the San Jose requirement for gun owners to carry insurance. Did you know that we have a Patreon? Join now for the low, low cost of $4/month (that's $1/podcast) and you'll get to listen to our podcast on Friday instead of Mondays, as well as patron-only content like mag dump episodes, our hilarious blooper reels and film tracks. Show Notes Main Topic: Toomey to Oppose Chipman for ATF Director Durbin Doesn't Have the Votes Durbin endorses David Chipman Wakefield Man Denied Permit Amicus brief of The DC Project Foundation; Operation Blazing Sword—Pink Pistols; Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership submitted. SCOTUS Docket for NYSRPA v. Bruen Independent Thoughts Don't Charge a Chevy Bolt in your House Gun Lovers and Other Strangers Ed's Red Homemade Firearm Cleaners & Lubricants DIY Gun Solvent Tom Knighton Interview: Tom Knighton: Bearing Arms San Jose Gun Owners Must Carry Liability Insurance  

Esse podcast traz diariamente o que de mais importante acontece no mundo das telecomunicações e da conectividade na curadoria e análise da TELETIME, a publicação que acompanha o mercado de telecomunicações há 23 anos.Se você ainda não se inscreveu, o podcast está disponível nas principais plataformas: Spotify, Apple e Google Podcasts.Se você ainda não acompanha a newsletter TELETIME, inscreva-se aqui gratuitamente e fique ligado no dia a dia do mercado de telecom. É simples e é gratuito.Você ainda pode acompanhar TELETIME pelo Twitter, Linkedin, Instagram, Facebook, Google News, ou em nosso canal no Telegram.____________________________ESTRATÉGIAEstratégia da Nova Oi conta com valorização da InfraCo, redução de custos e novas receitassegunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 22h05Unidade que será controlada pelo BTG Pactual poderá ter valor estimado em R$ 54 bilhões em 2025. Novas receitas poderão ser superiores a R$ 1 bilhãoNOVA OISerede e Tatho continuarão estratégicas para a Oi, diz Rodrigo Abreusegunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 20h51Apesar disso, a divisão de infraestrutura pode não ter exclusividade com a InfraCo. Já a de atendimento poderia ser objeto de futuro desinvestimento, embora não haja planos atualmentePRIVACIDADECDR e OAB solicitam à ANPD suspensão do sistema do governo de coleta massiva de dados biométricossegunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 20h46As entidades da sociedade civil alegam que o uso do sistema traz uma série de preocupações, pois afronta diretamente o direito fundamental à proteção de dados pessoaisINTERNET NAS ESCOLASEstudantes e PDT querem entrar na ação do governo contra lei do Fust para educaçãosegunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 20h34UBES, UNE e PDT querem ser Amicus Curiae na ação movida pelo governo contra Lei 14.172 que prevê R$ 3,5 bi para educaçãoB2BEmbratel e Nokia vão conectar locomotivas da Rumosegunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 20h16Até 300 composições da operadora logística devem ser beneficiadas em primeira fase de projetoNOVA OIVenda da operação de DTH continua nos planos da Oisegunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 19h07Companhia ainda diz que programa de desinvestimento segue em andamento, mas não fala em datas ou valores. Redução de custos com a venda pode chegar a 7% da base de custos total em 2021CONCESSÃOAnatel autoriza arbitragem com Claro sobre concessão de STFCsegunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 17h48Com decisão, fica aprovada minuta de termo de compromisso arbitral entre reguladora e concessionária dos serviços de longa distância nacional e internacionalSEGURANÇA CIBERNÉTICAGoverno cria rede de gestão de cibersegurança sob comando do GSIsegunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 16h45Objetivo é aprimorar e manter a coordenação entre órgãos e entidades da administração pública federal direta, autárquica e fundacional para prevenção, tratamento e resposta a incidentes cibernéticosCONCESSÃOPrazo no manual de continuidade da concessão é suficiente, defende Anatelsegunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 15h37Colocado em consulta pública até dia 31, manual operacional do RCon detalha regras sobre futuro de contratos do STFCNOVA OIOi mantém previsão de encerrar recuperação judicial até maio de 2022segunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 14h04Processo da venda da Oi Móvel e do controle da InfraCo deverá ser concluído até o final deste ano ou começo do ano que vem, dando tempo para encerrar a recuperação judicialNOVO MODELOOi: arbitragem com Anatel terá impacto positivo de 'vários bilhões de reais'segunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 13h03Com isso, companhia acredita que valor compensaria as despesas previstas no processo de migração. Assinatura do acordo de arbitragem deverá acontecer ainda em julhoNOVA OIApós venda de ativos, Oi planeja receita anual de até R$ 15,5 bi em 2024segunda-feira, 19 de julho de 2021 , 09h45EBITDA poderia chegar até R$ 2,3 bilhões segundo guidance da empresa. Relação da dívida líquida com a receita ficaria em 6,6x See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Artificial Intelligence has infiltrated our life and daily routines. AI is everywhere, from social media to the chess algorithm we play with online and never defeat. But, what can AI do for the administration of justice? What are the challenges in the implementation of these tools? What do governments around the world have done to solve them? What can we learn from them? Today, our host, Laurence Pantin, coordinator of the México Evalúa’s Justice Transparency Program will discuss with Harold Epineuse, Executive Director and founder of Amicus Curiae, the use of Artificial Intelligence inside governments and courts. Enjoy the episode!

Makes You Think | Guy Plus Beard; Vince Tagliavia; Amicus Curiae; Guests: Mike, and Tom   Our Primary Channel has been deleted. We are in full decentralize mode! If you can help to support us, please do! We need it!! JOIN US ON THE Social Redpill - A Private Social Network - www.socialredpill.com HELP SUPPORT The Repill Project! [Tip Jar] Bitcoin: 39Wbf3ScFxegBsqXZoNhiZ5N553HhrbYH9 Ethereum: 0xCAaBDc59CA49eBAC74bF6C5da41B557378e30Da0 www.paypal.me/dynamicmindsets www.venmo.com/redpillproject Different Coins, Different Exchanges. Trade Crypto Today VOYAGER CRYPTO APP! https://bit.ly/3dHVMdZ Coinbase: https://bit.ly/2MaC9ja KuCoin - Crypto Trading: https://bit.ly/3rKeDca​​ Support Us With Crypto: Bitcoin: 39Wbf3ScFxegBsqXZoNhiZ5N553HhrbYH9 Ethereum: 0xCAaBDc59CA49eBAC74bF6C5da41B557378e30Da0 LTC: MScwe8k9ZFfdAH1YXSbB1vnEqDGkkYeQmE THETA: 0x1Dc39F513b4ADb8aF10562900cde95dAD661A393 STELLAR [XLM] GDQP2KPQGKIHYJGXNUIYOMHARUARCA7DJT5FO2FFOOKY3B2WSQHG4W37 XLM Memo ID: 4124667336 For those interested in a Cold Storage Wallet for their Crypto. Here is the Nano Ledger info. http://bit.ly/3uxOb7J GET GOLD NOW! Rumor Is Trump is Moving To The Gold Standard!!!!!! NOBLE GOLD: Get Gold & SILVER NOW In Your Portfolio!

This seminar was a platform to share the actions of Civil Society in response to an attempt by Solidarity and Afriforum to promote private procurement and distribution of vaccines for COVID-19 in SA. Solidarity and Afriforum lodged court papers to compel government to allow the private sector, NGOs and provinces to procure and distribute vaccines independent of government. The Health Justice initiative applied to be an Amicus Curiae (friend of the court) and would have brought evidence as to why such as case, were it to be successful, would have disastrous effects for an equitable and effective roll out of vaccines. The case was withdrawn before it was heard. However, because we believe the issues are of critical importance, PHM and HJI decided to co-host this webinar to bring these issues to the attention of the wider public. The speakers included: Fatima Hassan - Director of the HJI Dr. Tlaleng Mofokeng - UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health Prof. Leslie London - Professor of Public Health Medicine at UCT and Steering Committee member for the PHM-SA

Sportico's Daniel Libit, joins the show to talk about the Supreme Court case regarding Name Image and Likeness. He discusses the Amicus Curiae brief coming towards the Supreme Court from players. Cedric Golden from the Austin American Statesman joins the show to talk about the drama in longhorn country surrounding the "eyes of texas" fight song.

The show is about Amicus Curiae Brief and how money is being wasted that could go to citizens of our country who are hungry.

This week our guest on the podcast is Olga Borisovna Sidorovich. Olga Borisovna is director of the Institute of Law and Public Policy and editor-in-chief of two important law journals: Sravnitelnoe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie and Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie. The Institute of Law and Public Policy is an NGO and one of the leading independent legal centres in Russia. It was founded in 2000 and is engaged in the study of constitutional processes in Russia and worldwide, strategic litigation, legal education, research and publishing. The Institute's engagement in strategic litigation via the procedure of Amicus Curiae has resulted in case law decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights. In 1993, when the new Constitution of Russia was being created, the Centre for Constitutional Studies of Eastern and Central Europe was established under the Moscow Public Research Foundation. Seven years later, it was transformed into an independent organisation – the Institute of Law and Public Policy.The issues discussed in the podcast include the history and work of the Institute of Law and Public Policy; the amicus curiae procedure; reform of the Russian Constitutional Court; amendments to the Constitution made this year; ongoing changes in NGO legislation and the future of the NGO sector; and the future of Russia's legal system.This podcast is in the Russian language

This episode covers alaska appellate procedure with an emphasis on amicus curiae briefs! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

This episode covers montana appellate procedure with an emphasis on amicus curiae briefs! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Neste 14º episódio, conversamos sobre "Interseccionalidade" com Nádia de Castro Alves e Thiago Teixeira, tema extremamente importante e altamente renegado pela academia. Tratamos dos aspectos conceituais e históricos e abordamos a importância desse estudo para a compreensão da sociedade atual. Nossos convidados relacionaram a interseccionalidade e a aplicação seletiva do Direito Penal, concluindo que é ele um dos principais instrumentos para a manutenção de um status discriminatório que tem se perpetuado. -- Convidados: - Nádia de Castro Alves: Advogada. Mestre em Ciências Jurídico-Políticas pela Universidade de Lisboa. Professora de cursos de graduação e Pós-Graduação em Direito. Pesquisadora, membro do IBCCRIM e Integrante da Comissão Amicus Curiae do ICP. - Thiago Teixeira: Mestre em Filosofia pela FAJE. Doutorando em Ciências Sociais pela PUC Minas. Professor universitário. Editor da Revista Senso. -- Realização: ICP Jovem -- Organizadores: Ícaro Leon e Pedro Figueiredo; -- As opiniões das entrevistadas não representam, necessariamente, a posição do Instituto de Ciências Penais. -- Sugestões, dúvidas, reclamações: jovem@icp.org.br -- Instagram: Instituto de Ciências Penais (https://www.instagram.com/cienciaspenaisicp/) || ICP Jovem (https://www.instagram.com/icpjovem/) -- Facebook: Instituto de Ciências Penais (https://www.facebook.com/institutodecienciaspenais)

Pierre and Josh are joined in studio by Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro. General Shapiro presides over one of the largest offices in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. His duties include enforcing the law as the state's top prosecutor and fighting corruption and fraud in areas of civil law. He speaks openly with Josh and Pierre about subject he deals with in his office, including police reform and racism.Also, General Shapiro and the guys discuss Florida's "Pay to Vote" law, which requires Florida citizens who have a felony conviction to pay all court ordered fines and fees in full before regaining their ability to vote. General Shapiro explains why he filed an Amicus Curiae brief opposing this law and why this issue is so important to all Americans. An interesting and informative interview with the People's Attorney General.

Informativos 969 e 970 do STF em Direito Constitucional. Temas: Imunidade parlamentar; Amicus Curiae; Controle de constitucionalidade; Ministério Público e CNJ.

Welcome to the last (most probably) episode of the Super Awkward Funcast in which Elle Latham wraps up this long journey with the story of how this show came to be, news in the #GhislaineMaxwell case, what’s up with Bill Gates, the whole dystopia and where it’s leading, the Johnny Depp libel trials, society’s fall and much more.  Sorry for all the sniffles. I guess this is an even more awkward episode than usual. Ha. It be like that sometimes.   Sources:   Lockstep Program   Bill Gates And 13 Other Investors Pour $120 Million Into Revolutionary Gene-Editing Startup   BILL GATES BACKED STARTUP IS USING CRISPR TO GROW LAB MEAT   Gene Editing for Good Bill Gates Article   Bill Gates says "serious mistakes were made" in U.S. pandemic response   Man arrested at Bill Gates' estate for reportedly trading child porn   Quantum-dot tattoos hold vaccination record   Amber Heard Washington Post Op-Ed   Nick Wallis Depp Trial Court Docs   Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein e-mails   Dozens Of Former “Ellen Show” Employees Say Executive Producers Engaged In Rampant Sexual Misconduct And Harassment   Brief of Ashley Ruth Moyé as Amicus Curiae in Support of Plaintiff's Trial Brief   Fairfax County Court Jennifer Howell Subpoena for the Plaintiff     Note: Ed Glavin was the guy with the button on his desk and Kevin Leman was the guy alleged to offer oral sex to his employees.    Thanks so much for listening! Please spread the word and spread the love and know how grateful I am to everyone involved in this show.    And for the most likely last time...enjoy the trip down the rabbit hole and make some snacks. It's gonna be a bumpy ride..

In episode 8.5, Clint & Merry debut the WESTEROSI BAR ASSOCIATION—our format for supporting and engaging with the Learned Hands podcast. To celebrate, we summarily answer your questions and announce a donation drive!To kick off the WBA, we made a shiny, new website where we detail our three membership levels, their perks, and how to apply to join! Credit for our swanky new logo goes to the amazing Abby, who you can find as @prosodi on Twitter. Here's how the WBA is different from a patreon campaign:Our dues of $25/50/100 are YEARLY; andRather than asking for your money directly, we ask you donate to an approved charity or mutual aid network promoting access to justice for the underserved. At the Esquire level, ($25 or a brief westerosi legal essay) the perks of WBA membership include:an official WBA Bar number and printable bar card!access to the WBA swag shop (with stuff like t-shirts, coffee mugs, blankets, and ... skateboards?)At the Amicus Curiae ($50) level, you get:an invitation to the WBA Slack!access to our voluminous show notesquarterly exclusive LIVE episodes!At the Justiciar ($100) level, you also get:the quarterly right to submit brief arguments to the pod!voting rights on episode topics!to BE THE JUDGE and ask us LIVE questions during our live episode!We’re also kicking off the WBA with a donation drive and logging all the donations you tell us about and giving special public rewards!Goal 1, $1k total: we will record a legal drama credits style video to our opening music.Goal 2, $3k: we will record a MOCK TRIAL!In addition to discussing the WBA (with our customary Jameson), we spend about an hour with our mailbag, answering YOUR questions, such as:what ONE law would unfuck Westeros!how did your hosts get into ASOIAF?primogeniture? the worst or the ABSOLUTE WORST?So, what are you waiting for? Make a donation to a great organization like RAICES Texas or the Transgender Law Center, and APPLY to become a member of the WBA today!Support the show (https://www.WesterosBar.org)

Bagaimana sih kedudukan Amicus Curiae dalam Sistem Peradilan di Indonesia? Apakah ada aturan khusus mengenai Amicus Curiae?

Acknowledgement of Country. What the heck is an amicus curiae? Metaphors about pottery and jigsaws. Thank you for listening and take care!

Private litigation over consummated merger is interesting, as such suits are rare and consummated deals are harder to challenge, as a common saying goes— you can't unscramble a scrambled egg. But have some recent developments found a new way for private litigants to challenge? Jack Martin, leading litigator in relevant cases, joins Anora Wang and John Roberti to discuss the statutes of limitations, remedy, standing, agency (in)action, and advocacy in front of a judge or a jury. Listen to this episode to learn about some lesser-known aspects of private litigation challenging consummated merger. Related Links: Brief for the United States of America as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellee Steves and Sons, Inc. (August 23, 2019) (Steves & Sons, Inc. v. JELD-WEN, Inc) Hosted by: John Roberti, Partner, Allen & Overy LLP and Anora Wang, Associate, Winston & Strawn LLP

Guest : Moeshfieka Botha | Head of Research and Consumer Education at National                                              Debt Advisors |  One of the most frequently asked questions during lockdown has been around the payment of school fees. Must I still pay school fees even if my child is not attending school? Very few households in South Africa (and even around the world) remain financially unaffected by the Covid-19 lockdown. Companies have closed, retrenchments have taken place, salaries have been cut and many are struggling to simply survive. This situation has made people question whether they should be paying school fees as schools have been closed for nearly two months. It seems parents who are questioning the payment of fees are not doing so because they don’t want to pay fees. They are asking because they literally can no longer afford to pay school fees. Yet, not paying school fees has a disastrous ripple effect, which in South Africa’s case could end up seeing over 100 000 people in governing body posts lose their jobs. Teachers employed by the Department of Education are being paid in full during lockdown, but school fees are used to pay SGB teachers and support personnel. Like with everything financial right now, the very best thing to do when your financial circumstances have changed is to communicate about it. In terms of Section 40 of the School’s Act, parents of pupils in fee-paying public schools are liable for school fees, but are eligible for exemption of payment if they are unable to pay. Sadly, many people are not even aware that they can apply for an exemption. The exemption may be full or partial, depending on whether the parent has had a reduction in salary, or lost their jobs. The school cannot refuse your request for an application form for exemption of school fees. With regards to the national Coronavirus lockdown, Brian Schreuder, from the Western Cape Education Department, said in a statement: “We are aware that many families will suffer income losses during this period and remind them that there is an option to apply for fee exemption when schools return.” So if you need to apply for an exemption (full, partial or conditional) get an application form from your child’s school as soon as it opens, or download and print from the WCED website. All application forms for school fee exemptions, as well as any supporting documents must be submitted at the school offices. Always make a second copy of the entire application and ensure that it is date stamped/ signed on the day you hand in your original form. If anything happens to the original forms, you will have proof that you have applied. It is important to note, that in terms of Section 41 of the Schools Act, a pupil cannot be excluded from participation in any official school programmes due to non-payment of school fees by the parent. A school may not withhold a pupil's report or transfer certificate because the parent cannot afford to pay school fees. However, schools can take legal action against the parents who owe school fees and who do not qualify for an exemption. The above applies to public schools. Parents who have children registered at private schools have different contracts and payment schedules with those schools. These parents who are struggling are encouraged to approach the school, and the school can look at it on a case-by-case basis. Personally, I encourage all parents who can pay school fees to do so. It could mean someone in an SGB position gets to feed their family. In a Supreme Court of Appeal Court case, the Western Cape Education Department and another versus the Women’s Legal Centre representing Amicus Curiae in December 2017, it was found that a single parent could and should be given a school fee exemption. Single parents will no longer need their ex-spouses to qualify for a school fees exemption for children who they have custody of. This relates to a case whereby a Western Cape mother had applied for a school fees exemption. The school her child attended then wanted both her and her estranged husband to fill in the application form for exemption, because they constituted a “family unit” even though the mother had custody of the daughter. The Supreme Court of Appeal judgement made it clear that in circumstances where one parent has refused or failed to provide their income details, public schools shall grant a conditional fee exemption to the parent who has custody of the child. This will then take that parent’s income into regard. Different types of school fee exemptions explained 1. Automatic Exemption: Orphans in an orphanage and child-headed households. Pupils with foster parents. Pupils placed in youth care centres or the care of a family member. Pupils whose parents receive a social grant in their name, for example a child support grant. 2. Full Exemption: If the school fees (of any one child or several children together) are 10% or more of the total income, you will be entitled to a full exemption and will NOT have to pay school fees. 3. Partial Exemption: Parents can apply for partial exemption if the fees represent between 2% and 10% of their annual salary depending on the number of children they have at a fee-paying, public school. 4. Conditional Exemption: This takes into consideration that some circumstances are beyond a parent’s control, and due to extreme personal issues, they cannot pay fees. It applies to parents who qualify for a partial exemption. However, if a parent is not eligible for an exemption, but presents enough evidence of circumstances that render them unable to pay fees, a conditional exemption will be considered. 5. No Exemption: Where the combined annual gross income of both parents is more than 30 times the yearly school fees per learner, the child doesn’t qualify for any exemption. * Moeshfieka Botha is Head of Research and Consumer Education at National Debt Advisors. For more debt and personal finance information visit www.nationaldebtadvisors.co.za. * For questions on this topic email Moeshfieka@ndadc.co.za

Today on The Daily Beans: Judge Sullivan appoints an amicus curiae to the Flynn case, Trump loses his bid to toss out an emoluments case, Richard Burr steps down as chair of the Senate intelligence committee amidst an FBI investigation into alleged insider trading, Dr.Bright testifies before congress and much more. Keep our show going by becoming a premium subscriber at patreon.com/thedailybeans Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Neste episódio, o Vire a Chave discute o que acontece agora que o STF concluiu o julgamento sobre prisão em 2ª instância. Por 6 votos a 5, os ministros decidiram que ninguém poderá ser preso antes do trânsito em julgado da sentença condenatória, com exceção das prisões preventiva e em flagrante. O Congresso Nacional se adiantou e já pautou duas propostas para que a execução provisória da pena seja inserida em nossa legislação penal e na Constituição Federal. Para discutir o tema, o podcast recebe a professora Carolina Costa Ferreira, do IDP, e coordenadora-chefe do Depto. de Estudos e Projetos Legislativos do IBCCRIM, e o professor da Faculdade de Direito da USP, Maurício Dieter, que está à frente do Depto. de Amicus Curiae do Instituto.

Episodio 24: Entre Los Positivos Panamericanos y Los Amicus Curiae 13/Aug/2019 Deportes: Medallero-watch Panamericano Positivo Panamericano Equipo Argentina Basket femenino elimina por uniformes incorrectos. Equipo de Beisbol de PR jugo con uniformes usados. Atletas de Team USA protestan la recibir medallas de oro. Rechazan Jugar con el equipo de Basket de PUR: Maurice Harkless, Jonathan Isaac, Shabazz Napier y Tyler Davis Locales: Chrystal Robles e Isoel Sánchez se declaran culpables de empleados fantasmas Sin chavos el PPD, ni pal agua cRicky firma 66 leyes antes de dejar su cargo, indulta a 15 y reparte millones en contratos cRicky y su escolta Pintan e portico de la igualdad de Blanco Despingue 2020: 3 “gobernadores” en menos de una semana. La demanda del Senado, Los “amicus curiae” y el “quo warranto”? Wanda Vázquez Garced juramenta como gobernadora de Puerto Rico Noticias Internacionales: Jeffrey Epstein, Clinton y Trump. Recuerda darle Like a nuestra pagina de Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DeTodoYDeNadaPR/ y tambien siguenos en Twitter: https://twitter.com/DeTodoYDeNadaPR

Thomas discusses the new information on the Rogers v. Grewal case as well as the Amicus Curiae brief filed by the Department of Justice in the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. New York City Case. Music Credits to Courtesy of the Red, White, and Blue - Toby Keith and Proud to be an American - Lee Greenwood   --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/thethomassalandrashow/support

Lecture summary: The role of civil society in drafting and the adoption of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court (ICC) is well known, as is the contribution of civil society to advocating for states to ratify the Statute and implement its provisions. However, despite the importance of these contributions, such opportunities do not constitute direct participation in the formal proceedings of the ICC. Other than the role of civil society actors as a witness, be it as an expert or a factual witness, there is only one option for direct participation of civil society in ICC proceedings: that is, to participate as an amicus curiae. States, too, have more limited rights of participation in proceedings before the ICC, particularly in comparison to other international institutions. However, the proceedings may raise issues of direct relevance to a state or broader relevance to several states, including states parties and non states-parties. Where the Rome Statute legal framework does not provide for formal rights of participation for states, states too must rely on the amicus curiae mechanism. This lecture addresses the practice in relation to the amicus curiae in proceedings before the ICC, particularly the reliance on this mechanism by both civil society actors and states. It sets out the legal framework for the amicus curiae in the ICC, analyses the types of actors that have sought to appear as amici curiae, and examines the process and criteria applied by ICC Chambers when considering applications, as well as the range of topics on which amici have sought to make submissions. It concludes that the ICC has so far been cautious in its approach to the amicus curiae; however, amici – particularly states – can influence outcomes at the ICC.

ConAgra Grocery Products Company, NL Industries, Inc., and The Sherwin-Williams Company filed petitions with the United States Supreme Court seeking review of the California Court of Appeal’s decision in The People of California v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company, 17 Cal. App. 5th 51. This lawsuit in California is using a novel legal theory – public nuisance – which is spreading to other industries across the country.The petitions raise important issues of national significance regarding the decision, which imposed hundreds of millions of dollars in public nuisance liability on three companies based on decades-old truthful advertising of a lawful product without proof that defendants caused any injury, that anyone relied on the advertisements to use lead paint on the interior of their homes, or that the defendants’ lead paint is in any home. Amicus Curiae briefs filed in support of the Petitioners agree that California’s misuse of public nuisance in this way violates the defendants’ free speech and due process rights and puts at risk every product manufacturer that has ever done business in California.Featuring:Michael A Carvin, Partner, Jones DayRepresenting The Sherwin-Williams CompanyErin E. Murphy, Partner, Kirkland EllisRepresenting ConAgra Grocery Products ConAgra Grocery Products Co. v. California18-84Issues: (1) Whether imposing massive and retroactive “public nuisance” liability without requiring proof that the defendant’s nearly century-old conduct caused any individual plaintiff any injury violates the due process clause; and (2) whether retroactively imposing massive liability based on a defendant’s nearly century-old promotion of its then-lawful products without requiring proof of reliance thereon or injury therefrom violates the First Amendment.The Sherwin-Williams Co. v. California18-86Issues: (1) Whether, in conflict with decisions of the Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, the First Amendment permits California to impose tort liability for truthfully promoting a lawful product that it finds to be hazardous in some uses; and (2) whether the due process clause allows a state to impose retroactive and grossly disproportionate public nuisance liability to inspect and abate millions of residences based on decades-old promotions without evidence that consumers relied on those promotions or that petitioner’s lead paint is in any residence.For more information including petitioners’ and amici briefs, visit www.leadlawsuits.com. Dial 888-752-3232 at 2:00 p.m. ET to join. This call is open to non-members and press.

ConAgra Grocery Products Company, NL Industries, Inc., and The Sherwin-Williams Company filed petitions with the United States Supreme Court seeking review of the California Court of Appeal’s decision in The People of California v. ConAgra Grocery Products Company, 17 Cal. App. 5th 51. This lawsuit in California is using a novel legal theory – public nuisance – which is spreading to other industries across the country.The petitions raise important issues of national significance regarding the decision, which imposed hundreds of millions of dollars in public nuisance liability on three companies based on decades-old truthful advertising of a lawful product without proof that defendants caused any injury, that anyone relied on the advertisements to use lead paint on the interior of their homes, or that the defendants’ lead paint is in any home. Amicus Curiae briefs filed in support of the Petitioners agree that California’s misuse of public nuisance in this way violates the defendants’ free speech and due process rights and puts at risk every product manufacturer that has ever done business in California.Featuring:Michael A Carvin, Partner, Jones DayRepresenting The Sherwin-Williams CompanyErin E. Murphy, Partner, Kirkland EllisRepresenting ConAgra Grocery Products ConAgra Grocery Products Co. v. California18-84Issues: (1) Whether imposing massive and retroactive “public nuisance” liability without requiring proof that the defendant’s nearly century-old conduct caused any individual plaintiff any injury violates the due process clause; and (2) whether retroactively imposing massive liability based on a defendant’s nearly century-old promotion of its then-lawful products without requiring proof of reliance thereon or injury therefrom violates the First Amendment.The Sherwin-Williams Co. v. California18-86Issues: (1) Whether, in conflict with decisions of the Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, the First Amendment permits California to impose tort liability for truthfully promoting a lawful product that it finds to be hazardous in some uses; and (2) whether the due process clause allows a state to impose retroactive and grossly disproportionate public nuisance liability to inspect and abate millions of residences based on decades-old promotions without evidence that consumers relied on those promotions or that petitioner’s lead paint is in any residence.For more information including petitioners’ and amici briefs, visit www.leadlawsuits.com. Dial 888-752-3232 at 2:00 p.m. ET to join. This call is open to non-members and press.

Katerina Gaita is the founder and CEO of Climate for Change, a new not-for-profit working to create the social climate in Australia for the action we need on climate change. Climate for Change focuses on supporting those who do understand the scale and urgency of solutions needed to have more effective conversations with people around them who do not. She is also a mother, a wife, daughter, sister, friend and active community member.Previously Katerina worked with Environment Victoria and ran a sustainable living business. She has trained with Al Gore and many other experts climate communication and behaviour change. She is a Centre for Sutainable Leadership Fellow and an Advisory Board Member of Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute.Prior to pursuing her passion in sustainability and environment, Katerina studied and worked in the field of law, working as an assistant to Amicus Curiae in the prosecution of Slobodan Milosevic, Professor Tim McCormack and as a researcher at the Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia (IPRIA).