This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Courts in other states had rejected that argument (see our articles on decisions in New York , Florida and Georgia ), but the question of the status of the law remained unresolved in California. But if the Court had found a state law performance right in sound recordings, that right could be deemed unrestricted.
Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma , the court held that the NCAA could, in the interest of preserving the character and quality of college sports, impose restrictions upon players that would otherwise breach antitrust laws. ” The court also granted certiorari in TransUnion LLC v.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday upheld a major shift in the relationship between universities and the athletes who play sports for those schools. The district court, Gorsuch explained, only barred the NCAA from imposing restraints on benefits related to education.
“The answer to that question,” the court held , “must be based on the public’s perception of the goods [bearing adidas’s trademark] on the one hand and the [defendants’ striped] goods on the other.”. That would be for the lower court to determine. The Dutch Supreme Courtdecision brings the case to an end.
The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday affirmed a lower court’s decision to restrict legislation that bans transgender girls from playing sports in an all-girls team. The court also granted a preliminary injunction, allowing the applicants to continue playing on their sports teams.
This is the question that the Supreme Court of Japan answered in its recent judgment rendered on 25 May 2021. The present case has already yielded an important Supreme Courtdecision rendered on 18 January 2019 (decision available here ). Indeed, in its judgment No.
Indecency: After the Supreme Courtdecision in June 2012, upholding the FCC’s right to regulate indecency but questioning the current procedure for doing so, the FCC’s regulation of indecency has been up in the air. Sports Blackout Rules.
In Ashcroft , the group notes, the Supreme Court specifically identified content-filtering software as a better way to limit young peoples access to inappropriate material without burdening adults access to speech they have a right to receive.
The charges against the former prime minister include using his powers as PM to corrupt senior officials in order to privatize a state-owned sports complex for the benefit of his son-in-law, Jamarber Malltezi, making it the second time he was accused of being complicit in the privatization of state-owned facilities.
Universities have spent decades working around courtdecisions limiting the reliance on race as an admissions criteria. If faced with a new decision further limiting (or entirely eliminating) race as a criteria, blind selection would effectively eliminate any basis for judicial review. No more “soft” criteria.
.” These protestations may be disingenuous coming from judges who relish issuing orders without written opinions, but entirely correct that the most damning takedowns of shoddy, politically motivated courtdecisions are those grounded in the text of an opinion. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content