#legal system

[reasonsforhope]

"Tuesday’s [April 9, 2024] definition-shifting court ruling means nearly 50 governments must now contend with a new era of climate litigation.

Governments be warned: You must protect your citizens from climate change — it’s their human right.

The prescient message was laced throughout a dense ruling Tuesday from Europe’s top human rights court. The court’s conclusion? Humans have a right to safety from climate catastrophes that is rooted in their right to life, privacy and family.

The definition-shifting decision from the European Court of Human Rights means nearly 50 governments representing almost 700 million people will now have to contend with a new era of litigation from climate-stricken communities alleging inaction. 

While the judgment itself doesn’t include any penalties — the case featured several women accusing Switzerland of failing to shield them from climate dangers — it does establish a potent precedent that people can use to sue governments in national courts.

The verdict will serve “as a blueprint for how to successfully sue your own government over climate failures,” said Ruth Delbaere, a legal specialist at Avaaz, a U.S.-based nonprofit that promotes climate activism...

Courting the courts on climate

The European Court of Human Rights was established in the decade following World War II but has grown in importance over the last generation. As the judicial arm of the Council of Europe, an international human rights organization, the court’s rulings are binding on the council’s 46 members, spanning all of Europe and numerous countries on its borders.

As a result, Tuesday’s [April 9, 2024] ruling will help elevate climate litigation from a country-by-country battle to one that stretches across continents.

Previously, climate activists had mostly found success in suing individual countries to force climate action. 

A 2019 Dutch Supreme Court verdict forced the Netherlands to slash its greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent, while in 2021 a French court ruled the government was responsible for environmental damage after it failed to meet greenhouse gas reduction goals. That same year, Germany’s Constitutional Court issued a sweeping judgment that the country’s 2019 climate law was partly “unconstitutional” because it put too much of the emissions-cutting burden on future generations.

Even in the U.S., young environmental activists won a local case last year against state agencies after arguing that the continued use of fossil fuels violated their right to a "clean and healthful environment."

But 2024 is shaping up to be a turning point for climate litigation, redefining who has a right to sue over climate issues, what arguments they can use, and whom they can target. 

To start, experts overwhelmingly expect that Tuesday’s ruling will reverberate across future lawsuits — both in Europe and globally. The judgment even includes specifics about what steps governments must take to comply with their new climate-related human rights obligations. The list includes things like a concrete deadline to reach climate neutrality, a pathway to getting there, and evidence the country is actually on that path...

Concretely, the verdict could also affect the outcomes of six other high-profile climate lawsuits pending before the human rights court, including a Greenpeace-backed suit questioning whether Norway's decision to grant new oil and gas licenses complies with its carbon-cutting strategy.

An emerging legal strategy

In the coming months, other international bodies are also expected to issue their own rulings on the same thorny legal issues, which could further solidify the evolving trend. 

The International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights all have similar cases working through the system.

"All these cases together will clarify the legal obligations of states to protect rights in the context of climate change — and will set the stage for decades to come," said Chowdhury, from the environmental law center."

-via Politico, April 9, 2024

#europe #human rights #legal system #international politics #climate change #climate emergency #climate hope #international law #netherlands #france #germany #united states #switzerland #good news #hope

[mapsontheweb]

Legal system in Germany before the unification of civil law, 1895.

#maps #legal system #1895 #germany

[allthecanadianpolitics]

A British Columbia lawyer alleged to have submitted bogus case law “hallucinated” by an AI chatbot is now facing both an investigation from the Law Society of B.C. and potential financial consequences.

Earlier this month, it was revealed that lawyer Chong Ke allegedly used ChatGPT to prepare legal briefs in a family law case at B.C. Supreme Court.

In reviewing the submissions, lawyers for the opposing side discovered that some of the cases cited in the briefs did not, in fact, exist.

Those lawyers are now suing Ke for special costs in the case.

Full article

Tagging: @politicsofcanada

#cdnpoli #canada #canadian politics #canadian news #canadian #british columbia #BC #law society of BC #Chong Ke #AI #chatgpt #law #legal #legal system #BC supreme court

[ranijaisichaal]

Indians on tumblr!!!!! I just found out something and i want to know yall's thoughts. I need to know if I'm the only one thinking about this, and im NOT going to mention this to my family. Help a girl out pls lovelies <333

So at the dinner table today, my dad said the government was making it mandatory to register live-in relationships now, and that not registering your relationship could result in a 6-month jail penalty or something. And at first I was like huh - they're trying to police us again, huh - but then stopped to think, and decided to research instead.

Now, this here is a Times of India article from a few hours ago.✨

In short, the Uttarakhand CM tabled the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) bill in the Uttarakhand assembly this morning. And one part from the 192-page bill is devoted to looking at live-in relationships as a legal entity. The bill was approved on Sunday, and tabled today.

And this made me SO HAPPY, because FINALLY. We're finally making some progress as a society. The Indian law has taken the first step in recognising two people living together without getting married, yet reaping the legal benefits - an unmarried partner will be a legal entity, legally counting as a loved one (provided they are over 21). Moreover, a couple that's living together but not married can legally have kids, and not face any discrimination in the eyes of the law. And not only that, but in case of a break-up (which also needs to be procedurally filed with the authorities), the woman is entitled to maintenance. I quote from the article:

CM Dhami said, “It is a historic moment for each one of us. Let us all have a lengthy and healthy discussion to bring uniformity in the society.”

This is wonderful! It's such a progressive measure.

But what caught my eye was the final paragraph from the article.

Leader of opposition Yashpal Arya said, "We fail to understand the logic behind the urgency being shown by the BJP government. They expect us to read such a lengthy document speedily and start the discussion. It looks like the government is trying to hide something."

At first that seemed like a classic political counterattack, but it got me thinking. Why indeed the urgency?

And then I realised - what if - what if - it is now legalised for queer couples in Uttarakhand to register live-on relationships and basically reap all the benefits of a legally recognised marriage? They haven't explicitly mentioned the queer community anywhere, but it's possible, right? We know the Supreme Court refused to give marriage rights to non-heterosexual couples last year (see here); but if this is presented as an option to queer couples instead, they can secure all the rights of a traditional marriage with a different kind of registration? It is, after all, not illegal to get into long-term homosexual relationships. I know it isn't perfect, but if they allow homosexual live-in relationships, then it's at least a step in the right direction?

I'm not very well-versed with this, so I'm turning to the only relatively safe space I can think of - desis on tumblr. Is it possible that this could happen, that queer relationship recognition could be an ulterior agenda? Is it really as progressive as I think it is? I'm curious, and so hopeful! Any and all discussion is welcome - what do y'all think?🫶

P.S. let me know if there are any more tags I should add for this to reach more people!

#jaate jaate keh gayi #desi #desiblr #india #indian academia #indian #queer #gender #queer community #queer pride #pride #gay #lesbian #politics #india politics #indian politics #law #legal system #indian law #krishnablr #gopiblr #krishna

[entitledrichpeople]

#bail #cash bail #legal system #courts #criminal legal system #pretrial detention

[thoughtportal]

Over the course of years in the 1970s, several boys between the ages of eight and fourteen in St. Martinville, Louisiana, were repeatedly sexually assaulted by their parish priest, suffering serious physical and emotional trauma. Like most child sexual abuse survivors, they did not disclose the abuse until they were in their fifties and sixties. Recognizing the developmental and emotional difficulties preventing survivors from disclosing childhood abuse, in 2021, the Louisiana legislature unanimously passed the Louisiana Child Victims Act, which provided a three-year “look-back window” allowing survivors to file lawsuits that would otherwise be barred by the statute of limitations. The law, versions of which have been passed in about half of states, finally allowed the St. Martinville survivors to sue the church and diocese that harbored their abuser.

Enter the Louisiana Supreme Court. In an opinion written by Justice James Genovese and published on March 22, the court found an absolute property right in the institutions’ right not to be sued. The Louisiana Child Victims Act, wrote Genovese, “cannot be retroactively applied to revive plaintiffs’ prescribed causes of action,” since that would “divest defendants of their vested right to plead prescription”—to defend themselves by asserting that the statute of limitations had run. The decision essentially strikes down the look-back window, leaving survivors once again powerless to hold their abusers accountable. It is a harrowing example of the legal system’s ability to obscure the nature of disputes and turn survivors’ real-life trauma into euphemistic abstractions, while at the same time protecting powerful institutions in the name of otherwise ephemeral property rights.

#article #Louisiana #catholic #church #courts #justice system #legal system #balls and strikes

[joshualunacreations]

We often talk about how white supremacy uses the Model Minority Myth as a wedge, but rarely talk about how Black Americans adopt racism and jingoism against Asians domestically and abroad. (Please don’t repost or edit my art. Reblogs are always appreciated.)

If you enjoy my comics, please pledge to my Patreon or donate to my Paypal.

#anti asian racism #anti asian violence #anti asian hate crimes #Vietnam war #My Lai massacre #white supremacy #legacy admissions #affirmative action #bipoc #jingoism #legal system #restorative justice #artists on tumblr #my art #comic #filam artist #josh luna #joshua luna

[duckyjokes]

#dysphoria system #legal system #bistro huddy #i need opinions #please #i cannot make my own decisions

[botto-b-bobbs]

Me in court facing 22 Counts Of Mayor Theft: your honor I'm about to shit myself

The Judge: Let the record show that the defendant is going to shit themselves.

Mayor: Uh oh.

#196 #/r/196 #r/196 #r196 #shitpost #im really high rn lol #im high #legal system #legal advice #prison reform #mayor #the joker

[ladymazzy]

My blind son was jailed for being at the scene of a murder. Halt this tide of joint enterprise convictions

From the article;

'Jordan had an eye condition called keratoconus that was so severe he was scheduled for transplant surgery in both eyes. Given that my son could not have seen the altercation, or run away from it, and did not come into contact with the victim, I assumed it was a no-brainer that he would be let off.

The prosecutor, Michael Chambers QC, thought differently. He wanted all five of the boys who had been charged to be prosecuted under joint enterprise, a 300-year-old common law doctrine, which was controversially brought back into use under the guise of prosecuting gang violence. Instead, it has led to innocent people – many young, working-class and black and minority ethnic boys – facing mandatory life sentences for crimes committed by others, as was the case for Jordan and so many others like him.'

#uk criminal justice #legal system #joint enterprise convictions #injustice #crown prosecution service #uk politics #guardian articles

[miawashere]

legal terminology pt 9!

subpoena: when a court orders for someone to give a testimony for a case.

subpoena duces tecum: basically the same thing as subpoena but for the person who was asked to testify to also bring documents that are useful for the case.

injunction: to prevent someone from doing continuing to do something. according to cornell law, there are three types of injunctions- permanent, temporary, and preliminary injunctions.

equity: how much someone owes on property after calculating liabilities (to be honest this one is a bit tricky to understand, please correct me if i am wrong!!)

#explore #discover #usa #history #lawyer #equal rights #high school #law #passion project #lawblr #study blog #new studyblr #study tips #law school #law student #legal action #legal #laws #lawsuits #legal system #legal service #legal advice #terms #plural terms #terminology

[reasonsforhope]

"Palestinian plaintiffs and their legal representatives on Friday [January 26, 2024] presented a powerful case in federal court accusing President Joe Biden and other top US officials of complicity in Israel's genocide in Gaza.

People around the world tuned in for the long-awaited hearing in Oakland, with plaintiffs appearing in person and over Zoom in an unprecedented effort to hold the Biden administration accountable for its actions in Gaza.

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed the lawsuit in November 2023 on behalf of Defense for Children International–Palestine, Al-Haq, and eight Palestinians in the US and Palestine. The complaint accuses President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin of failing to live up to their legal responsibilities under the 1948 Genocide Convention and the 1988 Genocide Convention Implementation Act.

The United Nations convention classifies complicity in genocide, or the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part, as a crime under international law and requires that states take measures to prevent such atrocities.

[Note: This is a big reason why politicians almost never call it a genocide, btw. Because if a country recognizes that it's a genocide, then they actually are legally required to do a bunch of things to stop it, under international law.]

The historic lawsuit contends that the Biden administration has failed to uphold its obligations by continuing to provide diplomatic and military support for Israel's brutal campaign in Gaza. Plaintiffs are asking the court to stop Biden from sending more weapons and munitions to Israel that are being used to kill Palestinians en masse.

The hearing before the US District Court for the Northern District of California took place just hours after the International Court of Justice issued provisional measures against Israel in a landmark case brought by South Africa.

-via TAG24, January 26, 2024. Article continues below.

Court contends with questions of jurisdiction and responsibility

In evaluating the allegations, questioning in Friday's hearing revolved around the so-called political question doctrine, by which federal courts regularly refrain from ruling on political matters seen as best resolved by the president and Congress.

The Department of Justice argued that according to the doctrine, the court has no jurisdiction to rule in the case.

"If the court condemns United States foreign policy toward Israel, it could cause international embarrassment and undermine foreign policy decisions in the sensitive context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," defense counsel Jean Lin told Senior District Judge Jeffrey S. White.

Katherine Gallagher of the CCR countered that the court does, indeed, have a responsibility to step in: "Here, the question is a legal one, whether the actions undertaken by the United States failed to uphold the obligation to prevent genocide, and that is an active obligation that requires that the United States not provide the means by which a genocide is being furthered."

"There is no discretion for any state to evade its obligations, its legal obligations. These are not policy decisions," she said.

Palestinian plaintiffs share powerful testimonies before the court

After legal arguments in the case, Judge White heard two hours of gut-wrenching testimony from Palestinian plaintiffs and a renowned Holocaust and genocide expert.

Rubin Presidential Chair of Jewish History at Wake Forest University Dr. Barry Trachtenberg shared his remarks before the court in spite of vehement US government opposition.

"To have an event fall under the 1948 Convention on Genocide requires both action and intent, and here we see that very, very clearly in a way that seems really quite unique in history," he stated, noting that there is now an opportunity to stop Israel's unfolding genocide in real time to prevent further loss of lives...

Judge White said he would take the testimonies to heart as he evaluates his constitutional responsibilities, describing the case as "the most difficult judicial decision" he has ever had to make."

-via TAG24, January 26, 2024

-

Note: I know a lot of people are really not gonna appreciate that last line. I'm not thrilled with it either. But it is worth noting that having a federal court overrule the US president's huge foreign policy and military decisions would be an absolutely massive deal/precedent

This is a case that deserves to be ruled on with an incredible amount of seriousness, if only because if you're a federal judge who's going to make that call, your written decision/legal justification needs to be unimpeachable

That said, if the judge uses jurisdiction to pass the buck here and avoid his legal and human responsibility to do what he can to stop a genocide, I'm gonna be pissed

#palestine #cw war #free palestine #united states #us politics #oakland #california #legal system #foreign policy #war crimes #cw genocide #anti zionisim #isreal #current events #good news #hope #also this decision runs right up against the fact that #if US citizens can sue the US for war crimes/violating international law #and actually force change #then suddenly the gates will open to similar lawsuits for EVERY future war #which btw they SHOULD and international humanitarian law SHOULD be enforceablle #and it will also be a major step forward for something the US is trying really really hard to stave off #which is being investigated/sued by the International Criminal Court for war crimes during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars #or you know be held accountable for those war crimes in any way #which again I AM ALL FOR #genuinely how do you stop rich white countries from committing war crimes without an actual way to hold them accountable #and actually enforce international law #reminder that all posts related to the war are tagged palestine and cw war

[jewish-unicorn]

POLL: WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON THE DEATH PENALTY?

by the way i live in the uk, so im very intrigued to hear what everyone else thinks of it

#polls #law #legal system #death penalty #noah stuff

[allthecanadianpolitics]

The number of incarcerated young offenders in British Columbia has fallen so dramatically that the province needs to come up with a plan to reallocate resources to avoid waste, a report released Thursday says.

The report from the office of Jennifer Charlesworth, B.C.'s representative for children and youth, says the average daily number of youth in custody in the province has fallen from 386 in 1997-98 to as low as 11 in 2021-22.

The "dramatically decreased" figures meant there were 11 staff for every youth in custody at dedicated facilities.

Full article

Tagging: @politicsofcanada

#cdnpoli #canada #canadian politics #canadian news #canadian #british columbia #BC #incarceration #legal system

[maklodes]

So, I know if I get arrested, I should decline speaking to the cops and talk to a lawyer first, but imagining myself in the actual scenario, I’m not sure who I’d call? I don’t have a lawyer on retainer, I don’t even know many lawyers, and the ones I do know generally aren’t in criminal defense. So what would I actually do in that scenario? Can anyone walk me through the mechanics?

I'm not involved in illegal activity and don't have any particular reason to believe I'll be arrested in the near future, but trying to actually imagine myself in the scenario, rather than just nodding along to "don't talk to the cops, lawyer up," I'm a little hazy on the "get a lawyer" part.

#police #legal system

[entitledrichpeople]

A note on judicial pay: while it's true that judges tend to make less than a lot of high end private practice lawyers, they're still making more than most US households. They are comparing themselves to the partners at their old firms making millions, not to normal people.

I remember the judge and my lawyer at my SSI hearing discussing their vacation homes during a break from the second hearing (we were waiting for the court's expert witness to call in and explain my weird neurological stuff) about whether I could have less than $8,000 a year to live on, there's no sense of reasonable perspective here.

#judges #lawyers #legal system