California levanta restricciones en servicios religiosos en locales cerrados telemundoareadelabahia.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from telemundoareadelabahia.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
The strength of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) is founded in the concepts of decentralization, diversification, democratization and disentanglement of the entire justice delivery mechanism, Supreme Court Justice DY Chandrachud said on Saturday. COVID-19 has transformed our lives in unimaginable ways, which inevitably also included the way courts operated with physical hearings giving way to virtual ones. The transition was difficult for everyone, including advocates, litigants and even court staff. However, while this process was initially slow, the concept of virtual hearings eventually came to find its place in the judicial ecosystem, top court judge, justice Chandrachud said. He was addressing the release event of a handbook on ODR, developed by Agami and Omidyar India, in association with NITI Aayog and with the support of ICICI Bank, Ashoka Innovators for the Public, Trilegal, Dalberg, Dvara and National Institute of Public Finance and Policy (NIPFP).
A US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has said that Congress should consider whether laws should be updated to better regulate social media platforms that have unbridled control over unprecedented amounts of speech. According to CNN, the provocative and controversial opinion comes as Twitter banned former President Donald Trump from its platform for violating its rules on incitement of violence. Some conservatives have called on more regulations in the tech world to combat what they view as political bias on social media. If part of the problem is private, concentrated control over online content and platforms available to the public, then part of the solution may be found in doctrines that limit the right of a private company to exclude, Thomas wrote in a 12-page concurring opinion Monday.
The U.S. Supreme Court turned down Jones’ request to hear his appeal without comment.
Jones’ attorney, Norman Pattis, called the court s decision “a disappointment.”
“Judge Bellis, and the Connecticut Supreme Court, asserted frightening and standardless power over the extrajudicial statements of litigants,” Pattis said in an email to The Associated Press. “Mr. Jones never threatened anyone; had he done so, he would have been charged with a crime. We are inching our way case-by-case toward a toothless, politically correct, First Amendment.”
Joshua Koskoff, a lawyer for the Sandy Hook families, said Jones deserved to be sanctioned for his threatening comments on his show.