Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor revealed that she has cried in her office after losses on major cases due to the panel’s conservative supermajority.
On Friday, Sotomayor spoke to the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University while receiving the Radcliffe Medal.
“There are days that I’ve come to my office after an announcement of a case and closed my door and cried,” Sotomayor admitted to the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study. “There have been those days. And there are likely to be more.’
While she did not reveal which events or cases drove her to tears, she pushed the need to keep fighting for particular causes. She was likely referring to the court’s overturning of Roe V. Wade, which guaranteed women’s right to an abortion nationwide.
“There are moments when I’m deeply, deeply sad,” she said. “And there are moments when, yes, even I feel desperation.
On Friday, Sotomayor spoke to the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University while receiving the Radcliffe Medal.
“There are days that I’ve come to my office after an announcement of a case and closed my door and cried,” Sotomayor admitted to the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study. “There have been those days. And there are likely to be more.’
While she did not reveal which events or cases drove her to tears, she pushed the need to keep fighting for particular causes. She was likely referring to the court’s overturning of Roe V. Wade, which guaranteed women’s right to an abortion nationwide.
“There are moments when I’m deeply, deeply sad,” she said. “And there are moments when, yes, even I feel desperation.
- 5/27/2024
- by Anushka Desai
- Uinterview
It was Valentine’s Day earlier this year when, in an Albany courtroom, the seven judges that make up the New York State Court of Appeals spent part of their day hearing oral arguments about potentially overturning the nearly four-year-old landmark trial in which Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein was found guilty of two of five felony counts of rape, resulting in a prison sentence of 23 years. On Thursday, more than two months later, the court announced it has reversed the mogul’s conviction in what is a shocking move to many and a pivotal moment in the #MeToo era.
Others who were closely watching the case and the proceedings on that February day in Albany may feel less shocked by the reversal. That Wednesday, the court’s seven judges — four women and three men — held both defense and the prosecution attorneys to account for their arguments, which centered around the...
Others who were closely watching the case and the proceedings on that February day in Albany may feel less shocked by the reversal. That Wednesday, the court’s seven judges — four women and three men — held both defense and the prosecution attorneys to account for their arguments, which centered around the...
- 4/26/2024
- by Kevin Dolak
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
Update: Supreme Court justices expressed skepticism of Donald Trump’s argument that presidents enjoy broad immunity, but they wrestled with which certain official acts could be shielded from prosecution and which would not.
There were some suggestions of sending the case base to lower courts to decide, on an individual basis, which of the charges against Trump could be deemed as private acts and subject to criminal liability. That is a prospect that could lead to further delay in Trump’s election conspiracy case, perhaps until after the 2024 election.
A number of the justices expressed concerns that their decision in the case would impact future presidents after they leave office and the extent to which they could be subject to criminal prosecution. Justice Samuel Alito hypothesized about political rivals being prosecuted and “a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country.”
Justice John Roberts in particular seemed to find troubles...
There were some suggestions of sending the case base to lower courts to decide, on an individual basis, which of the charges against Trump could be deemed as private acts and subject to criminal liability. That is a prospect that could lead to further delay in Trump’s election conspiracy case, perhaps until after the 2024 election.
A number of the justices expressed concerns that their decision in the case would impact future presidents after they leave office and the extent to which they could be subject to criminal prosecution. Justice Samuel Alito hypothesized about political rivals being prosecuted and “a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country.”
Justice John Roberts in particular seemed to find troubles...
- 4/25/2024
- by Ted Johnson
- Deadline Film + TV
As Donald Trump sat through another day of damning testimony in his criminal hush-money trial, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in his bid to establish widespread presidential immunity from criminal prosecution over “official” acts committed in office.
The case before the Supreme Court stems from Trump’s ongoing efforts to delay or dismiss the Justice Department’s case against him over his role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 riot. The court’s decision will have profound implications on the criminal indictments currently on the former president’s rap sheet.
The case before the Supreme Court stems from Trump’s ongoing efforts to delay or dismiss the Justice Department’s case against him over his role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 riot. The court’s decision will have profound implications on the criminal indictments currently on the former president’s rap sheet.
- 4/25/2024
- by Nikki McCann Ramirez
- Rollingstone.com
The women on the Supreme Court appeared to band together Wednesday during oral arguments in a case out of Idaho that could shape how hospitals in Republican-led states respond to life-threatening pregnancy complications.
Even conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Catholic abortion opponent, had some fierce inquiries for Idaho Solicitor General Joshua Turner, who refused to specify what medical conditions qualify for emergency abortions.
“Counsel, I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered. And you’re now saying they’re not?...
Even conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Catholic abortion opponent, had some fierce inquiries for Idaho Solicitor General Joshua Turner, who refused to specify what medical conditions qualify for emergency abortions.
“Counsel, I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered. And you’re now saying they’re not?...
- 4/25/2024
- by Jeremy Childs
- Rollingstone.com
The Supreme Court decided on Monday not to intervene in a lawsuit seeking to hold the organizer of a Black Lives Matter protest liable for injuries sustained by a police officer who was attacked by a demonstrator. The decision leaves in place an appeals court ruling that effectively renders organizers liable for any illegal act committed by protest attendees in three states: Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
In June of last year, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees the three states, ruled in Doe v. Mckesson that protest organizer...
In June of last year, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees the three states, ruled in Doe v. Mckesson that protest organizer...
- 4/15/2024
- by Nikki McCann Ramirez
- Rollingstone.com
The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Texas can begin enforcing a controversial immigration law that allows state law enforcement to arrest individuals on suspicion of being undocumented border crossers. Hours later, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the state from acting on the court’s decision.
In a 6-3 ruling, with the three liberal justices dissenting, the court ruled that the state will be allowed to enforce the legislation known as Senate Bill 4 pending a federal appeal — despite concerns that the law will lead to instances of...
In a 6-3 ruling, with the three liberal justices dissenting, the court ruled that the state will be allowed to enforce the legislation known as Senate Bill 4 pending a federal appeal — despite concerns that the law will lead to instances of...
- 3/19/2024
- by Nikki McCann Ramirez
- Rollingstone.com
An award named after Ruth Bader Ginsburg that was set to be given to Elon Musk and Rubert Murdoch has been canceled.
On Monday, the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation announced that it would be canceling its awards gala this year after Barbra Streisand — who was awarded the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award last year — and the late justice’s family denounced the organization over this year’s recipients.
“This year we selected leaders in different fields. We honored men for the first time. We thought Rbg’s teachings regarding equality should be practiced.
On Monday, the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation announced that it would be canceling its awards gala this year after Barbra Streisand — who was awarded the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award last year — and the late justice’s family denounced the organization over this year’s recipients.
“This year we selected leaders in different fields. We honored men for the first time. We thought Rbg’s teachings regarding equality should be practiced.
- 3/18/2024
- by Tomás Mier
- Rollingstone.com
Barbra Streisand joined the family of Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Monday in condemning the choice of a leadership award previously named after the late Supreme Court justice going to Elon Musk and Rupert Murdoch, among others.
Streisand, who accepted the honor formerly known as the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award last year, wrote on Instagram she was “proud” to have done so “in memory of one of the most esteemed public figures in American history.”
The Dwight D. Opperman Foundation, the organization which delivers the award, changed the title this year from the Women of Leadership Award to just the Leadership Award, citing a pursuit of gender equality, and four of the five recipients are men.
In addition to Musk and Murdoch, the award will be presented to billionaire Michael Milken (known for his dominance of the junk bond market in the 1980s before pleading guilty to securities...
Streisand, who accepted the honor formerly known as the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award last year, wrote on Instagram she was “proud” to have done so “in memory of one of the most esteemed public figures in American history.”
The Dwight D. Opperman Foundation, the organization which delivers the award, changed the title this year from the Women of Leadership Award to just the Leadership Award, citing a pursuit of gender equality, and four of the five recipients are men.
In addition to Musk and Murdoch, the award will be presented to billionaire Michael Milken (known for his dominance of the junk bond market in the 1980s before pleading guilty to securities...
- 3/18/2024
- by Zoe G Phillips
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that states could not remove Donald Trump from their ballots using the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause.
However, the Supreme Court justices were divided about how broadly this decision would end up sweeping. A five-to-four majority wrote that no state could exclude a federal candidate from any ballot – but four justices argued that the court should have kept its opinion limited.
A five-justice majority – Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh – wrote that states cannot remove any federal officer from the ballot, especially the president, unless Congress first passes legislation.
“We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency,” these justices said.
“Nothing in the Constitution delegates to the States any...
However, the Supreme Court justices were divided about how broadly this decision would end up sweeping. A five-to-four majority wrote that no state could exclude a federal candidate from any ballot – but four justices argued that the court should have kept its opinion limited.
A five-justice majority – Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh – wrote that states cannot remove any federal officer from the ballot, especially the president, unless Congress first passes legislation.
“We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency,” these justices said.
“Nothing in the Constitution delegates to the States any...
- 3/6/2024
- by Alessio Atria
- Uinterview
The Supreme Court has ruled that states cannot unilaterally implement the Constitution’s 14th Amendment anti-rebellion clause to bar individuals from appearing on state ballots. The decision benefits one person specifically this election cycle: Donald Trump.
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court overturned a ruling by Colorado’s Supreme Court authorizing Trump’s removal from the state’s 2024 primary election ballot on grounds that the former president had committed acts of rebellion and insurrection in the aftermath of his 2020 election loss and through his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court overturned a ruling by Colorado’s Supreme Court authorizing Trump’s removal from the state’s 2024 primary election ballot on grounds that the former president had committed acts of rebellion and insurrection in the aftermath of his 2020 election loss and through his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
- 3/4/2024
- by Nikki McCann Ramirez
- Rollingstone.com
Donald Trump cannot be removed from state ballots in the 2024 election, despite a clause in the Constitution that restricts those who have engaged in an insurrection from holding office, the Supreme Court ruled today.
In a 9-0 decision, the justices ruled that it was up to Congress, and not the states, to make such a determination.
Read the Supreme Court opinion on Trump ballot access.
The decision had been expected, after justices were skeptical of a Colorado Supreme Court ruling that removed the former president from the ballot. Other states, however, had reached alternate conclusions that kept Trump on their ballots.
Some legal scholars had held that Trump could be removed from the ballot following his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and his conduct on January 6, 2021, when he urged his supporters to march to the Capitol. There, rioters stormed House and Senate chambers as lawmakers were...
In a 9-0 decision, the justices ruled that it was up to Congress, and not the states, to make such a determination.
Read the Supreme Court opinion on Trump ballot access.
The decision had been expected, after justices were skeptical of a Colorado Supreme Court ruling that removed the former president from the ballot. Other states, however, had reached alternate conclusions that kept Trump on their ballots.
Some legal scholars had held that Trump could be removed from the ballot following his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and his conduct on January 6, 2021, when he urged his supporters to march to the Capitol. There, rioters stormed House and Senate chambers as lawmakers were...
- 3/4/2024
- by Ted Johnson
- Deadline Film + TV
Update: Supreme Court justices have been grappling all morning on the question of whether social media platforms are neutral gatekeepers, or whether their content moderation practices count as expressive activity protected by the First Amendment.
The justices raised a series of questions over the broadness of the Florida law, which restricts the content moderation practices of tech platforms. Some of the justices were skeptical of the law when it came to content decisions, but also wondered whether why it should not apply to the activity of Etsy or Uber.
Paul Clement, attorney representing the industry group NetChoice, offered the court a prediction of what will happen if the Florida law were allowed to stand.
“What some of these companies might do is say, ‘Let’s just do puppy dogs in Florida,'” Clement said, suggesting that platforms would default to featuring only non-controversial content “so no one can say we are not being consistent.
The justices raised a series of questions over the broadness of the Florida law, which restricts the content moderation practices of tech platforms. Some of the justices were skeptical of the law when it came to content decisions, but also wondered whether why it should not apply to the activity of Etsy or Uber.
Paul Clement, attorney representing the industry group NetChoice, offered the court a prediction of what will happen if the Florida law were allowed to stand.
“What some of these companies might do is say, ‘Let’s just do puppy dogs in Florida,'” Clement said, suggesting that platforms would default to featuring only non-controversial content “so no one can say we are not being consistent.
- 2/26/2024
- by Ted Johnson
- Deadline Film + TV
The Supreme Court heard arguments on Thursday in the case over whether states can toss Donald Trump off their ballots. Much of the discussion centered around a wildly inane legal question: whether America’s president qualifies as “an officer of the United States.”
The case will review Colorado’s decision to disqualify Trump from its ballot on the grounds that he committed “insurrection” by inciting the violent assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, as lawmakers were preparing to certify President Joe Biden’s electoral victory.
At issue is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,...
The case will review Colorado’s decision to disqualify Trump from its ballot on the grounds that he committed “insurrection” by inciting the violent assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, as lawmakers were preparing to certify President Joe Biden’s electoral victory.
At issue is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,...
- 2/8/2024
- by Nikki McCann Ramirez and Andrew Perez
- Rollingstone.com
Robert De Niro took the stage at the Kennedy Center on Sunday and, looking out at the balcony box where honoree Billy Crystal was sitting, told him of his career, “I had no idea you had done so much. And you’ve done it all in such a relatively short amount of time. You’re only 75. That means you’re just about six years away from being the perfect age to be elected president.”
The joke got some of the biggest audience cheers of the night — and a laugh from President Joe Biden, 81, embarking on a re-election campaign where his chronological advantage is, based on polls, top of mind to voters and the source of some doubts.
It was also one of a few references to age throughout Sunday evening’s Kennedy Center Honors which, in addition to Crystal, honored opera singer Renée Fleming, hip hop star and actress Queen Latifah,...
The joke got some of the biggest audience cheers of the night — and a laugh from President Joe Biden, 81, embarking on a re-election campaign where his chronological advantage is, based on polls, top of mind to voters and the source of some doubts.
It was also one of a few references to age throughout Sunday evening’s Kennedy Center Honors which, in addition to Crystal, honored opera singer Renée Fleming, hip hop star and actress Queen Latifah,...
- 12/4/2023
- by Ted Johnson
- Deadline Film + TV
According to a statement from the U.S. Supreme Court, retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor passed away “of complications related to advanced dementia, probably Alzheimer’s, and a respiratory illness.” O’Connor, whose husband suffered from Alzheimer’s, first announced her diagnosis in 2018 in a letter explaining that as her condition progressed, she was “no longer able to participate in public life.”
The nation’s first female justice ascended to the court in 1981, nominated by President Ronald Reagan, who, in a bid to attract support from female voters, made a...
The nation’s first female justice ascended to the court in 1981, nominated by President Ronald Reagan, who, in a bid to attract support from female voters, made a...
- 12/1/2023
- by Tessa Stuart
- Rollingstone.com
On Monday, September 18, 2023, at 8:30 Am, PBS will premiere Season 2, Episode 1 of “Alma’s Way” titled “Justice Sonia and Judge Alma; Justice Sonia and Umpire Alma.” In this episode, Alma, inspired by Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, helps her friends figure out what’s fair in different situations. Justice Sotomayor encourages Alma to take on the role of an umpire during a kickball game.
“Alma’s Way” is a show that teaches children about fairness and making good choices. In this particular episode, viewers will see Alma’s journey as she learns from a real-life justice and applies those lessons to her daily life. The episode also highlights the importance of being fair and impartial when taking on responsibilities like being an umpire.
For young viewers and their families, “Justice Sonia and Judge Alma; Justice Sonia and Umpire Alma” is an opportunity to explore valuable life lessons through the eyes of Alma.
“Alma’s Way” is a show that teaches children about fairness and making good choices. In this particular episode, viewers will see Alma’s journey as she learns from a real-life justice and applies those lessons to her daily life. The episode also highlights the importance of being fair and impartial when taking on responsibilities like being an umpire.
For young viewers and their families, “Justice Sonia and Judge Alma; Justice Sonia and Umpire Alma” is an opportunity to explore valuable life lessons through the eyes of Alma.
- 9/16/2023
- by Jules Byrd
- TV Everyday
Showtime’s four-part docuseries on the Supreme Court, Deadlocked: How America Shaped the Supreme Court, will premiere its first episode on September 22, amid a period of intense concern over the impact and integrity of the high court.
From director Dawn Porter, the project delves into the modern era of the court, going back to the Earl Warren court of the 1950s and 1960s, when the justices established a series of landmark progressive precedents, to today, with the conservative majority upending abortion rights and affirmative action. With it has come increasing distrust of the court itself, as well as the internal intrigue given the unprecedented leak last year of the Dobbs abortion decision.
“I wanted to give people an understanding of how the court works,” Porter told Deadline. “…You don’t pay attention until something you love is gone, until a right you cherish has been overturned. So I felt like...
From director Dawn Porter, the project delves into the modern era of the court, going back to the Earl Warren court of the 1950s and 1960s, when the justices established a series of landmark progressive precedents, to today, with the conservative majority upending abortion rights and affirmative action. With it has come increasing distrust of the court itself, as well as the internal intrigue given the unprecedented leak last year of the Dobbs abortion decision.
“I wanted to give people an understanding of how the court works,” Porter told Deadline. “…You don’t pay attention until something you love is gone, until a right you cherish has been overturned. So I felt like...
- 8/1/2023
- by Ted Johnson
- Deadline Film + TV
Barbra Streisand received The Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award, the fourth-ever presentation of this prestigious honor, last week in a private ceremony.
Barbra Streisand Receives The Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award
The award was presented by The Honorable Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Julie Opperman, Chair of the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation. Streisand was chosen as the 2023 recipient earlier this year by the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation board, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Leadership Award Nominating Committee and Voting Council members.
Recognizing the impact she had on the world and wishing to inspire leaders for generations to come, Justice Ginsburg established her legacy award with Opperman in 2019. The Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award is presented annually to leaders who have distinguished themselves by assuming a leadership role and making a meaningful change in the lives of others.
Streisand, an artist who redefined Hollywood...
Barbra Streisand Receives The Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award
The award was presented by The Honorable Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Julie Opperman, Chair of the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation. Streisand was chosen as the 2023 recipient earlier this year by the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation board, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Leadership Award Nominating Committee and Voting Council members.
Recognizing the impact she had on the world and wishing to inspire leaders for generations to come, Justice Ginsburg established her legacy award with Opperman in 2019. The Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Woman of Leadership Award is presented annually to leaders who have distinguished themselves by assuming a leadership role and making a meaningful change in the lives of others.
Streisand, an artist who redefined Hollywood...
- 7/10/2023
- Look to the Stars
Here’s a look at this week’s biggest premieres, parties and openings in Los Angeles and New York, including red carpets for Theater Camp and Essence Festival of Culture.
Disney x Essence Fest
Disney, the major entertainment sponsor of this year’s Essence Festival of Culture in New Orleans, showcased footage from Haunted Mansion, Lucasfilm’s new Star Wars series Ahsoka and Walt Disney Animation Studios’ Wish over the weekend, joined by Haunted Mansion cast members Lakeith Stanfield, Tiffany Haddish, Jamie Lee Curtis, Rosario Dawson and director Justin Simien.
Lakeith Stanfield, Tiffany Haddish, Rosario Dawson and Justin Simien
Essence Fest
The four-day New Orleans festival welcomed the casts of Abbott Elementary and The Chi, along with stars including Sheryl Lee Ralph, Rick Ross, Deon Cole, Chandra Wilson, Aunjanue Ellis and Lexi Underwood.
Lisa Ann Walter, Quinta Brunson, Sheryl Lee Ralph, Janelle James and Sade Baderinwa Jania Norman, Sheryl Lee Ralph,...
Disney x Essence Fest
Disney, the major entertainment sponsor of this year’s Essence Festival of Culture in New Orleans, showcased footage from Haunted Mansion, Lucasfilm’s new Star Wars series Ahsoka and Walt Disney Animation Studios’ Wish over the weekend, joined by Haunted Mansion cast members Lakeith Stanfield, Tiffany Haddish, Jamie Lee Curtis, Rosario Dawson and director Justin Simien.
Lakeith Stanfield, Tiffany Haddish, Rosario Dawson and Justin Simien
Essence Fest
The four-day New Orleans festival welcomed the casts of Abbott Elementary and The Chi, along with stars including Sheryl Lee Ralph, Rick Ross, Deon Cole, Chandra Wilson, Aunjanue Ellis and Lexi Underwood.
Lisa Ann Walter, Quinta Brunson, Sheryl Lee Ralph, Janelle James and Sade Baderinwa Jania Norman, Sheryl Lee Ralph,...
- 7/7/2023
- by Kirsten Chuba
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
Michael Imperioli blastd the Supreme Court’s decision to side in favor of a Christian web designer’s right to refuse to create websites that celebrate same-sex weddings.
Imperioli took his opinion onto Instagram stating, “I’ve decided to forbid bigots and homophobes from watching The Sopranos, The White Lotus, Goodfellas or any movie or tv show I’ve been in. Thank you Supreme Court for allowing me to discriminate and exclude those who I don’t agree with and am opposed to. USA! USA!”
He additionally included a picture of a headline that reads, “Supreme Court protects web designer who won’t do gay wedding websites.”
Fans had mixed reactions to his post. One said, “It’s her beliefs, bet you wouldn’t challenge a Muslim on their beliefs and take on homosexuality would you.”
Others agreed with his opinion, commenting, “Preach @realmichaelimperioli Thanks for this. Totally agree with this.
Imperioli took his opinion onto Instagram stating, “I’ve decided to forbid bigots and homophobes from watching The Sopranos, The White Lotus, Goodfellas or any movie or tv show I’ve been in. Thank you Supreme Court for allowing me to discriminate and exclude those who I don’t agree with and am opposed to. USA! USA!”
He additionally included a picture of a headline that reads, “Supreme Court protects web designer who won’t do gay wedding websites.”
Fans had mixed reactions to his post. One said, “It’s her beliefs, bet you wouldn’t challenge a Muslim on their beliefs and take on homosexuality would you.”
Others agreed with his opinion, commenting, “Preach @realmichaelimperioli Thanks for this. Totally agree with this.
- 7/7/2023
- by Nina Hauswirth
- Uinterview
Michael Imperioli took to social media to share a statement following the Supreme Court decision to side with a Colorado web designer who does not want to create wedding sites for same-sex couples due to religious reasons.
“I’ve decided to forbid bigots and homophobes from watching The Sopranos, The White Lotus, Goodfellas or any movie or tv show I’ve been in,” the actor wrote in an Instagram caption of a photo of a news story announcing the court’s decision.
He continued, “Thank you Supreme Court for allowing me to discriminate and exclude those who I don’t agree with and am opposed to. USA ! USA!” Imperioli also commented on his post, writing, “hate and ignorance is not a legitimate point of view,” and “America is becoming dumber by the minute.”
The court ruled 6-3 in favor of designer Lorie Smith, explaining that she can refuse to design...
“I’ve decided to forbid bigots and homophobes from watching The Sopranos, The White Lotus, Goodfellas or any movie or tv show I’ve been in,” the actor wrote in an Instagram caption of a photo of a news story announcing the court’s decision.
He continued, “Thank you Supreme Court for allowing me to discriminate and exclude those who I don’t agree with and am opposed to. USA ! USA!” Imperioli also commented on his post, writing, “hate and ignorance is not a legitimate point of view,” and “America is becoming dumber by the minute.”
The court ruled 6-3 in favor of designer Lorie Smith, explaining that she can refuse to design...
- 7/2/2023
- by Christy Piña
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
When Briannah Cook, 21, thinks about the years before college, she remembers anxiety, stress, and wondering if all of her hard work would still end in failure. The Black Chicago student’s list of extracurriculars included volleyball, soccer, dance, karate, violin, clarinet, and several student clubs and unions in addition to maintaining a high G.P.A.— which created a grueling 14-hour day schedule. But her goal wasn’t just a prestigious Ivy League seat: it was the chance to receive an advanced degree she knew her family couldn’t pay for on their own.
- 7/1/2023
- by CT Jones
- Rollingstone.com
The Supreme Court ended its latest term in devastating fashion, ruling that businesses can discriminate against gay Americans before striking down President Biden’s plan for relieve student debt relief for an estimated 43 million Americans. The rulings came a day after the conservative court deemed race-base affirmative action in college admissions unconstitutional.
The court’s three liberal justices — Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan — delivered scathing dissenting opinions, calling out their “let them eat cake” colleagues for taking a hatchet to the longstanding measures to protect and uplift marginalized Americans.
The court’s three liberal justices — Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan — delivered scathing dissenting opinions, calling out their “let them eat cake” colleagues for taking a hatchet to the longstanding measures to protect and uplift marginalized Americans.
- 6/30/2023
- by Ryan Bort
- Rollingstone.com
The Supreme Court ruled that a website designer could refuse to provide services for same-sex weddings, despite a Colorado non-discrimination law.
The court ruled that the designer was within First Amendment rights to refuse such services, but activists said the decision was a setback for LGBTQ rights.
“This is a dangerous step backward and gives some businesses the license to discriminate,” The Human Rights Campaign said in a statement.
In the ruling (read it here), the court was split 6-3 along ideological lines.
The case was a bit hypothetical, as no same-sex couple had approached the web designer, Lorie Smith, to create a wedding site at the time that the lawsuit was first filed. Smith was looking to expand her graphic design business to couples seeking wedding websites, but worried that she would be challenged if she refused to create sites for same-sex couples. She filed a lawsuit seeking an...
The court ruled that the designer was within First Amendment rights to refuse such services, but activists said the decision was a setback for LGBTQ rights.
“This is a dangerous step backward and gives some businesses the license to discriminate,” The Human Rights Campaign said in a statement.
In the ruling (read it here), the court was split 6-3 along ideological lines.
The case was a bit hypothetical, as no same-sex couple had approached the web designer, Lorie Smith, to create a wedding site at the time that the lawsuit was first filed. Smith was looking to expand her graphic design business to couples seeking wedding websites, but worried that she would be challenged if she refused to create sites for same-sex couples. She filed a lawsuit seeking an...
- 6/30/2023
- by Ted Johnson
- Deadline Film + TV
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that businesses can discriminate against LGBTQ Americans.
The court ruled 6-3 in favor of a Colorado web designer who argued that she has the right under the First Amendment to refuse to create wedding websites for gay people. Lori Smith, the website designer who brought the case, was never even hired to make a website for a same-sex couple, nor has she ever created a wedding website, as HuffPost points out.
Sonia Sotomayor issued a blistering dissenting opinion. “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history,...
The court ruled 6-3 in favor of a Colorado web designer who argued that she has the right under the First Amendment to refuse to create wedding websites for gay people. Lori Smith, the website designer who brought the case, was never even hired to make a website for a same-sex couple, nor has she ever created a wedding website, as HuffPost points out.
Sonia Sotomayor issued a blistering dissenting opinion. “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history,...
- 6/30/2023
- by Ryan Bort
- Rollingstone.com
The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina were unconstitutional. Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-n.Y.), a former public school teacher and principal, calls the decision “infuriating, exhausting, and another body blow to our continued fight for justice and equality in America.”
“The Supreme Court just upheld white supremacy,” Bowman says.
The ruling was 6-3, with every Republican-appointed justice voting to reject affirmative action. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote separate dissents, with the former writing “the devastating impact...
“The Supreme Court just upheld white supremacy,” Bowman says.
The ruling was 6-3, with every Republican-appointed justice voting to reject affirmative action. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote separate dissents, with the former writing “the devastating impact...
- 6/29/2023
- by Tessa Stuart
- Rollingstone.com
Universities can no longer consider race in college admissions, the Supreme Court ruled today. The ruling was expected, on 6-3 ideological lines, and it will forever change access to higher education in America. Like it or not, “affirmative action” was extraordinarily effective — in its first year at Harvard, admissions of Black students rose 51 percent, and diversity on college campuses has increased in every decade from the 1980s to the 2020s.
And now, it’s over.
What happens next? In many ways, the answer to that question is based on what...
And now, it’s over.
What happens next? In many ways, the answer to that question is based on what...
- 6/29/2023
- by Jay Michaelson
- Rollingstone.com
The Supreme Court has deemed race-based affirmative action in college admissions unconstitutional.
The court’s conservative majority ruled on Thursday that universities cannot consider an applicants’ race when deciding whether to admit them. The decision means higher-learning institutions will have to overhaul efforts to cultivate a diverse student body.
The court’s three liberal justices dissented. Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman to serve on the court, called out her conservative colleagues in a scathing dissent. “With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces ‘colorblindness for all’ by legal fiat,...
The court’s conservative majority ruled on Thursday that universities cannot consider an applicants’ race when deciding whether to admit them. The decision means higher-learning institutions will have to overhaul efforts to cultivate a diverse student body.
The court’s three liberal justices dissented. Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman to serve on the court, called out her conservative colleagues in a scathing dissent. “With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces ‘colorblindness for all’ by legal fiat,...
- 6/29/2023
- by Ryan Bort
- Rollingstone.com
The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down affirmative action in college admissions, forcing institutions of higher education to look for new ways to achieve diverse student bodies.
The court’s conservative majority overturned admissions plans at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, the nation’s oldest private and public colleges, respectively.
Chief Justice John Roberts said that for too long universities have “concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”
Justice Clarence Thomas, the nation’s second Black justice who had long called for an end to affirmative action, wrote separately that the decision “sees the universities’ admissions policies for what they are: rudderless, race-based preferences designed to ensure a particular racial mix in their entering classes.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent that...
The court’s conservative majority overturned admissions plans at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, the nation’s oldest private and public colleges, respectively.
Chief Justice John Roberts said that for too long universities have “concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”
Justice Clarence Thomas, the nation’s second Black justice who had long called for an end to affirmative action, wrote separately that the decision “sees the universities’ admissions policies for what they are: rudderless, race-based preferences designed to ensure a particular racial mix in their entering classes.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent that...
- 6/29/2023
- by The Associated Press
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
Updated: The Supreme Court ruled that colleges and universities who consider race as a factor in admissions violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
The 6-3 decision (read it here) likely will be one of the court’s most consequential rulings this term. Major broadcast networks interrupted regular programming to report on the ruling, while cable news networks had been anticipating the decision as the term nears its end.
The court was rendering judgement on the college admissions programs of Harvard and the University of North Carolina.
In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points. We have never permitted admissions programs to
work in that way, and we will not do so today. At the same time, as all parties agree,...
The 6-3 decision (read it here) likely will be one of the court’s most consequential rulings this term. Major broadcast networks interrupted regular programming to report on the ruling, while cable news networks had been anticipating the decision as the term nears its end.
The court was rendering judgement on the college admissions programs of Harvard and the University of North Carolina.
In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points. We have never permitted admissions programs to
work in that way, and we will not do so today. At the same time, as all parties agree,...
- 6/29/2023
- by Ted Johnson
- Deadline Film + TV
Purpose and character. These are now solidly enshrined as the buzzwords of copyright law on the heels of the Supreme Court’s 7-2 ruling earlier this week in the case involving the estate of Andy Warhol and photographer Lynn Goldsmith.
The decision at first blush seemed to be a clear-cut win for copyright owners and artists who create original works. But the court’s majority decision, penned with verve by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, is already proving divisive among experts on intellectual property rights. It demonstrates the difficulty of setting up hard and fast rules around highly subjective questions, such as when an artistic or literary work is “transformative” of an earlier work and whether its ultimate use is for commercial purposes, or not. The case has been closely watched in part because it’s sure to have implications for the tidal wave of AI-generated art and literary works that are to emerge,...
The decision at first blush seemed to be a clear-cut win for copyright owners and artists who create original works. But the court’s majority decision, penned with verve by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, is already proving divisive among experts on intellectual property rights. It demonstrates the difficulty of setting up hard and fast rules around highly subjective questions, such as when an artistic or literary work is “transformative” of an earlier work and whether its ultimate use is for commercial purposes, or not. The case has been closely watched in part because it’s sure to have implications for the tidal wave of AI-generated art and literary works that are to emerge,...
- 5/20/2023
- by Cynthia Littleton
- Variety Film + TV
In a case with potential implications on a wide range of creative industries, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday, May 18, that Andy Warhol infringed on a photographer’s copyrights for his portraits of Prince.
The court ruled 7-2 in favor of Lynn Goldsmith, whose photos of The Purple One were the original works, which Warhol then used for his own artwork. The court went against the Warhol Foundation’s argument that Warhol’s work was “transformative” enough that they were substantially different and constituted fair use.
The case dates back to the 1980s,...
The court ruled 7-2 in favor of Lynn Goldsmith, whose photos of The Purple One were the original works, which Warhol then used for his own artwork. The court went against the Warhol Foundation’s argument that Warhol’s work was “transformative” enough that they were substantially different and constituted fair use.
The case dates back to the 1980s,...
- 5/18/2023
- by Ethan Millman
- Rollingstone.com
Andy Warhol wasn’t allowed to use a photographer’s portrait of Prince for a series of pop-art images, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday in a decision limiting the reach of the fair use defense to copyright infringement claims.
Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the majority in the 7-2 decision, found that the Lynn Goldsmith’s “original works, like those of other photographers, are entitled to copyright protection, even against famous artists” like Warhol. Potentially overlapping commercial exploitation of the works was a key consideration.
“The purpose of the image is substantially the same as that of Goldsmith’s photograph,“ she wrote. “Both are portraits of Prince used in magazines to illustrate stories about Prince.”
Associate Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, sided with Warhol in a dissent saying that the majority is “uninterested in the distinctiveness and newness of Warhol’s portrait.” She...
Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the majority in the 7-2 decision, found that the Lynn Goldsmith’s “original works, like those of other photographers, are entitled to copyright protection, even against famous artists” like Warhol. Potentially overlapping commercial exploitation of the works was a key consideration.
“The purpose of the image is substantially the same as that of Goldsmith’s photograph,“ she wrote. “Both are portraits of Prince used in magazines to illustrate stories about Prince.”
Associate Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, sided with Warhol in a dissent saying that the majority is “uninterested in the distinctiveness and newness of Warhol’s portrait.” She...
- 5/18/2023
- by Winston Cho
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
The Supreme Court sided with a photographer in a dispute with the Andy Warhol Foundation over the late artist’s use of her photos as the basis for his own series of portraits of Prince.
The court’s ruling was closely watched by content creators, some of whom feared that it would widen the scope of copyrighted material that could be used for further derivative works. In fact, during oral arguments last fall, attorneys raised the issue of what the case would mean for sequels to Star Wars and spinoffs from shows like All in the Family.
In a 1984 issue, Vanity Fair used a Warhol work that was based on a Lynn Goldsmith photo, having obtained a license from the photographer. The problems came about after Prince died in 2016 and Conde Nast, in its tribute to the singer, used a different Warhol work that was part of a series of...
The court’s ruling was closely watched by content creators, some of whom feared that it would widen the scope of copyrighted material that could be used for further derivative works. In fact, during oral arguments last fall, attorneys raised the issue of what the case would mean for sequels to Star Wars and spinoffs from shows like All in the Family.
In a 1984 issue, Vanity Fair used a Warhol work that was based on a Lynn Goldsmith photo, having obtained a license from the photographer. The problems came about after Prince died in 2016 and Conde Nast, in its tribute to the singer, used a different Warhol work that was part of a series of...
- 5/18/2023
- by Ted Johnson
- Deadline Film + TV
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor took a few jabs during Monday’s Hot Docs world premiere of Barry Avrich’s “Without Precedent: The Supreme Life of Rosalie Abella.”
The American Justice was in Toronto to celebrate Abella, who served on Canada’s Supreme Court from 2004 until her retirement in 2021.
Avrich’s “Without Precedent: The Supreme Life of Rosalie Abella” is a portrait of Abella’s life and career. As the first Jewish woman, and refugee to sit on Canada’s top court bench, Abella was a fierce advocate for women’s rights, the disabled, and visible minorities.
After the 84 minute doc, Abella, Avrich, Sotomayor and the film’s exec producer Mark Selby sat for a Q&a.
Sotomayor explained that she met Abella in 2010, six months after she began serving on the Supreme Court of the United States.
“I was in a room with Supreme Court justices from...
The American Justice was in Toronto to celebrate Abella, who served on Canada’s Supreme Court from 2004 until her retirement in 2021.
Avrich’s “Without Precedent: The Supreme Life of Rosalie Abella” is a portrait of Abella’s life and career. As the first Jewish woman, and refugee to sit on Canada’s top court bench, Abella was a fierce advocate for women’s rights, the disabled, and visible minorities.
After the 84 minute doc, Abella, Avrich, Sotomayor and the film’s exec producer Mark Selby sat for a Q&a.
Sotomayor explained that she met Abella in 2010, six months after she began serving on the Supreme Court of the United States.
“I was in a room with Supreme Court justices from...
- 5/2/2023
- by Addie Morfoot
- Variety Film + TV
The fate of the social media industry is in the hands of the Supreme Court. The highest court in the land has heard oral arguments for Gonzalez v. Google, a case that concerns Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996.
Section 230 is the controversial piece of legislation that provides platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter with “safe harbor” status. The 27-year-old rule shields tech companies from being legally liable for any content posted on their platforms by third parties — so long as the companies react to moderation demands in a timely manner.
There have been many challenges to Section 230’s authority over the years, and Gonzalez v. Google is the latest attempt to rewrite the law. The case centers around Nohemi Gonzalez (pictured above), who was one of the 130 people killed in the November 2015 Paris attacks perpetrated by Isis.
The prosecution is arguing that the YouTube algorithm aided and abetted...
Section 230 is the controversial piece of legislation that provides platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter with “safe harbor” status. The 27-year-old rule shields tech companies from being legally liable for any content posted on their platforms by third parties — so long as the companies react to moderation demands in a timely manner.
There have been many challenges to Section 230’s authority over the years, and Gonzalez v. Google is the latest attempt to rewrite the law. The case centers around Nohemi Gonzalez (pictured above), who was one of the 130 people killed in the November 2015 Paris attacks perpetrated by Isis.
The prosecution is arguing that the YouTube algorithm aided and abetted...
- 2/21/2023
- by Sam Gutelle
- Tubefilter.com
There are a lot of good reasons not to vote: skepticism (what difference does one vote make, after all), despair, apathy, rage. Maybe a sense that there’s not a big enough difference between the two major parties, or that a more fundamental change is needed if there’s to be any hope for humanity. Maybe voting just seems… pointless.
I get these concerns. I often feel despair about the direction in which our country is re-embracing white, Christian ethno-nationalism, with its valorization of anger, white grievance, and ignorance. And...
I get these concerns. I often feel despair about the direction in which our country is re-embracing white, Christian ethno-nationalism, with its valorization of anger, white grievance, and ignorance. And...
- 11/4/2022
- by Jay Michaelson
- Rollingstone.com
Many of Sidney Lumet's movies have social themes. "Network" is an eerily prescient satire of corporate media and television as a vehicle for demagoguery. "Serpico" explores police corruption and the real-life assassination attempt on the incorruptible officer Frank Serpico. This political conscience goes right back to Lumet's debut, "12 Angry Men." This story about a hung jury in a murder trial isn't just a great ensemble drama, but a powerful testament to civic duty.
However, Lumet wasn't out to make a statement when directing "12 Angry Men," he was just trying to prove himself. The film's producers took a chance on Lumet, who had only theater and television credits to his name at the time, and he wasn't about to let them down and blow his big break in the process.
Lumet's Big Break
Interviewed by Marc Levin for the Director's Guild of America, Lumet recalled how he got...
However, Lumet wasn't out to make a statement when directing "12 Angry Men," he was just trying to prove himself. The film's producers took a chance on Lumet, who had only theater and television credits to his name at the time, and he wasn't about to let them down and blow his big break in the process.
Lumet's Big Break
Interviewed by Marc Levin for the Director's Guild of America, Lumet recalled how he got...
- 8/20/2022
- by Devin Meenan
- Slash Film
Click here to read the full article.
Variety Talk Series
The Daily Show With Trevor Noah (Comedy Central)
This show’s 25th season — its fifth in a row nominated in this category, one of its four noms this year — emanated from a new Times Square studio and featured guests as varied as Anthony Fauci, Monica Lewinsky and Greta Thunberg. Noah’s profile certainly grew, too, as he hosted the Grammys and White House Correspondents’ Dinner.
The Daily Show With Trevor Noah
Jimmy Kimmel Live! (ABC)
The dean of late night, whose show is nearing its 20th anniversary, had a colorful season during which he traded barbs with Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert and, on April Fools’ Day, shows with Jimmy Fallon. Alas, this is his show’s only nomination this year; each of his competitors show has more.
Jimmy Kimmel Live!
Last Week Tonight With John Oliver (HBO)
The...
Variety Talk Series
The Daily Show With Trevor Noah (Comedy Central)
This show’s 25th season — its fifth in a row nominated in this category, one of its four noms this year — emanated from a new Times Square studio and featured guests as varied as Anthony Fauci, Monica Lewinsky and Greta Thunberg. Noah’s profile certainly grew, too, as he hosted the Grammys and White House Correspondents’ Dinner.
The Daily Show With Trevor Noah
Jimmy Kimmel Live! (ABC)
The dean of late night, whose show is nearing its 20th anniversary, had a colorful season during which he traded barbs with Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert and, on April Fools’ Day, shows with Jimmy Fallon. Alas, this is his show’s only nomination this year; each of his competitors show has more.
Jimmy Kimmel Live!
Last Week Tonight With John Oliver (HBO)
The...
- 7/31/2022
- by Scott Feinberg
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
Click here to read the full article.
Ketanji Brown Jackson has been sworn in to the Supreme Court, shattering a glass ceiling as the first Black woman on the nation’s highest court.
The 51-year-old Jackson is the court’s 116th justice and she took the place Thursday of the justice she once worked for. Justice Stephen Breyer’s retirement took effect at noon.
Moments later, joined by her family, Jackson recited the two oaths required of Supreme Court justices, one administered by Breyer and the other by Chief Justice John Roberts.
Jackson, a federal judge since 2013, is the first Black woman to serve as a justice. She joins three women, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett — the first time four women will serve together on the nine-member court.
Biden nominated Jackson in February, a month after Breyer, 83, announced he would retire at the end of the court’s term,...
Ketanji Brown Jackson has been sworn in to the Supreme Court, shattering a glass ceiling as the first Black woman on the nation’s highest court.
The 51-year-old Jackson is the court’s 116th justice and she took the place Thursday of the justice she once worked for. Justice Stephen Breyer’s retirement took effect at noon.
Moments later, joined by her family, Jackson recited the two oaths required of Supreme Court justices, one administered by Breyer and the other by Chief Justice John Roberts.
Jackson, a federal judge since 2013, is the first Black woman to serve as a justice. She joins three women, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett — the first time four women will serve together on the nine-member court.
Biden nominated Jackson in February, a month after Breyer, 83, announced he would retire at the end of the court’s term,...
- 6/30/2022
- by Associated Press
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
Click here to read the full article.
The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the Biden administration properly ended a Trump-era policy forcing some U.S. asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico.
The justices’ 5-4 decision for the administration came in a case about the “Remain in Mexico” policy under President Donald Trump. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the decision and was joined by fellow conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh as well as the court’s three liberal justices — Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
President Joe Biden suspended the program on his first day in office in January 2021. But lower courts ordered it reinstated in response to a lawsuit from Republican-led Texas and Missouri. The current administration has sent far fewer people back to Mexico than did the Trump administration.
The heart of the legal fight was about whether immigration authorities, with far less detention capacity than needed, had to...
The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the Biden administration properly ended a Trump-era policy forcing some U.S. asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico.
The justices’ 5-4 decision for the administration came in a case about the “Remain in Mexico” policy under President Donald Trump. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the decision and was joined by fellow conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh as well as the court’s three liberal justices — Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
President Joe Biden suspended the program on his first day in office in January 2021. But lower courts ordered it reinstated in response to a lawsuit from Republican-led Texas and Missouri. The current administration has sent far fewer people back to Mexico than did the Trump administration.
The heart of the legal fight was about whether immigration authorities, with far less detention capacity than needed, had to...
- 6/30/2022
- by the Associated Press
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
The three liberal justices who opposed Friday’s decision eliminating a constitutional right to an abortion did not hold back, writing a blistering dissent likening the “catastrophic” decision to a “loaded weapon” that “takes aim… at the rule of law.”
Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan, writing together, abandon legalese for plain language starkly laying out the consequences of the majority’s reactionary decision.
“It eliminates a 50-year-old constitutional right that safeguards women’s freedom and equal station,” they write, adding that it also “places in jeopardy other rights,...
Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan, writing together, abandon legalese for plain language starkly laying out the consequences of the majority’s reactionary decision.
“It eliminates a 50-year-old constitutional right that safeguards women’s freedom and equal station,” they write, adding that it also “places in jeopardy other rights,...
- 6/24/2022
- by Tim Dickinson
- Rollingstone.com
Updated, June 24 at 12 p.m. Et: The Supreme Court ruled to overturn the 1973 landmark decision Roe v. Wade on June 24.
CNN reported that the opinion is the “most consequential Supreme Court decision in decades and will transform the landscape of women’s reproductive health in America.” Abortion right will be determined by states going forward, with 21 states already having laws or constitutional amendments in place to ban the right to terminate a pregnancy. An additional four states are expected to ban abortions as soon as possible without federal protections in place.
“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his majority opinion, as previously leaked last month. “Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.”
A joint dissenting opinion included Justices Stephen Breyer,...
CNN reported that the opinion is the “most consequential Supreme Court decision in decades and will transform the landscape of women’s reproductive health in America.” Abortion right will be determined by states going forward, with 21 states already having laws or constitutional amendments in place to ban the right to terminate a pregnancy. An additional four states are expected to ban abortions as soon as possible without federal protections in place.
“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his majority opinion, as previously leaked last month. “Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.”
A joint dissenting opinion included Justices Stephen Breyer,...
- 6/24/2022
- by Samantha Bergeson
- Indiewire
President Biden is set to address the Supreme Court’s controversial overturning of Roe v. Wade. He will deliver remarks from the White House at approximately 12:30 pm Et, with all major TV networks expected to break in live.
Friday’s 6-3 decision will end constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years. Justice Samuel Alito delivered the opinion of the Court, supported by fellow Justices Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett. Dissenting were Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.
More from TVLinePresident Biden to Address Nation After Texas School...
Friday’s 6-3 decision will end constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years. Justice Samuel Alito delivered the opinion of the Court, supported by fellow Justices Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett. Dissenting were Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.
More from TVLinePresident Biden to Address Nation After Texas School...
- 6/24/2022
- by Ryan Schwartz
- TVLine.com
Click here to read the full article.
The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Friday’s outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.
The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump.
The ruling came more than a month after the stunning leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito indicating the court was prepared to take this momentous step.
It puts the court at odds with a majority of Americans who favored preserving Roe, according to opinion polls.
Alito, in the final opinion issued Friday, wrote that Roe and Planned Parenthood v.
The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Friday’s outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.
The decision, unthinkable just a few years ago, was the culmination of decades of efforts by abortion opponents, made possible by an emboldened right side of the court that has been fortified by three appointees of former President Donald Trump.
The ruling came more than a month after the stunning leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito indicating the court was prepared to take this momentous step.
It puts the court at odds with a majority of Americans who favored preserving Roe, according to opinion polls.
Alito, in the final opinion issued Friday, wrote that Roe and Planned Parenthood v.
- 6/24/2022
- by the Associated Press
- The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News
Weeks after a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion threatened to roll back Roe v. Wade, a final decision Friday morning did just that, with a majority of justices casting votes to return authority over abortion rights to individual states.
The ruling reverses 50 years of precedent from the landmark 1973 case that gave women in the U.S. the right under federal law to terminate a pregnancy, and a subsequent 1992 decision — Planned Parenthood v. Casey — that largely maintained the right.
The case, from Mississippi, is called Dobbs V Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Read the court’s decision here.
“The Court finds that the right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition,” says today’s opinion, in language very similar to the leaked draft of earlier this year.
“The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to...
The ruling reverses 50 years of precedent from the landmark 1973 case that gave women in the U.S. the right under federal law to terminate a pregnancy, and a subsequent 1992 decision — Planned Parenthood v. Casey — that largely maintained the right.
The case, from Mississippi, is called Dobbs V Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Read the court’s decision here.
“The Court finds that the right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition,” says today’s opinion, in language very similar to the leaked draft of earlier this year.
“The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to...
- 6/24/2022
- by Jill Goldsmith
- Deadline Film + TV
Federal judge Ketanji Brown Jackson was confirmed Thursday as the next U.S. Supreme Court justice following contentious Senate hearings that revolved around political flashpoints.
Jackson, 51, becomes the first Black woman to earn a seat on the nation’s highest court after the 53-47 confirmation vote in the Senate that mostly fell along partisan lines.
Three Republicans broke ranks to affirm the confirmation of the jurist who was appointed to several as a federal judge for the Washington, D.C. circuit in 2012 by President Barack Obama. Last year, President Joe Biden appointed her to the court of appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
The fact that Jackson had been confirmed twice by the Senate in the past decade added to the sense of political grandstanding around the hearings earlier this week. Several Republican senators grilled Jackson about her past rulings on crimes involving child pornography, with nods to outrageous tropes...
Jackson, 51, becomes the first Black woman to earn a seat on the nation’s highest court after the 53-47 confirmation vote in the Senate that mostly fell along partisan lines.
Three Republicans broke ranks to affirm the confirmation of the jurist who was appointed to several as a federal judge for the Washington, D.C. circuit in 2012 by President Barack Obama. Last year, President Joe Biden appointed her to the court of appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
The fact that Jackson had been confirmed twice by the Senate in the past decade added to the sense of political grandstanding around the hearings earlier this week. Several Republican senators grilled Jackson about her past rulings on crimes involving child pornography, with nods to outrageous tropes...
- 4/7/2022
- by William Earl
- Variety Film + TV
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) on Wednesday became the first Republican to express her support for Ketanji Brown Jackson, all but assuring she will be confirmed as the first Black woman to sit on the Supreme Court.
It took a second meeting with Jackson on Tuesday afternoon for Collins to feel comfortable that the federal judge and former public defender would not be “bending the law to meet a personal preference,” as Collins told The New York Times in an interview.
“In recent years, senators on both sides of the...
It took a second meeting with Jackson on Tuesday afternoon for Collins to feel comfortable that the federal judge and former public defender would not be “bending the law to meet a personal preference,” as Collins told The New York Times in an interview.
“In recent years, senators on both sides of the...
- 3/30/2022
- by William Vaillancourt
- Rollingstone.com
Despite Lindsey Graham’s vocal criticisms of President Biden’s Supreme Court nomination, Ketanji Brown Jackson, “The View” host Ana Navarro thinks he still might vote to confirm her. In fact, Navarro argues that this is an opportunity for Graham to practice what he preaches.
On Friday morning, Graham tweeted, “If media reports are accurate, and Judge Jackson has been chosen as the Supreme Court nominee to replace Justice Breyer, it means the radical Left has won President Biden over yet again. The attacks by the Left on Judge Childs from South Carolina apparently worked.”
Even with those words, Navarro said on Friday’s episode of “The View” that she hasn’t “given up on Lindsey yet.” Though host Sunny Hostin joked that “You may be the only one,” Navarro stuck to her point.
“Well, me and my island, there’s room for Lindsey if he does the right thing on this,...
On Friday morning, Graham tweeted, “If media reports are accurate, and Judge Jackson has been chosen as the Supreme Court nominee to replace Justice Breyer, it means the radical Left has won President Biden over yet again. The attacks by the Left on Judge Childs from South Carolina apparently worked.”
Even with those words, Navarro said on Friday’s episode of “The View” that she hasn’t “given up on Lindsey yet.” Though host Sunny Hostin joked that “You may be the only one,” Navarro stuck to her point.
“Well, me and my island, there’s room for Lindsey if he does the right thing on this,...
- 2/25/2022
- by Andi Ortiz
- The Wrap
IMDb.com, Inc. takes no responsibility for the content or accuracy of the above news articles, Tweets, or blog posts. This content is published for the entertainment of our users only. The news articles, Tweets, and blog posts do not represent IMDb's opinions nor can we guarantee that the reporting therein is completely factual. Please visit the source responsible for the item in question to report any concerns you may have regarding content or accuracy.