The Court’s concern about chilling non-threatening speech will come at a cost—paid by the mostly female victims of stalking and online and verbal harassment who won’t be given the protections they deserve.
will reduce protections for victims of stalking, verbal abuse and online harassment and have a chilling effect on prosecutors.
, where Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh sided with the three liberal justices to find that Alabama’s voting map was racially gerrymandered, another interesting alignment found Justice Kagan writing theopinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Kavanaugh and Jackson. Justice Sotomayor filed a separate concurring opinion, in which Justice Gorsuch joined, and Justices Barrett and Thomas joined in a dissenting opinion.
to a local female musician over a period of two years. Though she repeatedly blocked him on social media, he opened new accounts to send messages that she found threatening in their cumulative effect. A jury sentenced Counterman to more than four years in prison for stalking. Lynn Hecht Schafran, senior vice president of Legal Momentum, a legal advocacy organization dedicated to advancing the rights of women and girls, expressed disappointment at the ruling.
Indonesia Berita Terbaru, Indonesia Berita utama
Similar News:Anda juga dapat membaca berita serupa dengan ini yang kami kumpulkan dari sumber berita lain.
The hypocrisy of the Supreme Court’s affirmative action decisionThe Supreme Court’s ultra-conservative majority is nothing if not audacious. The six right-wingers don’t bother to hide their disdain for precedent, their...
Baca lebih lajut »
What the Supreme Court’s decision on affirmative action could mean for legacy applicantsNew challenges take aim at the decades-old practice of giving preference to legacy applicants in college admissions.
Baca lebih lajut »
Supreme Court news: Roberts and Kavanaugh emerge as the court's most pivotal votesThe Supreme Court's completion of its recent term saw a range of sweeping decisions including the end of affirmative action in college admissions and curbing anti-discrimination laws.
Baca lebih lajut »
Opinion | Reasons for ambivalence about the ruling on web design and same-sex marriageOpinion by George F. Will: The Supreme Court's decision potentially sweeps broadly, beyond considerations of religion and gay rights.
Baca lebih lajut »
Essay | How Elite Colleges Will Work Around the Supreme Court’s RulingThe Supreme Court’s ruling against affirmative action simply means that the college admissions process will become more opaque and subjective
Baca lebih lajut »
Americans' beliefs about politicization of Supreme Court differ widely based on political affiliationAmericans’ views about the Supreme Court’s most recent decisions—from curtailing the use of race-based affirmative action in higher education, blocking student loan forgiveness, and more—varied widely based on political affiliation.
Baca lebih lajut »