Tag: Court

Trump Invades DC!

US: Washington DC Sues Trump Over National Guard Deployment! (5.9.2025)

Aside from the original 800 National Guard troops, six Republican-led states have supported the president’s effort by sending additional personnel, bringing the total deployment in D.C. to over 2,000.

The D.C. lawsuit follows a court victory by the Democratic-run U.S. state of California earlier this week.

On Tuesday, District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco ruled that the Trump administration violated a 19th-century law barring the use of soldiers for civilian law enforcement when it deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles in June.

Schwalb, a Democrat, noted that the National Guard deployment not only undermines public safety, but also hurts the district’s economy by depressing key sectors such as restaurants, hotels and tourism.

Continue reading

President Lyndon B. Johnson moves to shake hands with Martin Luther King Jr. while others look on after Johnson signed the federal Voting Rights Act into law at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Aug. 6, 1965. Yoichi Okamoto/Lyndon B. Johnson Library

US: 60 Years Later, Voting Rights Act Protections for Minority Voters Face New Threats! (7.8.2025)

Contrary to decades of precedent, Republican state officials in at least 15 states contend that private individuals and groups do not have the right to sue to enforce Section 2 because they are not explicitly named in the landmark law’s text. Only the head of the Justice Department, they argue, can bring this kind of lawsuit.

The issue is at the heart of a North Dakota legislative redistricting case that was brought by two tribal nations. A federal appeals court ruled against the Native American voters, and the case may be up for a full review soon at the Supreme Court. The justices may also be preparing to take up a broader question about the constitutionality of Section 2 protections, based on an order last week for legal briefs in a Louisiana congressional redistricting case originally filed by Black voters.

Continue reading

Court highlights a raft of errors in High Court judgment after wife hid more than 70% of her wealth in pre-nuptial agreement.

UK: Court of Appeal Overturns Ruling Upholding Pre-Nuptial Agreement – Due to Wife’s ‘Fraudulent Non-Disclosure’! (3.8.2025)

The ruling marks a rare appellate intervention in the context of pre-nuptial agreements. Lady Justice King stressed that the court’s conclusion should not be seen as undermining Radmacher, nor as any shift in the law: “So long as there is no statutory scheme, Radmacher will continue to bind this court. […] Pre-nuptial agreements are about the autonomy of the parties to determine for themselves what should be the fair outcome in the event that their marriage fails.” However, the judge continued, where the parties themselves set out a disclosure regime in the agreement, any deliberate misrepresentation of that disclosure – particularly when induced by one party – is liable to vitiate the agreement. “[W]ilful or fraudulent breach of that agreement […] is entirely different from the position in Radmacher,” she concluded.

Continue reading

Scales of Justice - Kate Fanning Defeated!

UK: British Neo-Nazi “Kate Fanning” Defeated in Court Action Over Assumed “White Victimhood” Claim! (30.5.2025)

Exercising the usual far-right deficiency in thinking, Kate Fanning falsely assumed that the 2020 Open University policy of aligning itself with the BLM movement at the height of the George Floyd-inspired riots – was somehow a “personal” attack directed at herself. The UK Court begs to differ and the Judge clearly explained in his statement why Fanning’s interpretation is legally and lawfully “wrong” and “incorrect”. As Fanning is unable to self-censor or self-correct – she is cultivating a cult-like belief in her corrupt attitude amongst those who feel she is worth following. It is ironic as Fanning is studying for a degree in the very bourgeois legal system she is attempting to take-on, defeat, and transcend – all of which she has failed to achieve. Fanning fails to understand that White countries developed modern “racism” around 400-years ago (during colonial and imperialist expansion) – and that non-White people have been forced to react to this hideous ideology ever-since. White people can be victims of inverse racism (which lacks any genuine economic power to make it anything other than nasty words) – but White people are never “disempowered” and are always in control of the societies and economic system they invented (predatory capitalist) and control. Fanning tried to make her inverted misconception of reality a concrete fact by manipulating the Courts to agree with her inherent stupidity.

Continue reading

Met Police Officer Punches Suspect!

UK: Met Police Policy of “Punching Suspects in Back of Head” Backfires – as Offending Officer Spared Jail-Time! (1.5.2025)

She told the court: “I accept it was out of character and you lost self control.

“As a police officer, you were in a position of significant responsibility. (These actions) will reduce trust and confidence in police.”

Speaking after the trial, father-of-two Mr Attanayake, 42, originally from Sri Lanka, told the PA news agency the incident had left him with both psychological and physical damage.

He said: “I play cricket as a bowler, but I have been unable to play because of issues I now have with my shoulder. It will get better but I have missed two seasons already.

“Psychologically, I now get triggered by alarms and people in uniforms. I have been a law abiding citizen since I have lived in the UK.”

Mr Attanayake also confirmed he was yet to receive an apology from the Metropolitan Police, and claimed he had instead been told the incident was a case of “mistaken identity”.

Continue reading

Labour Killing Disabled!

UK: £416.19 Victory for Disabled People – High Court Ruling Declared DWP’s Benefit Reforms Unfair & Illegal! (4.4.2025)

The DWP claimed the changes were designed to “support” disabled people into work. However, there was no evidence that the reforms would actually improve employment outcomes. In fact, internal assessments suggested the opposite: more disabled people facing tougher conditions, sanctions, and loss of income.

This contradiction was a central part of the court’s ruling. Public Law Project lawyer Aoife O’Reilly called the decision a “vindication,” noting that public consultations must reflect reality—not political spin.

Backlash and Response

Disability rights organizations, legal experts, and even civil service unions welcomed the court’s judgment. Groups such as Inclusion London and the UK DDPO CRPD Monitoring Coalition are now urging the government to drop the reforms and restart the process—with disabled people at the table.

Continue reading

1 2 3 4 … 9