#SUPREME-COURT

[megayogiposts]

Uttar Pradesh Information Commission: Latest RTI Cases Explained

Registration NumberUPICM/R/2024/60807NameYogi M P SinghDate of Filing20/12/2024StatusRTI REQUEST RECEVED as on 20/12/2024  PIO Details  PIO NAMEMUMTAZ AHMADDesinnationADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERPhone No.9151804317Email Idjansu-section.upic@up.gov.in  Nodal Officer Details  NameTEJASKAR PANDEYEmail-ID Online RTI Request Form Details Public Authority Details :-   * Public AuthorityUttar Pradesh…

[preetisinghuniverse]

Public Grievance on NHM UP Vacancies: Seek Answers

संदर्भ संख्या : 60000240224917 , दिनांक – 14 Nov 2024 तक की स्थिति आवेदनकर्ता का विवरण : शिकायत संख्या:- 60000240224917 आवेदक का नाम- Yogi M. P. Singh विषय- An application under article 51 A of the constitution of India to make inquiry regarding the advertisement concerning notification of vacancy which details are as follows. Ref. No: 642/SPMU/NHM/2022-23/6200 Date: 26.11. 2022 State…

[thingstrumperssay]

This is just another stepping stone closer to banning all forms of contraception.

[vague-humanoid]

You can write that the Supreme Court is delegitimizing itself only so many times before you’ve made yourself ridiculous. If the high court is not in fact behaving in a fashion that makes its decisions respected, the real question is: Why are we all zealously watching and reporting on its decisions as though they are immutable legal truths? Why are we scientifically analyzing every case that comes down as if it holds value? The obvious answer is that these decisions have real consequences—something the past year has showed us far too graphically. But if the Supreme Court is no longer functioning as a real “court,” why are we mostly still treating its output as if it were simply the “law”?

This is a part of Disorder in the Court, a weeklong series on the legal press and the most explosive Supreme Court in generations: how we cover it, how we’ve failed, and how we can do better.

You can write that the Supreme Court is delegitimizing itself only so many times before you’ve made yourself ridiculous. If the high court is not in fact behaving in a fashion that makes its decisions respected, the real question is: Why are we all zealously watching and reporting on its decisions as though they are immutable legal truths? Why are we scientifically analyzing every case that comes down as if it holds value? The obvious answer is that these decisions have real consequences—something the past year has showed us far too graphically. But if the Supreme Court is no longer functioning as a real “court,” why are we mostly still treating its output as if it were simply the “law”?

In some sense, the answer is that the Supreme Court’s power and prominence is mediated by the journalists that report on the institution, and we as journalists rely on the court for legitimacy and prominence in return. Someone has to translate legalese to the public. But the way journalists report on the institution—mostly by explaining the “law”—has set incredibly circumscribed boundaries around how the court’s political activities are viewed. The Supreme Court press corps has been largely institutionalized to treat anything the court produces as the law, and to push everything else—matters of judicial conduct, how justices are chosen and seated, ethical lapses—off to be handled by the political press. That ephemera is commentary; the cases remain the real story.

This critique of the professorial Supreme Court press corps, articulated perhaps most pointedly by David Margolick, writing in 2007 in the New York Times, is that those of us who cover the high court mostly just sit around taking dictation, reporting on the justices’ questions at oral arguments as if it’s news; reporting neutrally about the contents of their opinions; and reporting the facts of the cases as presented to us by the Supreme Court:

Try imagining any branch of government—the White House, say, or the State Department—covered solely on the basis of public events and printed releases, with nothing about its inner workings. It’s inconceivable. But that’s essentially how the Supreme Court beat works. Reporters assigned there rarely venture beyond oral arguments, briefs and decisions. Almost never do they stray from their cubicles. Part of this is perfectly sensible: the court makes most of its news through its opinions, and interpreting them, often heaps of them, at once, on tight deadlines, is damnably (and, maybe, deliberately) difficult. Those who do it well are rare, and they have little time to spare.

[newwayastrology]

See the previous post.

[weadvocate]

OHIO SUPREME COURT CLERK OF COURT ROBERT VAUGHN AND CLERK'S OFFICE INTERFERENCE AND TAMPERING WITH PROPER CIVIL FILINGS EQUATING TO WIRE FRAUD GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST ALERT

PUBLIC CALL TO ACTION To Richard Vaughn, Clerk of the Supreme Court of Ohio, and all other relevant judicial officers, agents, representatives, employees, or State and Federal actors involved in this matter, including but not limited to Counsel of Record, Respondents, Justices of the Court acting in their individual capacities, and any conspirators assisting in the following actions: Re: Notice…

[revev2]

The Ongoing Ordeal of Zammal: A Story of Injustice and Resilience

Original article by Messaoudi Abdessatar on Facebook. Six months have passed since the arrest of Zammal, and his plight remains shrouded in silence. Despite the media blackout, his story lingers in the minds of those who refuse to let it be forgotten. Over this period, Zammal has been paraded through nearly every court in the country, facing similar charges in each case. The pattern is clear:…

[boreal-sea]

Putting this as a meme so maybe y'all will actually read it.

Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.

And this is why we cannot let Trump win another term: he now has complete immunity for any acts he "officially" performs as president. You thought he was bad before? Now he will have zero fear. He will do whatever he wants. And what he wants is outlined in Project 2025.

[thecenterline]

White House Urges Senate Democrats to Confirm Judges Before Term Ends

As President Joe Biden’s administration faces a looming deadline, the White House is urging Senate Democrats to expedite the confirmation of up to 30 federal judges before the new Congress takes over on January 3rd, 2025. With Republicans gaining control of 53 seats in the Senate following last week’s elections, Democrats are racing against time to confirm Biden’s nominees before Donald Trump’s…

[oxytocinatrocities]

A comic I drew about leaving the Mormon church.

Can also apply to other things. Ex. constitutional originalism in the US

[megayogiposts]

Compliance of Order of Apex Court: Digitalization Efforts

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> No OTP is being sent by the portal so could not proceed to register.1 message Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>16 December 2024 at 00:38To: cic@hry.nic.in, cmharyana@nic.inMost respected chief information commissioner of government of Haryana the applicant is sending OTP from the rti portal at the government of…

[preetisinghuniverse]

Urgent Grievance: Action Needed on Youth Employment Fraud

Grievance Status for registration number : GOVHY/E/2024/0008774 Grievance Concerns To Name Of Complainant Yogi M. P. Singh Date of Receipt 12/11/2024 Received By Ministry/Department Haryana Grievance Description Most respected sir this representation may be considered as the reminder of earlier submitted grievances which description is as follows. The matter concerns the vulnerable section of…

[socialistexan]

[mysharona1987]

So SCOTUS has just given Joe Biden the funniest way to end this election, ever.

[thetourguidebarbie]

Supreme court came down with two earth-shattering decisions this morning:

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo allows courts to make decisions that used to be the job of federal agencies.

If the FDA says hormone treatments are safe, the court can now say "mmm, nah" and ban those treatments.

The court can ban mifepristone or miscarriage care contrary to medical experts.

The court can lower requirements by the EPA that regulates climate change.

The court can overrule trade rules by the FTC.

The court could require less safety regulation on airplanes.

And much much more!!

This is very very bad, and the way to solve this problem is by voting for Joe Biden so that he can replace Thomas and Alito when they die. If you care about marginalized communities, PLEASE vote.

City of Grant Pass v. Johnson says that criminalizing/fining people for sleeping outside (aka being homeless) isn't cruel and unusual punishment. It will punish people of color and disabled people disproportionately.

On my knees begging you to vote for Joe Biden. You cannot sit this one out. Activism is not tweeting or blogging. You are not helping by not exercising your right to vote, a right that can and will be taken from you if Joe Biden is not reelected.

Edit: they also dismissed some charges against January 6 defendants but quite frankly that is not as important, even though that's what everyone is freaking out about.

[weadvocate]

RICO RACKETERRING IN OHIO COURTS GENERAL PUBLIC NOTICE AND CALL FOR ACTION

In The Supreme Court of Ohio Case No. 2024 1362 GENERAL PUBLIC NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR COUNSEL OF RECORD LINDSAY A MILLER SCHIELE TO FILE SWORN OATH OR AFFIDAVIT TO SUPPORT EXHIBITS A THRU D REFLECTED ON THE RECORD WHEREBY PETITIONER FILINGS ARE BONA FIDE, MERITORIOUS, GOOD FAITH WITH COGNIZABLE LEGAL BASIS AND NUMBER OF FILINGS IS NOT VEXATIOUS NOR CRIMINAL BUT AIDING IN ABETTING IN FELONIOUS…