#law and legality

[charlesoberonn]

Art by u/reachling

[deimosatellite]

nuh uh

[anonymousdandelion]

A general tip for students who are sending those dreaded Religious Absence Emails to your professors: Rather than asking permission to take the day(s) off, politely let them know that you will be taking the day(s) off.

In other words, consider not saying this:

"May I miss class on [date] so I can observe [holiday]?"

It's not that there's anything wrong with the above, per se. But because it's phrased as a request, it risks coming across as optional — a favor you hope to be granted. Problem is, favors are not owed, and so unfortunately asking permission opens the door for the professor to respond "Thanks for asking. No, you may not. :)"

Instead, try something along the lines of:

"I will need to miss class on [date] because I will be observing [holiday]. I wanted to let you know of this conflict now, and to ask your assistance in making arrangements for making up whatever material I may miss as a result of this absence."

This is pretty formal language (naturally, you can and should tweak it to sound more like your voice). But the important piece is that, while still being respectful, it shifts the focus of the discussion so that the question becomes not "Is it okay for me to observe my religion?", but rather, "How can we best accommodate my observance?"

Because the first question should not be up for debate: freedom of religion is a right, not a favor. And the second question is the subject you need to discuss.

(Ideally, do this after you've looked up your school's policy on religious absences, so you know what you're working within and that religious discrimination is illegal. Just in case your professor forgot.)

[amalgamasreal]

So Universal Pictures may have just intentionally over-pruned all of the city owned trees in front of their LA corporate office in an effort to fuck with the WGA/SAG-AFTRA picketers during what is predicted to be the hottest week of the year so far:

And the LA City Controller is looking into it:

Once again it looks like it's time for:

[1982brucespringsteen]

some good news!! the spanish state's ministry of equality has finally passed one of the most progressive trans laws on the planet, shielded free and universal access to abortion and banned conversion therapy and genital surgery for intersex babies, among a lot of other feminist policies. the minister of equality irene montero gave a speech thanking spain's lgtb and trans associations for helping her draft these legislations. couldn't be more proud!!

[one-time-i-dreamt]

There’s a thing called “competitive legal poetry”, which is just like any other legal battle except the lawyers are required to speak in rhyming couplets.

[paunchsalazar]

more of the same

[ayo-edebiri]

Legally Blonde (2001) dir. Robert Luketic

[feybeasts]

Hey. You. Yeah, you.

Make your action-oriented characters fat. Make your high-energy fighty types fat. Make your action hero OCs fat. Do it.

[carriesthewind]

I beg of you.

If you ever find yourself in legal trouble, and you cannot afford a lawyer, please seek out free legal services in your area. Especially if you live in a major metropolitan area in the U.S. - there is a good chance that there is at least *some* free legal services available.

Please seek out those legal resources even if you think it is too late. Or even if you think there will be nothing a lawyer can do to help. Or hell, even if you think you've already got everything covered and you don't need help - best case scenario, a lawyer can confirm you are correct and you can sleep easier. (And if you are wrong - they can tell you before you learn the hard way.)

And please seek out those legal resources even if you have other, non-legal assistance. A social worker, a case manager, etc. - they are not a lawyer.

Be prepared for any legal services to be brief, and limited (e.g. just advice). Be prepared for a lawyer to only give you bad news, and tell you there is nothing they can do to help. But you don't know what legal options you might have until you seek them out.

This post was brought to you by seeing people who have been evicted, people who didn't reach out for legal help because they thought it was too late, or they thought a lawyer couldn't help, or because they thought they had it covered, or because they were working with a social worker/case manager/etc. who they trusted to know all of their options.

People whose evictions could have been stopped, if they had known to reach out for legal aid in advance.

[reasonsforhope]

"Tuesday’s [April 9, 2024] definition-shifting court ruling means nearly 50 governments must now contend with a new era of climate litigation.

Governments be warned: You must protect your citizens from climate change — it’s their human right.

The prescient message was laced throughout a dense ruling Tuesday from Europe’s top human rights court. The court’s conclusion? Humans have a right to safety from climate catastrophes that is rooted in their right to life, privacy and family.

The definition-shifting decision from the European Court of Human Rights means nearly 50 governments representing almost 700 million people will now have to contend with a new era of litigation from climate-stricken communities alleging inaction. 

While the judgment itself doesn’t include any penalties — the case featured several women accusing Switzerland of failing to shield them from climate dangers — it does establish a potent precedent that people can use to sue governments in national courts.

The verdict will serve “as a blueprint for how to successfully sue your own government over climate failures,” said Ruth Delbaere, a legal specialist at Avaaz, a U.S.-based nonprofit that promotes climate activism...

Courting the courts on climate

The European Court of Human Rights was established in the decade following World War II but has grown in importance over the last generation. As the judicial arm of the Council of Europe, an international human rights organization, the court’s rulings are binding on the council’s 46 members, spanning all of Europe and numerous countries on its borders.

As a result, Tuesday’s [April 9, 2024] ruling will help elevate climate litigation from a country-by-country battle to one that stretches across continents.

Previously, climate activists had mostly found success in suing individual countries to force climate action. 

A 2019 Dutch Supreme Court verdict forced the Netherlands to slash its greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent, while in 2021 a French court ruled the government was responsible for environmental damage after it failed to meet greenhouse gas reduction goals. That same year, Germany’s Constitutional Court issued a sweeping judgment that the country’s 2019 climate law was partly “unconstitutional” because it put too much of the emissions-cutting burden on future generations.

Even in the U.S., young environmental activists won a local case last year against state agencies after arguing that the continued use of fossil fuels violated their right to a "clean and healthful environment."

But 2024 is shaping up to be a turning point for climate litigation, redefining who has a right to sue over climate issues, what arguments they can use, and whom they can target. 

To start, experts overwhelmingly expect that Tuesday’s ruling will reverberate across future lawsuits — both in Europe and globally. The judgment even includes specifics about what steps governments must take to comply with their new climate-related human rights obligations. The list includes things like a concrete deadline to reach climate neutrality, a pathway to getting there, and evidence the country is actually on that path...

Concretely, the verdict could also affect the outcomes of six other high-profile climate lawsuits pending before the human rights court, including a Greenpeace-backed suit questioning whether Norway's decision to grant new oil and gas licenses complies with its carbon-cutting strategy.

An emerging legal strategy

In the coming months, other international bodies are also expected to issue their own rulings on the same thorny legal issues, which could further solidify the evolving trend. 

The International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights all have similar cases working through the system.

"All these cases together will clarify the legal obligations of states to protect rights in the context of climate change — and will set the stage for decades to come," said Chowdhury, from the environmental law center."

-via Politico, April 9, 2024

[bruciemilf]

Bruce texting " I'm writing my will. Would anyone like anything specifically?" In the group chat. With no expectations of his kids ripping the door of his office open. With Clark in toe. Well. Should've thought twice

[hello-sweetheart]

Dustin and Eddie who become actual brothers when Wayne and Claudia marry.

Steve being high low key jealous cuz he always considered Dustin like a pseudo brother but now he has an actual brother and they share similar interests, they get along, they squabble sure but in the end of the day it’s all love and belonging

And Steve is like a stray cat outside in the rain looking in at the cozy family gathered at the dinner table

He’s so happy that Dustin is happy, but their time together is limited now that his family has grown. and when they do have time he hears all about how Eddie is so cool, how his mom has never been happier, how she loves Eddie, how Wayne doesn’t mind his science rambles, how Eddie is such a great DM—

Of course he gets invited, he’s Dustin’s friend he still is he’s still here but that doesn’t mean he feels like he’s part of their family, their home.

Steve’s just the friend at the dinner table, the polite boy who offers help wash the dishes, who leaves at the end of the night with left overs. The guest.

And Eddie? Eddie who mistrusts this boy, who fits the mold of jock so perfectly that he’s baffled when he finds that there’s more to him… he takes an interest in this regular Saturday dinner guest of theirs…

[sarroora]

👏👏👏

[queenwille]

i’m gonna say this once more, so maybeeeee someone finally gets it.

the only jews “living” in gaza currently are the jewish hostages out of the 134 hostages still in gaza. not one jew is permitted to live there since 2005 by law. yes, it’s against the law.

[queerism1969]