Before Court Law

[beforecourtlaw]

Donald Trump's Supreme Court Pick Says US President Not Above The Law

According to Trump Administration Supreme Court Pick Neil Gorusch, the US President Donald Trump is "not above the law" and threatened he would "walk out" should Mr Trump ask him to overturn an abortion ruling. Despite receiving his position from the current administration, Justice Gorusch said he is "disappointed" with the Trump Administration attacking federal judges decisions during the last few days of the Travel Ban review.

Justice Gorusch said Trump's attack against federal judges and blaming judges -- including himself -- for possible consequences is "disheartening and demoralising." Upon his appointment, he said that "when anyone criticises the honesty or the integrity or the motives of a federal judge" this is "disheartening," "demoralising -- because I know the truth."

The judge was nominated for the Supreme Court seat after former Supreme Court head Justice Antonin Scalia had died a year ago.

When asked if for example Donald Trump had asked him to "overturn" the Roe v Wade landmark case related to abortion laws existing in the country today, he said "No" and if the President did ask, he would "walk out of the door."

Despite Democrats questioning Justice Gorusch upon assignment and their final vote, Republicans -- controlling the majority of the Senate, could circumvent the rules of the Senate Chamber and confirm Justice Gorusch should Democrats block him.

[beforecourtlaw]

Global Laws Are In Danger Of Being Undermined

The United Nations and the European Union depend on one single thing: the use of global laws to constitute peace based on the laws created after World War II. The global laws have also helped spread democracy. A ministerial code change that removed a requirement for ministers to comply with international laws and treaties could further bury the power of global laws into pre-global law eras.

According to The Guardian, the ministerial code in the United Kingdom had cut out the words "including international law and treaty obligations and to uphold the administration of justice. The UK High Court had also slammed down an appeal to review the decision as the change was of a high constitutional level.

Judge Lady Justice Arden said the burden of proof the appeals group must produce is that the original ministerial code held a different meaning than what it currently has. Powered by crowdfunding, the Gulf Centre for Human Rights Representative Melanie Gingell said the full court of appeal hearing is extremely welcome but the funding is greatly needed.

The UK Cabinet Office during the time said there was no intention to weaken the international law by physically omitting the phrases from the code.

[beforecourtlaw]

Supreme Court Rules Welsh Assembly Consultation Unnecessary For Brexit

According to Westminster's Supreme Court Senior Judges, an Act of Parliament is needed which includes a decision from other UK states. However, the judges said a consultation from the Welsh Assembly ministers is unnecessary to trigger Article 50.

Welsh ministers said the Welsh Assembly is to be consulted before Brexit is to begin. According to President Of The Supreme Court Lord Neuberger, UK ministers need to make a decision before Parliament but it is unnecessary to consult the devolved legislatures before triggering Article 50. It meant that the Assemblies had no veto power over the UK Parliaments decision.

The Supreme Court said there is nothing in the Northern Ireland Constitution or the Sewel Convention that could help resolve the issue quickly. The Sewel Convention allows Welsh Ministers to vote on new laws that affect devolution. The UK Supreme Court does not consider Sewel as a legal convention putting it out of the question.

According to Welsh Government Senior Legal Adviser Mick Antoniw, the Supreme Court decision was a victory for the Parliament. He said the Welsh did not argue for a veto or a consultation but only wished the decision be made through due process and not through the UK government's planned prerogative right.

The Supreme Court's Brexit decision spells trouble for UK Prime Minister Theresa May. She is now set to race a deadline to avoid immense internal party conflict to publish her plans for Parliament.

[beforecourtlaw]

A "Clean Brexit" Can Give The UK £40m Weely

According to pro-Brexit campaign group "Change Britain," the United Kingdom can save £24bn yearly by leaving the single market, customs union and other EU regulations they deem "burdensome." Research by the group indicates that the UK could earn £24bn yearly by exiting everything effectively due to annual savings of £10.4bn from the EU budget contribution of the UK and £1.2bn from regulation fees. The pro-Brexit campaign group also upheld UK's future new trade deals that could amount to £12.3bn in revenue.

Currently, the UK cabinet is split as to leaving the customs union and the EU single market completely or exiting from the EU and staying close to its single market as possible. "Change Britain" said that the estimates are still conservative but pushed that the benefits of withdrawal from the single market and custom union could be as much as £38.6bn yearly.

However, The Guardian debunks that the campaign group does not factor the possibility of a large-scale export loss in profits by cutting off the UK market from the 27 EU nations.Britain exports about £220bn worth of goods and services to the EU in 2015. EU imports to the UK have cost about £290bn in total.

According to "Change Britain", the UK could boost its GDP by £8.5bn to £19.8bn. By removing 59 of the 100 regulations on business after Britain's exit from the single market, the UK could save even £4bn more.

[beforecourtlaw]

MPs Call For Cannabis Legalisation: More Tax and Treasury Income?

The Adam Smith Institute estimates that the UK Government could save more than £50m combating cannabis-related crimes and dealings in the United Kingdom by making it legal. Senior MP and ex-Tory Cabinet Minister Peter Lilley and Labour MP Paul Flynn back the research's suggestion as it could save millions from taxpayer's money and earn even more through the legalisation of marijuana.

Cannabis is a relaxant often used as recreational drugs that -- according to research -- has minimal side effects. Registered medical professionals also use it in chronic pain and anxiety treatment.

The All Party Parliamentary Group on Drug Policy Reform said millions of UK citizens break the law every time they use cannabis as symptom relief.

Legalisation would mean doctors could allow patients to grow the plants in limited amounts for their medicinal use.

However, the Home Office said it has no plans to legalise the drug. A petition exists that is calling for cannabis to become legal. About 150,000 people have signed and the government has yet to respond to the petition.

According to the Government, scientific evidence indicates that cannabis is a "harmful drug that can damage human health."

It added that cannabis "would not address the harm to individuals or communities."

[beforecourtlaw]

Thousands Sign 'Finn's Law' In Creation Petition

The petition set up by David Burstow on the UK government's legal petition site calls on the government to provide the same care and status to police dogs as officers when they are injured at work had reached 30,000 signatures.

The 'Finn's Law' campaign is named after the Hertfordshire police dog. Finn was stabbed in Stevenage as he was chasing a suspect.

Finn's law would consider an attack on a police dog or any trained police animal the consequences of attacking an actual police officer.

The petition was filed by a private individual. Mr Burstow made it clear that he was not serving police officers and he wanted to ensure police animals would get the same benefits as officers for doing the best work they can in upholding the law.

Assistant Chief Constable Dan Vajzovic - from the Joint Protected Services for Beds, Cambs and Herts - said officers had been "overwhelmed" by the support for Finn and his handler.

He said "anything to help promote the safety of members of the police family should be looked at positively" but that decisions on legislative change were a government matter.

"Were there to be a proposal for legislative change I would support legislation that offered an effective mechanism for reducing the likelihood of officers and their police dogs being subject to assault and injury," he said.

[beforecourtlaw]

The Changes Britain Faces After Britain Exits The EU

On June 23, the United Kingdom has left the European Union on a referendum vote regarding EU membership. As it stands, the country will begin negotiating its split from Brussels.

Some of the Leave Campaign's positive predictions may be true.

The EU would be changing its human rights act once Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is invoked. The Human Rights Act would be replaced with a British Bill of Rights the current government asserts "would protect our rights in a better way."

Better may be subjective at this point.

The Human Rights Act allows EU judges to overrule UK courts. Migrants and terrorists have used the HRA to remain in the United Kingdom after being handed deportation notices.

The BBR is focused on "restoring common sense to law."

UK Prime Minister Theresa May seeks a "unique model" for migration. Her government has discarded the idea of an Australian-style points based system for migrants in the United Kingdom.

However, freedom of movement will be restricted against EU members. In consequence, the British will need Visas to enter the European Union.

Home Secretary Amber Rudd suggested that the Government could retaliate by imposing a similar charge on European visitors.

She said: "The EU and the commissioners may be considering issues - they will be considering their negotiation with us, just as we are considering it with them.

"But I’m going to make sure that what we do get is in the best interest of the UK."

[beforecourtlaw]

UK Court Orders May Not Apply In Saudi Arabia

It isn't a question of possibility but rather a border-shattering power that every country has. But being that the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia have differing views on laws and human rights, the possibility of a UK Court Order to bring home Amina Al-Jeffery, who claimed she was imprisoned by her Arabian father.

The father said he denies locking up her daughter.

Amina elaborates further that Saudi Arabian Academic Mohammed Al-Jeffery had locked her up because she "kissed a guy".

According to the UK judge presiding over the case, the UK courts could do very little to force her father's compliance. However, he acknowledges that the girl has been "deprived of her liberty" and "her father must facilitate her return by September 11."

Sir William Pattey elaborated:

"Amina is a dual national so when she's in Saudi Arabia she is subject, not only to Saudi laws, but to Saudi customs," he told BBC Radio Wales.

"While we think it's very normal that a 21-year-old woman is a freely independent actor, and can do what she likes, that's not quite the same in Saudi Arabia where a single woman is subject to the guardianship of her appropriate male relative."

[beforecourtlaw]

Cameron Honoured For Serving the UK As Three-Year Prime Minister

UK Prime Minister David Cameron said that once Brexit happens, he would step down as Prime Minister.

And indeed he did.

With his wife and children in Downing Street, he showed great emotion upon his retirement from the post. But he claimed the UK was "much stronger as he leaves than when he took over."

The Prime Minister made a speech in the Prime Ministers Quarters and made a speech, saying that he would "miss the roar of the crowd."

He had also shown a photo of himself and Larry the Downing Street Cat, amusing listeners that he proved he loved the cat and disproving rumours of his dislike for him.

Mr Cameron acknowledged his errors, saying that he didn't get every decision right.

"Politicians like to talk about policies, but in the end it's about people's lives," he said, pointing to the government's record on employment, the NHS and defence.

He wished Theresa May, the new Prime Minister and leader of the Tory Party, well, saying she would provide "strong and stable leadership", and paid tribute to his wife Samantha and his children.

Buckhingham Palace had confirmed that Mr Cameron had tendered his resignation, to which the Queen responded that she was "graciously pleased" to accept.

[beforecourtlaw]

Abortion Criminalisation Violates Irish Womens' Rights

The UN is urging the Irish government to reform its abortion laws after Amanda Mellet, who received news her child had congenital effects that would immediately kill the child in the womb, could not have an abortion due to the country's current criminalisation of abortion.

According to legal accounts, Mellet was subject to severe emotional and mental pain and suffering from the government due to the law.

A UN Human Rights Committee concluded upon investigation that Ireland's abortion laws - one of the most restrictive in the world, had forced Mellet to travel to countries or states that would allow her to commit and abortion, and then return quickly despite having only partial recovery at her own expense.

The UN Committee said that Ireland signed the International covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which would mandate the government has to compensate for Mellet's pain and suffering and must prevent similar violations from occurring in the future.

Irish Lawyers said the ruling could urge countries with restrictive abortion laws to reform their own stringent rules.

Europe at the Centre of Reproductive Rights Regional Director Leah Hoctor - who also filed the complaint- said it was a huge step forward for women's rights once other countries decriminalise abortion.

[beforecourtlaw]

Coalition of Students and Parents File New Case Against North Carolina

North Carolina's new HB2 law, constitutionalised and bans transgender people from using restrooms aligned with their new sexuality, comes under fire from an unknown number of public school students, public university students and their parents.

The coalition, "North Carolinians for Privacy", has no identifiable individuals. It calls for the Department of Justice and Department of Education to interpret laws under Title IX that would allow transgender individuals protection from discrimination.

Perhaps uncoincidentally, it complements the suit filed Monday by Gov. Pat McCrory (R), which only addressed the DOJ’s concerns over HB2’s Title VII (employment) violations. The university system has not filed any suits of its own.

The public school students and parents are worried that North Carolina's public schools may lose funding for not complying with HB2.

The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed the collective in District 211.

The suit said:

“The female University Students experience the added worry, anxiety, stress, and fear caused by the knowledge that allowing biological males the right of entry and use of restrooms and locker rooms designated for females places them at higher risk of sexual assault.

“Currently, if someone sees a male student enter the female students’ private facilities, he or she can notify campus security. But if Defendants have their way, no one will be able to stop any biological male from entering female restrooms and locker rooms.”

[beforecourtlaw]

We Do Need A Concrete Abuse Law. But It Can Be Difficult To Do So

The Internet has always been a symbol of freedom.

Log in to your social media account and express yourself. You'll find like-minded individuals responding to your messages and commentaries agreeing with you.

Some will intellectually challenge you.

But some may abuse you.

According to Conservative MP Maria Miller, the online abuse law needs to be revamped as more and more reports of individuals are rising.

It's not new news that someone who commented something offensive about a certain news article, topic or individual made a few enemies.

However, some individuals online are more than just keyboard warriors. In fact, they're capable of dealing massive damage online. This made for easier "smear" campaigns. This also includes the use of self-generated pornographic material by ex-lovers.

And since this happened on Facebook and the Internet, the police are often quick to dismiss that "it isn't a police matter" when in fact it is.

According to Maria Miller, and I must agree:

"As a result of a campaign that I was leading, we've put in place a new law that partly recognises the posting of sexual images online in order to cause distress. If we can have a set of laws which pick up on online crime, that will enable the police to do more."

She added that a clearer framework for operators was also needed because "at the moment, they are allowing criminal activity, whether on Facebook or Twitter or any other platforms, to go unchecked".

She called for them to enable people to report offences "more readily" and ensure action was taken.

"There have to be consequences and, at the moment, there aren't," she said.

[beforecourtlaw]

UK-Saudi Weapons Laws Have Always Been Instrumental For Saudi

Saudi Arabia is in the middle of initiating attacks against the Yemeni civilians. Guess who supplied them their arms?

UK defence contractors are infamous for supplying about a quarter of Saudi Arabia's military firepower. However, the same firepower had been used in attacking Medicins Sans Frontieres hospitals in the area. About four hospitals of the MSF were destroyed by aerial bombardment.

Thousands of civilians in refugee camps, schools, hospitals and aid facilities were killed by Saudi-led bombardment in the regions.

The MSF also said its last remaining hospital in the country was too close in one of the Saudi Arabian bombing runs.

So why are we still providing them arms? Well, Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond pledged the UK would "support the Saudis in every practical way short of engaging in combat."

So no MP voted against the sales of £3 billion worth of arms.

The previous year, the Defence News network said the UK bombs for the RAF the government passed to Saudi Arabia to aid the bombing.

If we look at our selling licenses, UK arms export laws said licenses for military-grade equipment should not be granted if there is a clear risk the buyer would use it in violation of humanitarian law.

I guess we're not that humanitarian, are we, as Britons?

[beforecourtlaw]

We're Gonna Get Automated Cars In The Future

Today, and I'm happy to say that despite the fact this is happening in the United States and not here, US regulators have approved and legalised Google's driverless car system. Now we have a benchmark for successfully integrating AI-driven cars in our traffic system.

To be honest, I'm not being sarcastic. I love the fact that we have driverless cars. Never have I thought that I'd live to see a car driving me home by itself.

Going back, The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) published a document that the driverless system is given the same legal definition as a real human driver thinks.

According to the document:

“If no human occupant of the vehicle can actually drive the vehicle, it is more reasonable to identify the driver as whatever (as opposed to whoever) is doing the driving.

Google and its parent company Alphabet have tried everything and anything to perfect the self-driving/driverless car models they have.

These cars would allow self-driving car projects involving forward-thinking automakers such as Ford, Tesla and GM Motors to have a peg for their own designs. Combined with further development of electric vehicles, we can create a concrete entrance for legal and safe self-driving vehicles.

[beforecourtlaw]

We Created IS

Need someone to tell off everyone supporting the Snooper's Charter? Tell them we were the ones that created the IS in the first place.

Don't believe me? Well, recent news had picked up on the UK's defence contractors and the weapons sales between it and Saudi Arabia.

You may as well know that Saudi Arabia is against the Syrian government, which is backed by Iran, Saudi's long-time Shia enemies.

Who's Saudi's friends? Rebels who intend to overthrow the Syrian government. Part of these rebels are US-trained rebels, and also those who made up the now-infamous Islamic State.

In short, we created this nightmare that had killed tons of innocent lives and had declared itself the new superpower of the Middle East.

Saudi Arabia, the ally of the west in the Middle East, doesn't have its own hands clean. Its improper use of imported arms during the Yemen Houthi Rebels insurgency makes it a volatile ally.

Now that the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) had issued two weeks for the UK government to review arms sales licenses, there's no guarantee they would pass this law because the UK wants capital in a world with a gloomy global economy.

[beforecourtlaw]

Law Society Condemns Spending Review Proposals On Personal Injury Claims

The Law Society is criticising the Chancellor's proposals to use the Small Claims Court in addressing soft tissue personal injuries from motor accidents.

The Select Transport Committee also condemned the proposal, stating that it did not guarantee proper legal representation for the victims of such accidents.

Law Society President Jonathan Smithers said:

“The Law Society is gravely concerned that these proposals will completely undermine the right of ordinary citizens to receive full and proper compensation from those that have injured them through negligence. These proposals will stop people obtaining legal advice for all personal injury claims below £5,000 and stop people claiming for often debilitating injuries arising from road traffic accidents if these injuries are considered minor.

“This is a fivefold increase in the present level of cases currently within the small claims procedure, benefiting those who have negligently harmed people and will result in more people trying to work their way through a complex court system without any legal advice.

"People recovering from their injuries will have to bring claims as litigants in person (without any legal advice) and this can be very unfair because those defending the claims can often afford to pay for legal advice. This therefore undermines ordinary people’s ability to access justice. Especially if defendants simply deny liability forcing people to fight through the courts without legal help.

“Personal injury claims, even lower value claims, can include serious injuries arising from the fault of an employer or other road traffic accidents where legal rights can be very complex and the injuries caused debilitating. A new limit of £5000 will mean personal injuries including facial scarring would be considered as ‘small claims’. This is totally unacceptable.

“These proposals are not, as stated, about stopping fraudulent claims. Fraudulent claims are clearly repellent but they should be dealt with by targeting the fraudsters and not the vast majority of honest claimants who have been injured and bring genuine claims.

“We await the detail of the Government’s proposals. And we will be responding to the consultation robustly.”

[beforecourtlaw]

Why China Still Has More Freedom Of Speech Than The UK

It's appalling to say that China has more freedom to talk about issues and raise it at higher levels than UK citizens. The report comes after UK citizens face more difficulties to hold protests against the government and private companies with changing costs and new administration regarding environmental challenges to the United Kingdom.

Yep, we're a bit screwed, in a way.

Defendant And Protester Cost Caps

Previously, individuals and charities launching protests and legal challenges against the government and polluters have to pay more than £5000 to the other side for legal costs. They would pay £10,000 upon losing. Defendants stand to pay £35000 to the other side should they lose

Seeing this as an abusive platform, the government had raised the initial cost caps for defendants to £25000 while individuals and charities have to pay double the price they have had. The limits may even be removed on a whim.

Using The Law As A Tool To Protect The Environment

In China, even the United States, the power to protect the environment is given to the hands of the public. An environmental legal challenge is usually a case wherein the individual stands to gain nothing more than the public. They should have no fear in incurring higher costs.

China is often perceived as ruled by an 'iron fist'. But legal experts say the new laws give their people empowerment they could use to help their environment and China's increasing pollution.