Subscript Law

Discrimination in the employment context: which groups get federal protection? Not all unfair treatment is a violation of the law. In the employment context, for example, courts have noted they are not “super-personnel” departments meant to second guess every employment decision ( see, e.g. , Johnson v. Weld County (10th Cir. 2010) ; Chapman v. AI Transp. (11th Cir. 2000) . Instead, the civil right statutes only prohibit actions that occur because of a person’s membership in a protected class. Congress has extended protections to specific groups who have historically faced hardships in obtaining employment, housing, and other public accommodations What are the protected classes? Under federal law, employers cannot discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, or disability. The law is not, however, a blanket bar on employers taking into account a person’s membership in one of these groups in all circumstances. For example, employers may consider ...

Support for the president wanes after poor response to the pandemic and nationwide protests. Supporting Donald Trump, or at least his actions, has become harder lately. Trump’s response to the pandemic and to nation-wide protests against police brutality have shown the president’s ego controls his policy actions.  The following prominent conservative voices have spoken out against Trump: James Mattis “Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us.” James Mattis, the highly respected Marine general who acted as Trump’s Secretary of Defense before resigning in late 2018, initially declined to criticise the president. He said he did not want to harm existing officers’ opportunity to defend the country. He said he owed a certain period of silence, but that he would not keep quiet forever. Mattis’s silence lasted until Trump used tear gas on peaceful protestors for...

Argument: December 2, 2019 Decision: April 27, 2020 Petitioner Brief: Georgia Respondent Brief: PublicResource.Org Court Below: Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals Supreme Court ruled commentary published in Georgia’s official legislative code is not eligible for copyright protection. On April 27, 2020 in  Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org  the Supreme Court ruled against the State of Georgia, holding that commentary published in Georgia’s “official” legal code is not eligible for copyright protection.  The parties Petitioner, the State of Georgia, contracts with a private company to publish “official” copies of its laws.  The publisher also prepares an “annotated” version of Georgia’s laws called the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (OCGA).  The annotations include commentary such as summaries of relevant judicial opinions, summaries of relevant opinions of the state attorney general, relevant law review articles and other ref...