US: Supreme Court allows climate change scientist's defamation suit against National Review - - PressFrom - US
  •   
  •   
  •   

US Supreme Court allows climate change scientist's defamation suit against National Review

22:30  25 november  2019
22:30  25 november  2019 Source:   latimes.com

Google and Oracle copyright fight is headed to the Supreme Court

  Google and Oracle copyright fight is headed to the Supreme Court Oracle previously asked for $8.8 billion in damages. Oracle sued Google in 2010 over copyright and patent infringement allegations for its use of the Java programming language in Android, now the world's most popular mobile operating system. Oracle obtained the rights to Java when it acquired Sun Microsystems. Google has said that under fair use laws it didn't need a license for the open-source software.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused on Monday to shield two conservative writers from being sued for defamation by a climate-change expert whom they accused of having “molested and tortured data in the service of politicized science.”

a large white building with United States Supreme Court Building in the background: DACA faces its biggest challenge on Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2019: a hearing before the Supreme Court that will test whether it was properly enacted and whether President Donald Trump has the authority to end a program that has been a lifeline for hundreds of thousands of immigrants across the country.© Dreamstime DACA faces its biggest challenge on Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2019: a hearing before the Supreme Court that will test whether it was properly enacted and whether President Donald Trump has the authority to end a program that has been a lifeline for hundreds of thousands of immigrants across the country.

Over a dissent by Justice Samuel A. Alito, the high court cleared the way for Penn State professor Michael Mann to sue the National Review and the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute for having compared him to the former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky, who was imprisoned for sexual abuse. Both had been investigated by the university.

Google's fight with Oracle will be heard in the Supreme Court

  Google's fight with Oracle will be heard in the Supreme Court Google is getting one more shot at fending off Oracle's Android copyright claims. The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear Google's appeal of a federal appeals court ruling that Android violated Oracle copyright by using Java code without a license. The appeal will also address a 2014 decision that programing can be copyrighted. A decision is expected by July. This isn't the first time the Supreme Court has dealt with the issue. In 2015, the court refused to hear an appeal over the 2014 decision and sent the issue back to a lower court. require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function (medianetNativeAdOnArticle) { medianetNativeAdOnArticle.

In his 2012 article, columnist Mark Steyn said that in Mann’s case, as with Sandusky and football legend Joe Paterno, who was also involved in the sex-abuse scandal, Penn State “declined to find one of its star names guilty of any wrongdoing.” His comment repeated the words of an online columnist at the Competitive Enterprise Institute who first made the comparison between Mann and Sandusky.

The case involves a hotly disputed question that has split lower courts: When can statements of opinion form the basis of a libel suit? Ordinarily, the high court has ruled, a person can’t be sued for expressing an opinion. But when a statement mixes opinion with a claim about facts — in this case, the claim that Mann had misused data — courts have struggled to decide whether lawsuits are valid.

U.S. House panel agrees to 10-day hold in fight for Trump financial data

  U.S. House panel agrees to 10-day hold in fight for Trump financial data A House of Representatives committee on Monday told the U.S. Supreme Court it would agree to a 10-day hold - but not a longer delay - on a lower court ruling directing President Donald Trump's accounting firm to hand over his financial records to the Democratic-led panel. © Reuters/TOM BRENNER U.S. President Donald Trump delivers remarks on honesty and transparency in healthcare prices inside the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington The case represents an important showdown pitting the powers of the presidency against the authority of Congress, with Trump fighting doggedly to keep details of his finances private.

Lawyers for the institute and the National Review, a conservative publication founded in 1955 by the late William F. Buckley, urged the court to block the suit on 1st Amendment grounds. They argued that freedom of speech and the press requires shielding people who comment on matters of great public controversy, such as climate change.

Standing aside in this case, they said, “would be to insert courts and juries into every hot-button political and scientific dispute.”

But lawyers for Mann argued the disputed comments crossed the line from protected opinion to a defamatory accusation that Mann engaged in “data manipulation” and “scientific misconduct.”

An appeals court for the District of Columbia had refused to block the suit.

The high court’s action clears the way for the suits to go to trial. The justices, however, could still intervene later to review the verdict.

Judge denies Trump's request to dismiss Summer Zervos defamation case

  Judge denies Trump's request to dismiss Summer Zervos defamation case A Manhattan judge has cleared the way for President Donald Trump to be deposed in a defamation lawsuit filed by a former "Apprentice" contestant who has accused Trump of sexual assault. require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function (medianetNativeAdOnArticle) { medianetNativeAdOnArticle.getMedianetNativeAds(true); }); Trump's legal team had argued that a stay is necessary "given the novel and important Constitutional issues involved," the "special considerations due" their previous requests to dismiss the case, and to prevent "irreparable harm.

In the past, President Donald Trump, among others, has called for making it easier to sue the press for libel. Justice Clarence Thomas has also suggested the court should reconsider the landmark 1964 decision in New York Times vs. Sullivan, which shields the press from being sued by public officials except when their reports reflect a “reckless disregard for the truth.”

Thomas did not register a dissent Monday in the cases of National Review vs. Mann or CEI vs Mann.

Alito, however, said the court should have heard the cases.

They “present questions that go to the very heart of the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and freedom of the press: the protection afforded to journalists and others who use harsh language in criticizing opposing advocacy on one of the most important public issues of the day,” he wrote.

“Climate change has staked a place at the very center of his nation’s public discourse,” he added. “The core purpose of the constitutional protection of freedom of expression is to ensure that that all opinions on such issues have a chance to be heard and considered.”

———

©2019 Los Angeles Times

Visit the Los Angeles Times at www.latimes.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Climate change is threatening your Prosecco supply. Here's why. .
Italian government scientists are using vineyards as a lab and testing new techniques to mitigate effects of extreme weather"Climate change is a big problem," Tomasella told CBS News correspondent Seth Doane, adding, "When it's hot, it's very hot. When it's raining, it rain very much.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 1
This is interesting!