- #NYTIMES. HEI SREENAVASAN AND SRI SRINAVASAN TRIAL#
- #NYTIMES. HEI SREENAVASAN AND SRI SRINAVASAN FREE#
Section 3 of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, "violates basic due process and equal protection principles." That part of DOMA was struck down. Windsor that the federal government violated the Constitution when it refused to recognize same-sex marriages that had been legally recognized by state governments. In June 2013 the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in United States v. Srinivasan lost that case in a 9-0 decision written by liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
#NYTIMES. HEI SREENAVASAN AND SRI SRINAVASAN TRIAL#
United States, in which Srinivasan represented former Enron chief Jeffrey Skilling, who claimed that he did not receive a fair trial when he was convicted of fraud. There is one case in particular that's likely to disconcert Srinivasan's potential progressive supporters. Why? Because when Srinivasan was a lawyer working in private practice, Mother Jones observed, he "defended corporate clients against unions and plaintiffs alleging human rights abuses." Not exactly the sort of ringing endorsement that's going to win big cheers at a Bernie Sanders rally. "It's understandable that liberals might look skeptically at Srinivasan." So wrote the progressive magazine Mother Jones in 2013. With disputes over the scope of religious liberty increasingly appearing on the federal docket, this case is likely to figure prominently in any discussion of Srinivasan's record.
#NYTIMES. HEI SREENAVASAN AND SRI SRINAVASAN FREE#
"By imposing an unwanted minister," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, "the state infringes the Free Exercise Clause, which protects a religious group's right to shape its own faith and mission through its appointments." The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 against Srinivasan's client and against the EEOC. According to the school, on the other hand, its internal personnel decisions are protected by the First Amendment and its requirement that Congress make no law "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion. Srinivasan and the EEOC both took the position that the "ministerial exception" to federal anti-discrimination law should not shield a parochial school from a disability lawsuit filed by a discharged teacher (Perich). In 2012 Srinivasan served as counsel of record for private respondent Cheryl Perich in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Where does he stand on the issues? What do we need to know about his legal philosophy? Here are four areas of the law where Srinivasan's legal record is likely to come under scrutiny. But for the sake of argument, let's assume Srinivasan is going to be the nominee. We don't yet know whose name Obama will put forward. If he's actually confirmed Srinivasan would also make history as both the first Asian American and the first Indian American to sit on the high court. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit and for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court, both Republican appointees. Circuit by a Senate vote of 97-0, had a successful private legal practice, and served multiple stints in the office of solicitor general, including a period as principal deputy solicitor general for the Obama administration. Srinivasan has certainly got the right sort of resume for the job.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
That candidate is Sri Srinivasan, who currently sits as a judge on the U.S. Among those five, one in particular has struck many court watchers as a potential frontrunner. According to multiple reports, Obama is deciding among a shortlist of five candidates. President Barack Obama is expected soon to announce his nominee to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia on the U.S.
0 kommentar(er)
