Kavanaugh will start US Court work today

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Senate ◽  
Supreme Court Rulings ◽  
State Senators ◽  
Regulatory Landscape

Significance On October 6, the US Senate voted 50-48 to confirm Kavanaugh, who succeeds recently retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. Kavanaugh’s confirmation returns the Court to full nine-member strength and gives conservatives a 5-4 majority that will influence the US regulatory landscape for years. Impacts Democratic ‘red state’ senators from 2016 pro-Trump states who voted against Kavanaugh may gain support. Trump may have the opportunity to nominate further Supreme Court justices, but a Democratic Senate could halt his picks. Chief Justice John Roberts could become the Court’s new most-likely ‘swing voter’. Absent any court packing, Republicans and Democrats in office may be tempted to ignore or circumvent Supreme Court rulings.

US election lawsuits unlikely to change result

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Election Result ◽  
Run Off ◽  
The Us ◽  
Court Intervention ◽  
Us Senate ◽  
Vote Counting

Significance However, Republican President Donald Trump is alleging that vote tallies are fraudulent and inaccurate. He is seeking recounts and undertaking lawsuits over alleged vote-counting irregularities. Impacts Two run-off elections in Georgia will determine whether the US Senate stays Republican or is tied 50-50 with the Democrats. Given the type of complaints raised by Trump’s campaign, prospects for a Supreme Court intervention look remote. Controversy over the election result will linger, perhaps until the 2024 presidential election.

'Deepfakes' could irreparably damage public trust

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
National Security ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Department Of Homeland Security ◽  
Digital Videos ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Senate

Subject Deepfake technology. Significance The US Senate on October 24 passed an act that requires the Department of Homeland Security to publish a yearly report on how ‘deepfake’ technology may be used to harm national security. Deepfakes are believable digital videos, audios or photos created using artificial intelligence (AI) to portray a person saying or doing something that the person never said or did, or portraying an event as real that never took place. The level of sophistication of this technology has leapfrogged over the past two years, raising a wide spectrum of concerns. Impacts A market for anti-deepfake verification technologies will emerge. Lawmakers will need to define the lines between art/entertainment and malicious deepfakes. Upcoming elections will be impacted by the existence of this technology.

OECD and EU cannot count on Biden backing digital tax

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Global Consensus ◽  
Democratic Candidate ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
Us Senate

Significance Signs that Democratic candidate Joe Biden is likely to secure a narrow victory in the US presidential election will boost the Commission’s hopes for global consensus and better transatlantic dialogue on digital taxes. Impacts Despite Brexit, the United Kingdom will support EU calls for a digital tax. The list of countries imposing unilateral digital taxes will continue to grow as pandemic-induced recession bites. The precise bipartisan balance of the US Senate will determine the extent of tech-related policy changes under Biden.

Polling will proliferate despite UK 'Brexit' failure

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Market Volatility ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
Us Senate ◽  
Communication Methods ◽  
The Eu

Subject 'Brexit' polling. Significance On June 23, the pound swung wildly: final polls on whether the United Kingdom should leave the EU ('Brexit') had shown a 4-percentage-point lead for 'Remain', only for the final result to be the opposite. Pollsters have been criticised for their failure to predict both this result and the 2015 UK general election outcome, even as qualitative analysts have also been criticised for missing the results. Impacts The US presidential election is immune from most polling failures, given its hyper-coverage and the discrete decisions of swing states. US Senate and House of Representatives elections are much more difficult to poll, leading to likely market volatility in early November. Changes in communication methods are sparking debates about how a representative sample of the population can be reached best.

US elections will energise fight over abortion access

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
State Legislatures ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Abortion Debate ◽  
The Us ◽  
Abortion Access

Significance The ruling, the first on abortion since the Court returned to having a 5-4 conservative majority, has energised the abortion debate, especially with the US elections coming in November. Impacts The next president may have to nominate one or more Supreme Court justices. Additional lawsuits will be filed on both sides of the abortion debate. The composition of state courts and state legislatures will shape the abortion debate.

US Supreme Court will generate greater controversy

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Foreseeable Future ◽  
Court Reform ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Political Backlash

Significance The decision to hold a hearing on this issue, rather than simply issue a decision, reflects a degree of concern about perceptions of the Court’s legitimacy following the transfer of the country’s currently polarised politics onto the Court through recent appointments. Impacts The conservative majority of the Supreme Court is so dominant that no liberal decisions are likely in the foreseeable future. Chief Justice Roberts will try on occasion to moderate the Court’s conservative decision-making but mostly without effect. The recent report from President Joe Biden’s commission on the Supreme Court will prove ineffectual. Upcoming cases will provoke a political backlash among voters and make Court reform a central preoccupation for some Democrats.

scholarly journals Understanding President Trump supporters’ behaviors about a political controversy

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-136
Author(s):  
Arunima Krishna ◽  
Soojin Kim
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Spiral Of Silence ◽  
Loss Of Face ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Speaking Out ◽  
The Us ◽  
Political Controversy ◽  
Us Senate

PurposeThis study seeks to understand Trump supporters’ behaviors on social media in the wake of a political controversy: US President Trump’s continued support for Judge Roy Moore’s candidacy for the US Senate representing the state of Alabama despite several allegations of sexual assault against him.Design/methodology/approachFew days before the special election was held in Alabama, an online survey was conducted among 325 supporters of President Trump to explore Trump supporters’ social media behaviors, including the unfriending/unfollowing contacts and speaking out about the controversy.FindingsWe found a negative presidential image to influence individuals’ loss of face, and such loss of face to impact unfriending/unfollowing behaviors on social media, as well as outspokenness. Furthermore, the differences between strong issue supporters and weak issue supporters’ opinions of climate perceptions and outspokenness were investigated.Originality/valueRather than using fear of isolation as the mediator between opinion climate and willingness to speak out, as is generally the case in the spiral of silence model (Moy et al., 2001), this study investigated the role of another affective indicator, loss of face on two social media behaviors, outspokenness, and unfollowing/unfriending contacts on social media.

Judging style: The case of Bush versus Gore

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-327
Author(s):  
Matthew L Jockers ◽  
Fernando Nascimento ◽  
George H Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Text Mining ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Medium Frequency ◽  
Main Contributor ◽  
Machine Learning Methods ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Usage Patterns

Abstract The judgments by members of the US Supreme Court in the 2000 case of Bush versus Gore remain controversial to the present. We use text mining and machine learning methods to compare the word usage patterns of Supreme Court Justices in order to explore the likely authorship of both the anonymous 5-4 per curiam decision in this case and the concurrence that is attributed to Chief Justice Rehnquist, with Scalia and Thomas joining. An analysis of high and medium frequency words suggests that Justice Kennedy was likely the main contributor to the per curiam decision. A similar analysis of the concurrence, however, suggests that Justice Scalia may have played a more central role than the document’s purported author, Justice Rehnquist. Our analysis indicates that while Chief Justice Rehnquist was likely to have been the crafter of the document, much of the more forceful language of the concurrence resonates more clearly with a vocabulary that is indicative of Justice Scalia.

SEC requires hedge funds to prevent insider trading despite unsettled legal definition

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-64
Author(s):  
Nicolas Morgan ◽  
Art Zwickel ◽  
Thomas A. Zaccaro ◽  
Jenifer Q. Doan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Insider Trading ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Legal Definition ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Investment Advisers ◽  
Definition Of

Purpose To explain the import of a recent enforcement action by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against an investment adviser for failing to prevent insider trading against the context of an unsettled legal definition of “insider trading” as evidenced by the issue presented in a recent case before the US Supreme Court. Design/methodology/approach Reviews the principal issues raised by the SEC in its enforcement action, legal requirements imposed on investment advisers, and the insider trading issues presented by the US Supreme Court case. Findings Because the legal concept of insider trading has developed through case law and is not defined by statute, it remains uncertain, and therefore the practice of insider trading will be difficult to prevent without restricting activities that could ultimately be determined to be legal. Practical implications In light of the SEC’s high threshold for investment advisers to prevent insider trading and the uncertain legal definition of that concept, investment advisers should review their insider trading policies and err on the side of caution. Originality/value Practical guidance from an experienced former SEC counsel and SEC practitioners offers new insights into the steps investment advisers should take in response to SEC enforcement activities and nebulous legal definitions.

Transparency in eVoting

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Prosser
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Security Framework ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
German Constitutional Court ◽  
Supreme Court Rulings ◽  
Core Issues ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to present and discuss some core issues regarding the transparency of the eVoting process. Apart from the protection of voting secrecy, the possible manipulation of votes, even of the entire election, is one of the key issues in eVoting. Comparatively few Supreme Court rulings are available for eVoting, as it is a new field. Where there are rulings available, they often focus on the case at hand and do not derive general principles. On 3 March 2009, the German Constitutional Court published a ruling on the use of voting terminals[1] from which also general principles can be derived far beyond the case itself. Design/methodology/approach – Apart from the protection of voting secrecy, the possible manipulation of votes, even of the entire election, is one of the key issues in eVoting. Comparatively few Supreme Court rulings are available for eVoting, as it is a new field. Where there are rulings available, they often focus on the case at hand and do not derive general principles. On 3 March 2009, the German Constitutional Court published a ruling on the use of voting terminals[1] from which general principles can also be derived far beyond the case itself. Findings – The paper presented some core issues in eVoting transparency as required by the ruling of the German Constitutional Court. In particular, it suggested a way to define and operationalise the terms “audit chain”, “count” and “recount”, which arguably represent the core issues in eVoting transparency and auditability. Furthermore, the paper introduced a model to map the key security dimensions in an eVoting system and the degree to which they are fulfilled by technical, not just organisational, means, with auditability being the dimension discussed in this contribution. Research limitations/implications – The paper only considers political elections and starts off the framework and requirements set by the German Constitutional Court. With one exception, these requirements can be seen as rather generic for most Western-style democracies, the exception being observability and auditability of the election by the general public. Practical implications – The paper derives concrete design principles for remote eVoting systems. Originality/value – The paper develops a security framework for remote eVoting from given legal requirements. After an analysis of popular existing eVoting protocols, a generic eVoting protocol is derived satisfying these requirements.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document