In each of these cases, plaintiffs filed their claims in state court and carefully drafted their complaints to raise only state law issues, trying to shield the cases from the right of removal that defendants have when a case is filed in state court but involves federal claims. If removed, the cases will be tried in federal court, probably with judges that the plaintiffs think are less likely to accept their theories of liability and strained concepts of proof of proximate causation.
is deciding only whether the defendants may have these cases concerning global climate change — which seek to impose global liability for global companies with a global effect on global energy prices and supply — heard in federal court. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the case could not be removed from state courts. Whether the 10th Circuit was correct is the only issue theand similar cases can be heard in dozens of different states with the risk of inconsistent or conflicting verdicts that risk chaos in global energy markets, threaten energy security, and thereby compromise national security without any branch of the federal government having a role in the decision-making.
It is a question of whether a patchwork of lawsuits can be used to stretch the defendants’ resources so thin that they are forced to settle. All along the way, the costs of litigation will raise the price of energy, ultimately affecting consumers already hit hard by inflation.believes that these cases can scatter to the local courthouses across the country, the court should accept the case for full review and say so.
Only then will Congress get a clear signal and be motivated to take action to prevent that chaos — by passing legislation to preempt these local lawsuits and declare that these cases belong in federal courts even more expressly than it has already done through the Clean Air Act and other vehicles., though, we know Congress is slow to act when it thinks the right result will shake out in the courts.
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
McConnell hammers Democrats for attacking Supreme Court justices: 'Going after the court'.LeaderMcConnell was asked about Justice Clarence Thomas’s relationship with a Republican donor. 'The Democrats, it seems to me, spend a lot of time criticizing individual members of the court and going after the court as an institution,' McConnell said. LeaderMcConnell Nominating Thomas was the greatest achievement of the HW Bush Administration. LeaderMcConnell This guys balls retract and descend like a turtles head. 🐢
Source: dcexaminer - 🏆 6. / 94 Read more »
Anti-abortion group asks Supreme Court to keep mifepristone restrictionsSupreme Court Justice Samuel Alito on Friday temporarily blocked abortion pill restrictions until 11:59 p.m. Wednesday.
Source: CNBC - 🏆 12. / 72 Read more »
Supreme Court to deliver answer in religious mailman's caseThe Supreme Court this week is hearing the case of a religious mail carrier who refused to deliver Amazon packages on Sundays.
Source: ksatnews - 🏆 442. / 53 Read more »
Supreme Court to Consider Christian Delivery Man's Refusal to Work Sundays in Religious Freedom CaseThe Supreme Court this week is hearing the case of a religious mail carrier who refused to deliver Amazon packages on Sundays. That's a easy solution don't take the job. God certaintly understand he said if you need wisdom just ask for it. Many folks works in hospital , public safety believe in the Lord, wants to go to church on some weekends.
Source: NBCNewYork - 🏆 270. / 63 Read more »
Supreme Court to deliver answer in religious mailman's caseThe Supreme Court this week is hearing the case of a religious mail carrier who refused to deliver Amazon packages on Sundays. The court will consider Gerald Groff's case on Tuesday. Lower courts have sided with the Postal Service. It says Groff’s demand for Sundays off meant extra work for other employees and caused tension. Groff argues employers can too easily reject employees’ requests for religious accommodations. If he wins, that could change. The conservative-dominated Supreme Court has been particularly sympathetic to the concerns of religious plaintiffs in recent years. Capitalism will find someone who wants to work on Sunday. That’s how it works. Who pays for all these cases to make it to the supreme Court because it's certainly not this guy Don’t work for Amazon then
Source: AP - 🏆 728. / 51 Read more »
US Supreme Court rebuffs Novartis bid to revive MS drug Gilenya patentThe U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp's bid to revive a key patent on its blockbuster multiple sclerosis drug Gilenya that was invalidated amid a legal dispute with China's HEC Pharm Co Ltd .
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »