The plea seeks the removal of personal laws as they are discriminatory under Art. 14,15 and other provisions of International Covenants.
A Supreme Court bench headed by CJI SA Bobde is hearing a PIL seeking the direction for the Ministry of Home Affairs, Law and Justice and Women and Child Development to make all the personal laws uniform.
The plea seeks the removal of personal laws as they are discriminatory under Art. 14,15 and other provisions of International Covenants.
Pinky Anand: No
CJI: You are not saying it doesn't mean that's not the reality.
More from Live Law
More from Court
so @tedwheeler did you hear? today we are discussing "public whippings" thanks to @JamesBuchal
its a great chance to study the history of public beatings.
understandably, women feel threatened. https://t.co/jck05JGM4B
#PDX #tourism
FIRST OREGON WIFE-BEATER TO RECEIVE WHIPPING POST PUNISHMENT
https://t.co/3SJOODbuLf
PORTLAND. Or., June 7—The whipping post law passed at the last session of the Legislature was Into execution for the first time today, the victim being Charles Mcdlnty, convicted of wlfe-beatlng
whip was a braided blacksnake, made of rawhide, with four lashes. ..hustled to jail, stripped to the
waist, manacled, and his hands tied to the door high above his head. The whipping was as severe as the powerful deputy was capable of administering. Blood drawn on the 4th blow.
its a great chance to study the history of public beatings.
understandably, women feel threatened. https://t.co/jck05JGM4B
#PDX #tourism
@MultCoDA https://t.co/GgR1rCGIdG @OregonStateBar @BrentWeisberg @USAO_OR
— braingarbage (@braingarbage) November 28, 2020
Even if this is a "joke" or a drunk tweet, it appears that he is inciting gender-based violence on a woman via Twitter@twittersupport pic.twitter.com/TcaBiQ2wvU
FIRST OREGON WIFE-BEATER TO RECEIVE WHIPPING POST PUNISHMENT
https://t.co/3SJOODbuLf
PORTLAND. Or., June 7—The whipping post law passed at the last session of the Legislature was Into execution for the first time today, the victim being Charles Mcdlnty, convicted of wlfe-beatlng
whip was a braided blacksnake, made of rawhide, with four lashes. ..hustled to jail, stripped to the
waist, manacled, and his hands tied to the door high above his head. The whipping was as severe as the powerful deputy was capable of administering. Blood drawn on the 4th blow.
1) God bless the State of Texas and @KenPaxtonTX What he has just done gives us every chance to save our Republic and our country.
Keep in mind that there are only a few instances where a party can file a direct lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court, a state claiming harm by
2) another state is one of those instances.
https://t.co/xvXGDdgDYh
Texas Attorney General @KenPaxtonTX has filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court seeking and emergency injunction against Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia “from taking action to
3) certify presidential electors or to have such electors take any official action including without limitation participating in the electoral college.”
@KenPaxtonTX argues that arbitrary changes made by the state’s governors, secretaries of states and election supervisors were
4) “inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.”
The lawsuit states: “these non-legislative changes … facilitated the casting
5) and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution.” […] “By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens vote, but
Keep in mind that there are only a few instances where a party can file a direct lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court, a state claiming harm by
2) another state is one of those instances.
https://t.co/xvXGDdgDYh
Texas Attorney General @KenPaxtonTX has filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court seeking and emergency injunction against Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia “from taking action to
The ONLY court that can hear the #TexasLawSuit is the Supreme Court of the United States. When a case is between two or more states, the Supreme Court holds both original and exclusive jurisdiction, and no lower court may hear such cases. SCOTUS does not have discretion to ignore
— Robert Barnes (@Barnes_Law) December 8, 2020
3) certify presidential electors or to have such electors take any official action including without limitation participating in the electoral college.”
@KenPaxtonTX argues that arbitrary changes made by the state’s governors, secretaries of states and election supervisors were
4) “inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.”
The lawsuit states: “these non-legislative changes … facilitated the casting
5) and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution.” […] “By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens vote, but