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
#LIVE Delhi High Court Women Lawyers Forum in Association with LiveLaw is conducting a Webinar on the topic 'Attack On Love Marriages And Freedom Of Choice'.
#FreedomOfChoice
Watch the Webinar live at :
YouTube link: https://t.co/l074foe9RA
Facebook link:
https://t.co/d0m3h0Ut1w
Instagram Link:
Advocate Kajal Chandra begins the webinar and introduces the panelist Justice AP Shah, Delhi High Court’s Former Chief Justice. Advocate Gayatri Virmani introduces Human Rights Activist Jagmati Sangwan.
#FreedomOfChoice
The moderator Adv Chandra questions Justice Shah: Do the freedom of Religious ordinance of laws stand the test of Constitutionality and in your opinion, do they violate the fundamental right of liberty including the freedom to choose? #FreedomOfOpinion
Delhi High Court’s Former Chief Justice AP Shah: This topic cannot be discussed without referring to the Indian Constitution that guarantees Justice, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity and protects dignity of individual and Unity and integrity of the Nation. #FreedomOfChoice
#FreedomOfChoice
Watch the Webinar live at :
YouTube link: https://t.co/l074foe9RA
Facebook link:
https://t.co/d0m3h0Ut1w
Instagram Link:
Advocate Kajal Chandra begins the webinar and introduces the panelist Justice AP Shah, Delhi High Court’s Former Chief Justice. Advocate Gayatri Virmani introduces Human Rights Activist Jagmati Sangwan.
#FreedomOfChoice
The moderator Adv Chandra questions Justice Shah: Do the freedom of Religious ordinance of laws stand the test of Constitutionality and in your opinion, do they violate the fundamental right of liberty including the freedom to choose? #FreedomOfOpinion
Delhi High Court’s Former Chief Justice AP Shah: This topic cannot be discussed without referring to the Indian Constitution that guarantees Justice, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity and protects dignity of individual and Unity and integrity of the Nation. #FreedomOfChoice
More from Court
In the MATTER OF Jones David HOLLISTER
A171609.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
July 8, 2020.
https://t.co/qB3G8IAtxS we must correctly interpret the statute.
Stull v. Hoke, 326 Or. 72, 77, 948 P.2d 722 (1997).
legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary
Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and Mooney, Judge, and Hadlock, Judge pro tempore.
https://t.co/oJuecwvEKc
Bruce L. Campbell, John C. Clarke, and Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP filed the brief amicus curiae for Transgender Law Center, interACT, and Beyond Binary Legal.
Does ORS 33.460 permit the circuit court to grant a legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary? The circuit court concluded that the statute does not permit such a change, and it denied petitioner's application under ORS 33.460
A171609.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
July 8, 2020.
https://t.co/qB3G8IAtxS we must correctly interpret the statute.
Stull v. Hoke, 326 Or. 72, 77, 948 P.2d 722 (1997).
legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary
Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and Mooney, Judge, and Hadlock, Judge pro tempore.
https://t.co/oJuecwvEKc
J. Gibbons https://t.co/TieeoF2bZd
— braingarbage (@braingarbage) December 5, 2020
Bruce L. Campbell, John C. Clarke, and Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP filed the brief amicus curiae for Transgender Law Center, interACT, and Beyond Binary Legal.
Does ORS 33.460 permit the circuit court to grant a legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary? The circuit court concluded that the statute does not permit such a change, and it denied petitioner's application under ORS 33.460
I've decided that I will not be spouting off an uninformed, kneejerk opinion on a topic I don't have enough information about. Instead I shall cast shame on the idiots who do, and bring further confusion to everyone.
We as a people have been defanged not only by being fed wheelbarrows full of raw unmitigated horseshit, but even the knowledge of where to go to find this information has been buried beneath obscuring layers of horseshit thicker than the planet's crust.
We do not live in a democracy, whose vital functions require a freeflow of information much like pure capitalism requires a completely informed consumer populace. We instead live in an oligopoly of knowledge, where important facts we need to know are denied to us and hoarded away
Much like how we do not live under true capitalism as knowledge we need to make informed decisions as consumers is locked away and hidden behind thicc layers of legal documents, denying us knowledge of our rights under the rules of commerce we allegedly agreed to.
This is how we are denied our rights. By denying us knowledge of our rights, and then by denying us pathways to seek said knowledge, and if not removing them then hiding them within websites hosted on fucking geocities servers and javascript written by lowest bidder.
What\u2019s your level of optimism on this election going to the Supreme Court
— Dr. Gulag inmate president elect 69420 (@ViewnComs) December 17, 2020
We as a people have been defanged not only by being fed wheelbarrows full of raw unmitigated horseshit, but even the knowledge of where to go to find this information has been buried beneath obscuring layers of horseshit thicker than the planet's crust.
We do not live in a democracy, whose vital functions require a freeflow of information much like pure capitalism requires a completely informed consumer populace. We instead live in an oligopoly of knowledge, where important facts we need to know are denied to us and hoarded away
Much like how we do not live under true capitalism as knowledge we need to make informed decisions as consumers is locked away and hidden behind thicc layers of legal documents, denying us knowledge of our rights under the rules of commerce we allegedly agreed to.
This is how we are denied our rights. By denying us knowledge of our rights, and then by denying us pathways to seek said knowledge, and if not removing them then hiding them within websites hosted on fucking geocities servers and javascript written by lowest bidder.
