Two years after President Joe Biden was inaugurated, his administration continues to advance Trump-era legal positions in dozens of court cases, a progressive watchdog group revealed Friday.

Former President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice (DOJ) “consistently made a mockery of the law throughout his four years in power,” the Revolving Door Project (RDP) noted in the latest release of its long-running litigation tracker.

Even though “their laughable reasoning and indefensible positions were struck down at a historic rate, many cases were still waiting for Biden,” wrote RDP. “Two years into Biden’s presidency, an alarming number remain, either in some form

CALL FOR PAPERS

ILPC Annual Conference 2022 – Online Safety in a Connected World

We are pleased to announce this call for papers for the Information Law and Policy Centre’s 7th Annual Conference on 17-18 November 2022 hosted by the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (IALS) and supported by the School of Advanced Studies (SAS) and Bloomsbury’s Communications Law journaling. You can read about our previous annual events here.

We are looking for high quality contributions that explore the impact of policymaking focused on ensuring ‘online safety’ and the increased use of data-driven systems that are increasingly connecting all aspects

The ILPC Book Launch Event – Media Freedom in the Age of Citizen Journalism (Elgar Law 2021) took place on 11th May. The ILPC was delighted to host this online event and congratulates former ILPC Research Associate Dr Peter Coe (University of Reading) on ​​its publications.

This timely and highly topical event was organized as a panel discussion with an impressive and international panel of speakers from academia, regulation, and legal practice – Professor David Rolph (University of Sydney), Professor Paul Wragg (University of Leeds), Rebecca Moosavian ( University of Leeds), Lexie Kirkconnell-Kawana (Head of Regulation at IMPRESS), and

On December 29, 2022, President Biden signed into law the Omnibus Appropriation Act, 2023, which includes the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 (the “SECURE Act 2.0”). The Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Act of 2019 (the “original SECURE Act”) included a number of legislative changes designed to encourage retirement savings and expand employee participation in retirement plans. The SECURE Act 2.0 again modifies the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to further these objectives and to address some new areas. this Legal Update highlights some key changes

On appeal from [2020] EWCA Civ 1521

The Appellant (“Blacks”) rented commercial retail premises from the Respondent (“S&H”) under two successive leases dated 2013 and 2018 (the “leases”). The leases stated that S&H as landlord should provide a certificate each year “as to the amount of the total cost and the sum payable by the tenant” and that this was to be “conclusive” in the absence of “manifest or mathematical error or fraud ” (the “certification provision”). Blacks refused to pay the service charge for the years 2017-18 and 2018-19, claiming that the service charge was excessive. S&H issued proceedings

Author: Dr Marion Oswald

Last week, Rt Hon. Lord Geidt resigned as the Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests, citing – as the straw that broke the camel’s back – a still rather opaque issues relating to international lawputting him ‘in an impossible and odious position’. This non-statutory role advises the Prime Minister on the Ministerial Code, which requires Ministers to uphold the highest standards of property, comply with the law, protect the integrity of public life and observe the Seven Principles of Public Life. The role now stands vacant, with uncertainty as to whether Lord Geidt will be

“We will complete legislating the reforms in a way that will correct what needs correcting, will totally protect individual rights and will restore the public’s faith in the justice system that so much requires this reform,” Netanyahu said.

A poll released Sunday painted a more complex picture.

The survey found that 58% of Israelis believe the Supreme Court should have the power to overturn laws passed by parliament if they conflict with democratic principles. The survey, conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute in October, just before the election, questioned 1,092 people and had a margin of error of 2.8%.

The