The Roundtable
Welcome to the Roundtable, a forum for incisive commentary and analysis
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.
By Kaitlyn Rentala Kaitlyn Rentala is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania studying Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE). On March 24, 2020, the Supreme Court was scheduled to hear Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., a pivotal copyright infringement case that could alter the way in which software companies intrinsically operate. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Supreme Court announced that the March argument session and its 11 cases would be postponed until an undetermined time. In Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., the Supreme Court will finally decide if Google will have to pay Oracle billions of dollars for the copyright that runs hundreds of millions of phones around the world, and their decision will mark the end of almost eight years of numerous federal court cases and appeals launched from both sides.
0 Comments
By Kaitlyn Rentala Kaitlyn Rentala is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania studying Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE). On October 8, the Supreme Court heard three major cases about Title VII and discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The first case, Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, which was consolidated with the second case, Altitude Express v. Zarda, dealt with whether or not sexual orientation was a subset of sex, which is protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The third case, R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, dealt with whether or not transgender status or gender identity was protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [1] Both cases were toted as the biggest cases to be heard in front of the Supreme Court during this term, and could prove to be landmark decisions with major ramifications for both sides. I was one of the lucky 62 members of the public to sit in on oral arguments.
By Kaitlyn Rentala Kaitlyn Rentala is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania studying Philosophy, Politics, and Economics. At 86, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the oldest member of the bench, but still one of the most impactful. Throughout her long lasting career, Ginsburg has distinguished herself as a leader in the women’s rights movement all while overcoming personal struggles and misogyny. This year celebrates her 26th year anniversary on the bench. Here is a look back at Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s influence over US law and culture.
By Kaitlyn Rentala
Kaitlyn Rentala is a freshman at the University of Pennsylvania studying Philosophy, Politics, and Economics in the College of Arts and Sciences. “If I could choose an amendment to add to the Constitution, it would be the Equal Rights Amendment. I think we have achieved that through legislation, but legislation can be repealed, it can be altered. So I would like my granddaughters, when they pick up the Constitution, to see that notion – that women and men are persons of equal stature – I’d like them to see that is a basic principle of our society.” - Ruth Bader Ginsburg The history of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) has been a long and tumultuous one. Despite the widespread media attention the ERA received in the 1970s, itis widely misunderstood today. Shockingly, 80% of Americans, including many lawyers, believe the ERA is a constitutional amendment while in fact it was never ratified. [1] This also begs the question, why wasn’t the ERA ratified? With nearly two-thirds of Americans supporting the amendment, the ERA clearly holds the same cultural relevance today as it did over 40 years ago. [2] However, with the recent ratification of the ERA by Nevada and Illinois, perhaps the more pertinent question is what does the future hold for the ERA? |
Archives
November 2024
|