Soudní novinky 26/16 (Nabito! OMT, imigrace, afirmativní akce)

• BVG: Constitutional Complaints and Organstreit Proceedings Against the OMT Programme of the European Central Bank Unsuccessful. 
• The Supreme Court ruled 4 to 3 that the tobacco company could not be sued for money-laundering by the European Union under an American racketeering law.
• Eszter Polgári: The Hungarian Constitutional Court’s case with the ECHR: an ambivalent relationship.
• Maďarský ústavní soud odmítl stížnosti na referendum o kvotách. 
• Linda Greenhouse (NYT): The Supreme Court’s Post-Scalia Term.
• Marko Milanovic: Grand Chamber Judgment in Al-Dulimi v. Switzerland.("This is the latest in a long and complex line of cases dealing with the negative human rights impact of sanctions mandated by the UN Security Council, raising inter alia the legal effects of the supremacy clause in Article 103 of the UN Charter.")
• NYTimes: Supreme Court Tie Blocks Obama Immigration Plan ("The 4-4 tie dealt a sharp blow to an ambitious program that the president had hoped would become one of his central legacies.")
• Ilya Somin: "Today’s Supreme Court decision upholding racial preferences in admissions at the University of Texas (UT) has potentially far-reaching implications. It might well license extensive racial discrimination in college admissions policies."
• What Do This Week’s Supreme Court Decisions Mean for Immigration and Affirmative Action? 

Soudní novinky 25/16 (Anal examinations are legal... at least in Kenya)

• Oregon Judge Allows Resident to Change Sex to Non-binary. 
• A Kenyan court has ruled that the use of anal examinations are legal after two men accused of being homosexuals were subjected to the tests.
• NYTimes: Federal Judge Tosses Texas’ Lawsuit to Bar Syrian Refugees ("A federal judge in Dallas ruled Texas has no legal merit to sue the Obama administration over the resettlement of Syrian refugees in the state.")

Soudní novinky 24/16 (France v Uber)

• Začneme něčím zásadnějším: Judge gives farmer time to find ‘nice woman’ before driving ban.
• Opět zajímavá (nejen) právnická otázka v NYT Room for Debate: Should an Unpopular Sentence in the Stanford Rape Case Cost a Judge His Job?
• French court fines Uber, execs for illegal taxi service. ("A French court fined Uber Technologies [UBER.UL] 800,000 euros ($907,000) on Thursday for running an illegal taxi service with non-professional drivers and slapped smaller fines on two of its executives in the first such criminal case in Europe.")
• The Turkish Constitutional Court rejected petitions by opposition lawmakers seeking to lift immunity for members of Parliament. 
• "The Indian Supreme Court directed the central government to formulate a national policy for proper rehabilitation of rape survivors." (ICON)
• "Ruling that prosecutors in Georgia violated the Constitution by striking every black prospective juror in a death penalty case against a black defendant, the Court by a majority of 7 to 1 reversed the order of the Georgia Supreme Court and held that the prosecutors of the State were motivated in substantial part by race when they struck the jurors from the jury 30 years ago. The Court further concluded, ‘considering all of the circumstantial evidence that bears upon the issue of racial animosity, we are left with the firm conviction that the strikes of the two jurors were motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent’.

NATO vs. Rusko

Viz Marek Ženíšek.

Babišova kavárna a Pavlova cukrárna

Soudní novinky 23-16 (Kdo je nejcitovanější právník? Nápověda: píše o Hvězdných válkách, a není to Hoder)

• Ústavní soud má být předvídatelný, srozumitelný a důvěryhodný - rozhovor s Vojtěchem Šimíčkem.
• European pioneers battle air pollution in the courts ("Her group, known locally as Milieudefensie (Environmental defence), sent the Dutch government a summons earlier this month, saying it should come up with a plan to reduce air pollution. If not, it will take the government to trial next month. (..) The Netherlands, as many other EU member states, is failing to stay under the EU limits. Currently, the EU commission has opened infringement procedures for excessive levels of fine particles against more than half of the member states, and against six countries regarding nitrogen dioxide. (..) The Dutch case is inspired by a similar legal action against the UK government by the NGO ClientEarth. That UK case led to landmark ruling by the ECJ in November 2014, when the Luxembourg-based court said that a national court has the power to order a government to do more to improve air quality. (..) Meanwhile, the mayor of Paris is preparing two cases before the European Court of Justice (ECJ) against a recent decision by EU member states and the European Parliament to allow car manufacturers to exceed emissions limits. (..) In the UK, ClientEarth started a second case against the state, because the plan the government presented after being forced to do it by the UK Supreme Court, was not sufficient in their eyes. A landmark court ruling in the Netherlands in 2015, demanding that the government does more to fight climate change, has also not produced a policy shift that satisfied the organisation that won the case.")
• Nejcitovanější právníci: Sunstein, Chemerinsky, Epstein, Posner, Lemley, Eskridge, Tushnet, Amar, Ackerman, Lessig. Sunstein teď mimochodem píše o Hvězdných válkách.
• Garrett Epps: Why Legislate When Judges Will Do It for You? While the Supreme Court remains hobbled and deadlocked, the lower courts are making power grabs.
• Bulgarian President takes referendum questions to Constitutional Court.
• EU firms free to ban Muslim headscarves, jurist says ("The headscarf ban “may … be justified in order to enforce a legitimate policy of religious and ideological neutrality pursued by the employer”, Juliane Kokott, a German advocate general at the EU Court of Justice in Luxembourg).
• Greek court halts Syrian deportations to 'unsafe' Turkey.
• Polish president lectures EU judges on independence (méně dramatické než titulek napovídá).
• Brussels court confirms UberPop ban.
• Bad omen for Russia's legal attack on EU sanctions ("Rosneft, a huge, state-run Russian oil firm which is part-owned by British company BP, has filed two cases against the EU measures. The first one, at the EU Court of Justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg, seeks to annul an EU Council decision in July 2014 to impose curbs on credit and on technology exports to Russian energy firms and banks. The second one, at the English high court, seeks to stop UK authorities from implementing the EU decision. But the English court subsequently asked the ECJ to clarify legal issues before giving its verdict.")
• A Court You’ve Never Heard of Is About to Raise the Stakes in the South China Sea. An international tribunal’s decision will reorder the tense chess game over the South China Sea — and test Washington’s commitment to the Philippines. ("The international tribunal is due to issue a decision this month over territorial disputes in the strategic waterway that have pitted China against its smaller neighbor, the Philippines. Most experts believe the court will side with Manila on the key issues. But China has already rejected the court’s authority and vowed to stick to its far-reaching claims over the contested shoals, reefs, and rocks that the Philippines also asserts are its own. With a minuscule navy and coast guard, Manila will be looking to the United States for both diplomatic and military support. But, so far, Washington has stopped short of promising to come to the rescue of the Philippines if its ships clash with Chinese vessels in the South China Sea.")