Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court

• share
• favorite_border

The Supreme Court today struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and rejected a challenge to a lower court ruling that invalidated California’s ban on same-sex marriage, known as Proposition 8. Gregory Magarian, JD, constitutional law expert and professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis, says that the immediate effects of these decisions for same-sex couples will be profound. “The demise of DOMA means that the federal government must treat same-sex couples, legally married under state laws, just like opposite-sex married couples for purposes of federal benefits, tax status, etc,” he says. “The nullification of Proposition 8 appears to make marriage available to same-sex couples in the nation’s largest state, under a prior marriage law that Proposition 8 had purported to invalidate.”

• share
• favorite_border

Statement on DOMA decision.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

Members of the National Communication Association who study rhetorical and cultural theory, social movements, gender and communication, and queer studies can provide insight the Supreme Court's rulings on DOMA and Prop 8.

• share
• favorite_border

The Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder effectively kills the most successful weapon our nation has ever produced against racial discrimination in voting, says constitutional and election law expert Gregory Magarian, JD, professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis. He says the Court’s decision reflects a victory for two big ideas: state power, at the expense of racial justice; and judicial power, at the expense of democracy.

• share
• favorite_border

Expert available to discuss the recent Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

The American Sociological Association (ASA) has sociologists available to discuss the Supreme Court’s rulings in the same-sex marriage cases.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

Live expert panel discussion today, June 19, 2013, from 3-4 p.m. EDT on Supreme Court Ruling on gene patents.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling that human genes cannot be patented is a major victory for patients.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that human genes may not be patented. The University of Michigan has several experts available to comment on the implications of the ruling.

• share
• favorite_border

AMP applauds the U.S. Supreme Court on their ground breaking, unanimous decision.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

In the Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics decision, the Supreme Court unanimously held that naturally occurring DNA sequences are “products of nature” and therefore cannot be patented.

• share
• favorite_border

College of American Pathologists applauds U.S. Supreme Court ruling on gene patents.

• share
• favorite_border

Jeffrey Rosenfeld, Ph.D., at the UMDNJ-New Jersey Medical School published research in March on gene patents and an op-ed in the Washington Post arguing against the the patenting of human genes.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

With the U.S. Supreme Court expected to rule on DOMA and Prop 8 in the coming days, Wake Forest University's decision to offer a tax equality benefit for same-sex domestic partners of Reynolda Campus faculty and staff beginning July 1 is both timely and important.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

The Supreme Court’s unanimous opinion in Bowman v. Monsanto holds that farmers who lawfully obtain Monsanto’s patented, genetically modified soybeans do not have a right to plant those soybeans and grow a new crop of soybeans without Monsanto’s permission. “The Court closed a potential loophole in Monsanto’s long-standing business model, prevents Monsanto’s customers from setting up ‘farm-factories’ for producing soybeans that could be sold in competition with Monsanto’s soybeans, and it enables Monsanto to continue to earn a reasonable profit on its patented technology,” says Kevin Collins, JD, patent law expert and professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

On April 15, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, a case that could answer the question, “Under what conditions, if any, are isolated human genes patentable?” Kevin Emerson Collins, JD, patent law expert and professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis, believes that layered uncertainties make this case an unusually difficult case in which to predict the outcome.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border

Indiana U. experts in family law and Americans' changing public opinion on families are available to discuss the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court cases involving same-sex marriage.

• share
• favorite_border

• share
• favorite_border