Lisa Montgomery executed in the United States


Protest against the execution in Terre Haute
Image: Reuters

Lisa Montgomery was executed in Indiana after the Supreme Court dismissed the last appeal. She is the first woman to be executed in the United States after a federal conviction since 1953.

LIsa Montgomery was executed at 1:31 am local time in Terre Haute Federal Prison, Indiana. The American news channel CNN reports. The execution was initially suspended. A federal court in Indiana based the decision on Monday with mental disorders of the fifty-two-year-old. Montgomery is not in a position to understand the planned execution as a result of her act. However, an appeals court overturned the decision a day later. The Supreme Court in Washington finally approved the authorities on Wednesday.

Montgomery strangled a pregnant dog breeder in Missouri in December 2004 and cut an eight-month-old fetus from her stomach. One day after the crime, she was arrested at her home in Skidmore, about 250 kilometers from the scene. She had the kidnapped baby who survived the gruesome act with her. Before she confessed, she told the police and her husband that she gave birth to the girl herself. She was sentenced to death in 2007.

Montgomery is the first woman to be executed in the United States following a federal conviction in nearly 70 years. After 17 years, President Donald Trump resumed federal executions last summer. The Republican government has since executed ten people sentenced to death. He ignored a pardon from Montgomery’s lawyers.

In addition to Montgomery, Terre Haute Federal Prison is also slated for executions of the murderers Cory Johnson and Dustin John Higgs this week. The lawyers for the two death row inmates have also requested a suspension.

.

The Supreme Court says that a negotiated clause cannot be non-transparent

He Supreme court has agreed that if a customer negotiated a clause of a mortgage contract it is not possible to appeal to the lack of transparency, and therefore the consumer is delegitimized to report it. The sentence known this Tuesday and dated in December is added to two issued in November, in which the Supreme endorsed the agreements between several clients and their entity to reduce the floor clause that contained their mortgage, although declared void the waiver to take legal action that the documents contained when it was understood that it covered issues unrelated to those agreed.

In the ruling known this Tuesday, it accepts the appeals presented by the Caja Rural de Aragón Cooperative Credit Society (Bantierra) against the ruling of the Provincial Court of Zaragoza, and concludes the lack of legitimacy of the clients.

This is the case of a couple who subrogated a loan of 183,000 euros that the promoter of a house had with Bantierra, a loan that they decided to renew by extending it to 195,000 euros.

A fixed interest of 2.75% was agreed until March 3, 2011, and from then on a variable interest (Euribor at one year plus a differential of 1.40%, as well as a floor of 2.75% and a ceiling of 12%; later, in 2013, the floor was set at 1.75 after both parties reached an agreement.

With the signing of the new conditions customers “expressly waived all claim action on the floor clause “, acknowledging that they had been informed, before the document was signed, of the existence of the floor clause, its consequences and the fluctuations in the Euribor.

The Supreme Court contradicts the Zaragoza audience

Both the first instance and the Provincial Court of Zaragoza agreed with the clients, but now the Supreme Court has addressed Bantierra’s arguments and concludes that both parties signed a private contract by which the bank agreed to reduce the land and clients , that at that moment could exercise the nullity action of the original clause ground, they gave up said exercise.

It may interest you

From the platform of Reclamador lawyers they regret this “new trip to the mortgaged people who signed those agreements with their bank to remove the floor clause of their loan, then refusing to initiate subsequent legal actions to claim.”

It should not be forgotten that those bank-client agreements only meant eliminating the floor clause or lowering it, not recovering the money that until then they had overpaid, say the lawyers.

.

Donald Trump still does not accept his defeat and lashes out against the FBI and the Supreme Court

Donald Trump still does not accept his defeat. In a series of tweets published this Saturday, the US president violently attacked several institutions, including the FBI and the Supreme Court.

“They should be ashamed of themselves,” the Republican tweeted of the FBI. History will remember it. You must never give up. “

The Supreme Court, for its part, was qualified as “incompetent and weak” for not taking its side.

.

The Supreme Court limits temporary hiring in subcontractors

Coup by the Supreme Court to subcontractors, precisely at a time when the Government will begin to negotiate with social agents in the new year the labor counter-reform, in which one of the measures that is intended to be approved is to limit subcontracting. And this is what the High Court does, which modifies its doctrine and rejects the temporary limitation of employment contracts in response to the commercial contracts of the companies in a ruling dated December 15 and signed unanimously by all the magistrates and that has been applauded by the unions.

Since the end of the nineties, jurisprudence had been admitting that the contract for a specific work or service can adjust its duration to that of the contract. However, the Supreme Court now points out that those who offer services to third parties carry out their essential activity through contracting with them and, therefore, “it is illogical to maintain that the bulk of that activity has the exceptional character to which the contract for work or service must attend ».

The judgment declares that it is “difficult” to continue to maintain that the company can support the essence of its activity in a workforce subject to the regime of indeterminacy of labor relations. In addition, the magistrates warn that the automation of this temporary hiring, by the mere mechanism of the type of activity, can lead to situations of jeopardizing the guarantees sought by European Union law.

Likewise, the ruling recalls that the legislator has designed other instruments to meet the variability of the company’s needs and make decisions about the size of the workforce.

High temporality

Along with high unemployment, temporary employment is one of the major structural problems that has dragged on the labor market for decades. Thus, Spain is at the forefront of Europe in the percentage of workers with an expiration date: more than 26% have a temporary job, a percentage that is almost double the European average.

For this reason, the unions celebrated this change in the Supreme Court’s criteria. For CC OO it is “great news that should contribute to curbing temporary and irregular hiring” in Spain. “Those who work through these contracts or subcontractors perform a stable job and are entitled to a stable contract,” claimed Mari Cruz Vicente, secretary of Union Action for this organization. Vicente specified that the high court ruling “reaffirms us in our proposals at the social dialogue table for labor reform, in the sense that a contract cannot justify hiring workers on a temporary basis.”

.

The Supreme Court limits temporary hiring in subcontractors

Coup by the Supreme Court to subcontractors, precisely at a time when the Government will begin to negotiate with social agents in the new year the labor counter-reform, in which one of the measures that is intended to be approved is to limit subcontracting. And this is what the High Court does, which modifies its doctrine and rejects the temporary limitation of employment contracts in response to the commercial contracts of the companies in a ruling dated December 15 and signed unanimously by all the magistrates and that has been applauded by the unions.

Since the end of the nineties, jurisprudence had been admitting that the contract for a specific work or service may adjust its duration to that of the contract. However, the Supreme Court now points out that those who offer services to third parties carry out their essential activity through contracting with them and, therefore, “it is illogical to maintain that the bulk of that activity has the exceptional character to which the contract for work or service must attend ».

The judgment declares that it is “difficult” to continue to maintain that the company can support the essence of its activity in a workforce subject to the regime of indeterminacy of labor relations. In addition, the magistrates warn that the automation of this temporary hiring, by the mere mechanism of the type of activity, can lead to situations of jeopardizing the guarantees sought by European Union law.

Likewise, the ruling recalls that the legislator has designed other instruments to meet the variability of the company’s needs and make decisions on the size of the workforce.

High temporality

Along with high unemployment, temporary employment is one of the great structural problems that has been dragging on the labor market for decades. Thus, Spain is at the forefront of Europe in the percentage of workers with an expiration date: more than 26% have a temporary job, a percentage that is almost double the European average.

For this reason, the unions celebrated this change in the Supreme Court’s criteria. For CC OO it is “great news that should help put a stop to temporary and irregular hiring” in Spain. “Those who work through these contracts or subcontractors perform a stable job and are entitled to a stable contract,” claimed Mari Cruz Vicente, secretary of Union Action for this organization. Vicente specified that the high court ruling “reaffirms us in our proposals at the social dialogue table for labor reform, in the sense that a contract cannot justify hiring workers on a temporary basis.”

.

The Supreme Court concludes that the leave to care for children must be equated to active service

Facade of the Supreme Court building.

Facade of the Supreme Court building.
EP

The Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme court has issued a judgment in which it establishes that, in tenders for the provision of jobs, the situation of voluntary leave to care for relatives must be equated to active duty, in order to prevent the professional career of the people who use such a permit from being negatively affected by the exercise of said right.

The court establishes as a doctrine that the provisions of art. 57 of Organic Law 3/2007, of March 22, for the effective equality of women and men, have direct effect without mediation of the corresponding bases of the call, imposing an assessment of the administrative situation of voluntary leave for the care of identical relatives to which is granted to active duty status.

In its judgment, the Chamber recognizes the right of a woman, an official in the Local Administration, to be counted as active service for the months that she was on leave of absence for childcare in the list of merits of the officials of the local administration with 2015 national clearance.

Thus the high court dismisses the appeal filed by the State Attorney against the judgment of the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community, which annulled the administrative resolution by which the aforementioned list of general merits was published but only in the part referring to the merits of this worker.

The appealed judgment understood that the time of permanence of the appellant in the aforementioned situation of leave of absence should be understood as assimilated to the active situation, and deploy the appropriate effects in the evaluation of the general merits, in accordance with article 57 of the Organic Law 3 / 2007 for the effective equality of women and men, the Consolidated Text of the Basic Statute of the Public Employee, Royal Legislative Decree 5/2015 and Law 10/2010 of Ordination of the Valencian public function.

Decision against the State Bar

A conclusion shared by the Supreme Court, which in its judgment, a presentation by magistrate Celsa Pico, indicates that all the precepts considered by the Superior Court of Justice of Valencia consider that it should assess the time spent in the situation of voluntary leave by caring for family members according to a varied denomination of the professional career (professional promotion, career, provision of jobs), which equates the situation of voluntary leave for caring for family members with that of active service.

The Chamber affirms that all these norms have another point in common, they are subsequent to the Order of August 10, 1994 that establishes the norms on competitions for the provision of positions reserved for Local Administration officials with national qualifications.

This means, according to the ruling, that given its drafting date, when setting the rules on contests for the provision of positions reserved for the aforementioned officials, that 1994 rule did not take into account the objective of eliminating inequalities between women and men. established as a policy of the European Union in its Directives 76/207 / CEE and 2002/73 / CE, antecedents of the Organic Law 3/2007, whose articles must be integrated with the aforementioned article 57.

In addition, it explains that they are of superior rank, nature of law, including one of an organic nature, by developing fundamental rights, article 81 of the Spanish Constitution, as is the Organic Law for the effective Equality of Women and Men 3/2007, of March 22.

Therefore, it affirms that the Court of Instance is right when it argues that the Order of August 10, 1994, must be interpreted in the current legislative context that responds to the social reality of the time in which it is to be applied (art. 3.1 C. Civil).

.

The Supreme Court equates the periods of leave for children to active service

Voluntary leave for the care of children or dependents will be counted as working time for future job promotions of officials. This is what the Supreme Court establishes in a ruling made public this Monday, which establishes that, in competitions for the provision of jobs, the situation of voluntary leave of absence for the care of family members must be equated to that of active service, “in order to prevent the professional career of people who use a permit of this type from being negatively affected by the exercise of said right “, according to the ruling.

The court establishes as a doctrine that the provisions of article 57 of the organic law for the effective equality of women and men have direct effect without mediation of the corresponding bases of the call, imposing an assessment of the administrative situation of voluntary leave for the care of family members identical to that granted to active duty status.

Thus, in this judgment, the Chamber recognizes the right of a woman to be counted as active service for the months that she was on leave of absence for childcare in the list of merits of the local administration officials with national authorization from 2015.

The Chamber dismisses the appeal for cassation filed by the State Attorney against the ruling of the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community, which annulled the administrative resolution by which the aforementioned list of general merits was published but only in the part referring to the merits of this worker.

The judgment appealed against understood that the time of permanence of the appellant in the aforementioned situation of leave of absence should be understood as assimilated to the situation of assets, and display the appropriate effects in the assessment of the general merits, in accordance with the aforementioned equality law, to the Basic Statute of the Public Employee and the norm of the Valencian public function.

This conclusion is shared by the Supreme Court, which in its judgment indicates that all the precepts considered by the Superior Court of Justice of Valencia consider that the time spent in the situation of voluntary leave of absence for care of relatives should be valued according to a varied denomination of the professional career (professional promotion, career, provision of jobs), which equates the situation of voluntary leave to care for family members with that of active service.

The Chamber affirms that all these norms have another point in common: they are subsequent to the order of August 10, 1994 that establishes the norms on competitions for the provision of positions reserved for Local Administration officials with national qualifications. This means, according to the ruling, that given its drafting date, when setting the rules on contests for the provision of positions reserved for the aforementioned officials, that 1994 rule did not take into account the objective of eliminating inequalities between women and men. set as the policy of the European Union.

In addition, it explains that they are of superior rank, the nature of law, including an organic one, when developing fundamental rights, article 81 of the Spanish Constitution, such as the Organic Law for the effective Equality of Women and Men.

For this reason, it affirms that the Court of Instance is right when it argues that the Order of August 10, 1994 must be interpreted in the current legislative context that responds to the social reality of the time in which it is to be applied.

.

What you need to know about electoral voting in the United States :: Politics :: RBC

The electoral vote is the second stage of the electoral process in the United States, which will formally fix the voting results of ordinary voters on November 3. In states where the majority of voters supported Donald Trump, Republican electors will vote, and where Joseph Biden won, Democrats. On November 3, Biden won the majority of votes in 25 states and the District of Columbia, which should bring him the support of 306 electors – 36 votes more than 270 necessary to win. The incumbent president won in 25 states, he has 232 electors in his piggy bank.

What could hinder Biden’s presidency

Read on RBC Pro

In theory, electors in several states can disregard voters’ opinions and vote for any candidate. Since the beginning of the 20th century, there have been eight campaigns in which electors have refused to vote for a candidate with the support of the majority of their state’s population. For example, in 2016, five Democrats and two Republicans did this. However, over the past hundred years, there have been no cases when the arbitrariness of the electors cost the victory of one of the rivals. Given Biden’s current lead over Trump, there is little doubt that a Democrat will win, even if a few electors refuse to heed the populace.

But there is another factor that could prevent Biden from becoming the 46th President of the United States. This is a Supreme Court decision to overturn election results in certain states. Donald Trump refuses to admit defeat and expects to achieve victory in court. The current president believes that the counting of votes in several states was carried out with violations. He is unhappy, in particular, that some states have allowed the counting of votes cast by mail after voting day, even if ballots were received before November 3.

Last week, 106 GOP House of Representatives backed Texas Attorney General Can Paxton’s lawsuit to renegotiate presidential elections in four states won by Joe Biden – Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, which earned Biden’s 62 electoral votes. … Their loss could cost a Democrat the presidency. Paxton applied to the Supreme Court with a request to invalidate the election results in these states, as they did not comply with the rules for processing ballots, including those sent by mail.

Trump accused the US Supreme Court of lack of wisdom and courage

Prior to this, the courts rejected complaints from the Trump team. For example, the courts of Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin and Arizona refused to consider the claims of the Republicans: the judges referred to the fact that Trump either did not follow due process in the petition, or did not provide evidence to support his statements. On Saturday morning, the Supreme Court also dismissed Paxton’s claim, pointing out that Texas was unable to prove it had a legal right to make such claims. According to the court, the state did not demonstrate “a legally justified interest in how elections are held in other states.”

As a result, the Republicans have one last chance to prevent Biden’s victory. On January 6, at a meeting of both chambers of Congress, legislators are to officially confirm the results of the electoral vote. Members of Congress may refuse to do so and challenge the outcome of a state election. However, such a refusal must be expressed by a majority in both houses of Congress – the Senate and the House of Representatives. Given that Democrats control the majority in the House of Representatives, such an outcome seems unlikely.

Why the debate about the effectiveness of such an electoral system has escalated

In recent years, there has been a heated debate among analysts and political scientists about the expediency of the entire institution of electors (in general, over the past 200 years, more than 700 options have been proposed in the United States to reform or abolish the electoral system, but none have been adopted).

Skeptics point out that in the past 20 years, there have been two cases in which the candidate who received the most votes across the country did not receive the majority of the electoral votes – Al Gore, who lost to Republican George W. Bush in 2002, and Hillary Clinton, who lost to Trump in 2016 year. In addition, the electoral system leads to the fact that election participants during the campaign concentrate their forces on those states in which the result is not a foregone conclusion, in fact, ignoring the territories where the voters’ preferences are obvious.

Trump may “trade” Biden’s inauguration for a rally

Donald Trump

In turn, supporters of the current system point out that it emphasizes the importance of each state and demonstrates the connection of the population with regional structures. In addition, there is a strengthening of the bipartisan system, as the votes of the “third” candidates, which they have collected in individual states, are not converted into electoral votes. The presence of a two-party system allows a candidate from one of the leading parties to get a clear advantage in the first round and close the question of who should lead the country.

According to a September Gallup poll, 61% of Americans are in favor of abolishing the electoral system. Instead, they would like to introduce a direct system whereby the winner is the candidate with the most votes nationwide. This decision is supported by 89% of Democrats and 69% of non-partisans, but only 23% of Republicans.

Since the current electoral model is enshrined in the Constitution, its abolition will require the consent of two-thirds of the members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as two-thirds of the states. At the same time, a consensus has not yet formed in Congress for such changes, especially since the current system plays into the hands of the Republicans.

.

The United States added Russia to the “watchlist” for violations of religious freedom :: Politics :: RBC

This list also includes Cuba, Nicaragua and the Comoros. Their authorities “have participated in or tolerated serious violations of religious freedom,” said US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo

(Photo: Saul Loeb / Pool via AP)

The US authorities have compiled a list of countries that violate religious freedoms, Russia was included in a special “watch list” on this issue, said US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo. His statement was published on the State Department website.

The list of violators includes ten countries: China, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Myanmar, Eritrea, Nigeria, Pakistan, as well as the former Soviet republics of Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. These countries “are of particular concern <...> as they commit systematic and flagrant violations of religious freedoms,” Pompeo said.

In addition to Russia, the “watch list” includes Cuba, Nicaragua and the Comoros. Their governments “have participated in or tolerated serious violations of religious freedom,” the US secretary of state said. At the same time, Uzbekistan and Sudan were excluded from the list “on the basis of significant progress”.

Pompeo did not name the specific reasons for including a particular country in the list.

US Senate urged to punish Russia over religious freedoms in Donbass

Roger Wicker

.

The Verkhovna Rada announced a “huge hole” in the budget of Ukraine :: Economy :: RBC

Фото: Yevhen Kotenko / Keystone Press Agency / Global Look Press

The state budget of Ukraine lacks about 40 billion hryvnia ($ 1.4 billion). This was stated by Yaroslav Zheleznyak, First Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Finance, Tax and Customs Policy of the Verkhovna Rada, the press service of the Golos party reports.

“In March, the government decided to live on a grand scale, leaving the country without money. There is a huge hole in the state budget of 2020 – at least 40 million hryvnias are missing, ”the message says.

According to the deputy, the authorities wanted to close the hole in the budget at the expense of the International Monetary Fund, the European Union and the World Bank. Zheleznyak claims that no one will give money to Ukraine, and the state has not earned more money.

Zelensky called Ukraine a serious and poor country

Kiev, Ukraine

The parliamentarian also said that the “first signals” regarding problems with the budget were last week, when the country’s Treasury “froze spending.”

.