No legal mandate to make final turnout data of all booths public: EC to SC

EPA's New Limits on PFAS in Drinking Water Could Be Upended by the Supreme Court

EPA's New Limits on PFAS , in Drinking Water Could Be , Upended by the Supreme Court. 'Newsweek' reports that the United States Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a case against new water rules put in place by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 'Newsweek' reports that the United States Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a case against new water rules put in place by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In April, new national limits were placed on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the nation's drinking water, otherwise known as PFAS. . Also known as "forever chemicals," PFAS have been linked to a number of health concerns, including cancer. According to the EPA, of the 66,000 public drinking water systems impacted by the new limits, an estimated 6% to 10% will need to make updates to meet the new standards. According to San Francisco, the EPA's new "narrative" regulations fail to meet the Clean Water Act's requirement to lay out clear restrictions. The lawsuit headed to the Supreme Court accuses the EPA of setting vague rules without quantifiable standards. Rather than specify pollutant limits that tell the permitholder how much they need to control their discharges as required by the CWA, these prohibitions effectively tell permitholders nothing more than not to cause 'too much' pollution, Lawyers representing San Francisco, via 'Newsweek'. These generic water quality terms expose San Francisco and numerous permitholders nationwide to enforcement actions while failing to tell them how much they need to limit or treat their discharges to comply with the Act, Lawyers representing San Francisco, via 'Newsweek'. We simply want to know in advance what requirements apply to us, and we want the EPA to fulfil its duty under the Clean Water Act to determine those requirements. , Lawyers representing San Francisco, via 'Newsweek'. 'Newsweek' points out that the Supreme Court has sided against the EPA in the past, most recently in 2022 when it ruled 6-3 against the Biden administration's climate agenda. . 'Newsweek' points out that the Supreme Court has sided against the EPA in the past, most recently in 2022 when it ruled 6-3 against the Biden administration's climate agenda.

Voters Turnout Data Debate: Supreme Court Rejects Plea Over Form 17C Seeking Record of Voters Polled

With five Lok Sabha election phases concluded, attention turns to the sixth phase. However, concerns arise over delayed voter turnout figures, sparking accusations of manipulation favoring the ruling BJP. Opposition parties, led by ADR, petitioned the Supreme Court for immediate data release. Yet, the Court postponed hearings, citing potential electoral disruption. The controversy underscores the need for transparent and accountable electoral processes, a vital aspect of safeguarding democracy's integrity. #Supremecourt #LokSabhaElections #ADR #BJP #Voterturnout #VotingSixthPhase #SixthPhase #SupremeCourtnews #Courtnews #Chandrachud #Indianews #news #Oneindianews #Oneindia ~HT.99~PR.320~ED.155~

Arvind Kejriwal Bail: What's Next for AAP Leader? Exclusive Schedule Revealed! Watch

The Supreme Court granted interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal till June 1, 2024, allowing him to campaign for Lok Sabha elections. Arrested in a liquor policy scam, he'll surrender on June 2. No CM duties allowed; restricted from commenting on the case. Campaigning permitted. AAP aims to challenge BJP in Delhi and enhance performance in Punjab. Kejriwal's release could impact election dynamics significantly. #ArvindKejriwal #ArvindKejriwalLawyer #ArvindKejriwalBail #ExcisePolicyCase #AAP #AamAadmiParty #Shorts #YouTubeShorts #Oneindia #LokSabhanews #Indianews #Oneinda #Oneindianews ~HT.178~GR.125~ED.155~PR.152~

Arvind Kejriwal Arrest: SC says it is ‘inclined to consider interim bail’ for Delhi CM | Oneindia

On May 3, 2024, a Supreme Court Bench signalled its inclination towards granting interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister and AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal, taking into account the imminent Lok Sabha election. The bench deliberated on a plea submitted by the Chief Minister, contesting his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a money laundering case linked to the purported Delhi Excise policy scam. #ArvindKejriwal #ED #ArvindkejriwalArrest #LiquorPolicyScam #DelhiExcisePolicy #SC #InterimBail #DelhiCM #LokSabhaPolls2024 #AAP #SupremeCourt #LegalMatters #Justice #IndianPolitics ~HT.178~PR.152~ED.194~GR.125~

Elon Musk Loses Appeal of 'Twitter Sitter' Provision

Elon Musk , Loses Appeal of , 'Twitter Sitter' Provision . On April 29, the Supreme Court denied billionaire Elon Musk's challenge to the terms of a Securities and Exchange Commission agreement. . On April 29, the Supreme Court denied billionaire Elon Musk's challenge to the terms of a Securities and Exchange Commission agreement. . NBC reports that the SEC requirement would require a lawyer to review the Tesla CEO's social media posts. . In his appeal, Musk argued that the SEC's requirement, which has been dubbed the 'Twitter sitter' provision, unlawfully imposed conditions on his freedom to comment. . In his appeal, Musk argued that the SEC's requirement, which has been dubbed the 'Twitter sitter' provision, unlawfully imposed conditions on his freedom to comment. . The SEC requirement stems from Musk's tweets in 2018 that claimed he was taking Tesla private, which shocked the market and caused shares in the company to surge. The SEC requirement stems from Musk's tweets in 2018 that claimed he was taking Tesla private, which shocked the market and caused shares in the company to surge. The SEC deemed the tweets "materially false and misleading," and in clear violation of securities laws. At the time, Musk agreed to settle the issue with the SEC, which included his signing off on the so-called "Twitter sitter" provision. NBC reports that Musk has since said the restrictions are unconstitutional and that he was coerced into signing the SEC agreement. According to court papers, lawyers representing Musk have accused the SEC of waging an "ongoing campaign" against Musk. Musk's legal team claim the provision , "restricts Mr. Musk’s speech even when truthful and accurate.". It extends to speech not covered by the securities laws and with no relation to the conduct underlying the SEC’s civil action, Elon Musk legal team, via NBC. In response, the SEC said in court papers that Musk waived his right to appeal when he signed off on the settlement.