UCLA Professor to Speak on Second Amendment and Gun Violence

first_imgFaith & Religion Events UCLA Professor to Speak on Second Amendment and Gun Violence From STAFF REPORTS Published on Monday, April 29, 2013 | 6:39 pm Name (required)  Mail (required) (not be published)  Website  faithfernandez More » ShareTweetShare on Google+Pin on PinterestSend with WhatsApp,Virtual Schools PasadenaHomes Solve Community/Gov/Pub SafetyCitizen Service CenterPASADENA EVENTS & ACTIVITIES CALENDARClick here for Movie Showtimes 18 recommended0 commentsShareShareTweetSharePin it HerbeautyIt Works Great If Weight Loss Is What You’re Looking For!HerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyThese Are 15 Great Style Tips From Asian WomenHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyInstall These Measures To Keep Your Household Safe From Covid19HerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyNow She’s 19 – Look At Her Transformation! Incredible!HerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyThe Most Heartwarming Moments Between Father And DaughterHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty10 Questions To Start Conversation Way Better Than ‘How U Doing?’HerbeautyHerbeauty Adam Winkler Photo by Law.UCLA.EduIn light of recent tragedies related to gun violence, UCLA constitutional law professor Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America (published 2011), will speak on the Second Amendment and what it means to gun reform in the Rector’s Forum at All Saints Church, on Sunday, May 12, at 10:15 a.m.Winkler’s wide-ranging scholarship has touched upon a diverse array of topics such as the right to bear arms and corporate political speech rights. His work has been cited in landmark Supreme Court cases, including opinions handed down regarding the Second Amendment. For information call (626) 796-1172. All Saints Church is at 132 N. Euclid Avenue, Pasadena (across Euclid from Pasadena City Hall).For more information, visit allsaints-pas.org. More Cool Stuff EVENTS & ENTERTAINMENT | FOOD & DRINK | THE ARTS | REAL ESTATE | HOME & GARDEN | WELLNESS | SOCIAL SCENE | GETAWAYS | PARENTS & KIDS Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m. Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * Subscribecenter_img Make a comment Home of the Week: Unique Pasadena Home Located on Madeline Drive, Pasadena Pasadena’s ‘626 Day’ Aims to Celebrate City, Boost Local Economy Pasadena Will Allow Vaccinated People to Go Without Masks in Most Settings Starting on Tuesday Business News Community News Community News First Heatwave Expected Next Week Top of the News last_img read more

Rose Bowl Live Hosts 1999 Women’s World Cup Champs Brandi Chastain and Julie Foudy Today

first_imgHome of the Week: Unique Pasadena Home Located on Madeline Drive, Pasadena Business News More Cool Stuff HerbeautyNow She’s 19 – Look At Her Transformation! Incredible!HerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyCreative Ways To Burn Calories That Require Little EffortHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyThese Lipsticks Are Designed To Make Your Teeth Appear Whiter!HerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyThe Most Heartwarming Moments Between Father And DaughterHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty12 Most Breathtaking Trends In Fashion HistoryHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty10 Ways To Power Yourself As A WomanHerbeautyHerbeauty Subscribe Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m. Community News Community News faithfernandez More » ShareTweetShare on Google+Pin on PinterestSend with WhatsApp,Donald CommunityPCC- COMMUNITYVirtual Schools PasadenaHomes Solve Community/Gov/Pub SafetyPasadena Public WorksPASADENA EVENTS & ACTIVITIES CALENDARClick here for Movie Showtimes STAFF REPORT First Heatwave Expected Next Week 20 recommended0 commentsShareShareTweetSharePin it center_img EVENTS & ENTERTAINMENT | FOOD & DRINK | THE ARTS | REAL ESTATE | HOME & GARDEN | WELLNESS | SOCIAL SCENE | GETAWAYS | PARENTS & KIDS CITY NEWS SERVICE/STAFF REPORT Pasadena Will Allow Vaccinated People to Go Without Masks in Most Settings Starting on Tuesday Name (required)  Mail (required) (not be published)  Website  Top of the News Make a comment STAFF REPORT Pasadena’s ‘626 Day’ Aims to Celebrate City, Boost Local Economy Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * Community News Rose Bowl Live Hosts 1999 Women’s World Cup Champs Brandi Chastain and Julie Foudy Today STAFF REPORTS Published on Friday, May 15, 2020 | 12:24 pm The Rose Bowl Stadium looks to host soccer legends from one of the most iconic matches in Rose Bowl history on Rose Bowl LIVE! this Saturday, May 16th at 4:00 PM. 1999 Women’s World Cup Champions, Brandi Chastain and Julie Foudy will take the stage to address their experiences, key learnings and talk about how they helped put women’s sports on the map.Earlier this week, Netflix announced their plans to create a film to honor the 1999 United States Women’s World Cup Team. Who can forget the iconic moment when Brandi Chastain scored the winning penalty shootout goal and took her jersey off in celebration? The story will follow the journey of the US Women’s Soccer team, who on an unbearably hot summer day, inside America’s Stadium with a sold-out crowd, won the World Cup in a nail-biting final against China. In doing so, the team captured the hearts of millions around the world and changed the way women’s sports were looked at forever.This will be a once-in-a-lifetime experience so mark your calendars – you won’t want to miss this opportunity so plan to register today!The upcoming Rose Bowl LIVE! schedule is as follows:• Saturday, May 16 at 4:00 PM: Brandi Chastain and Julie Foudy1999 Women’s World Cup champions Brandi Chastain and Julie Foudy enter the Rose Bowl Stadium virtual event room!• Saturday, May 23 at 4:00 PM: Cade McNownUCLA All-American and former Miami Dolphins, SF 49ers and Chicago Bears Quarterback, Cade McNown, steps inside the Rose Bowl virtual event room.To register for these free events and to receive updates as new events are added, please visit: https://www.rosebowllive.tvlast_img read more

Public appeal for missing Limerick woman

first_imgWATCH: “Everyone is fighting so hard to get on” – Pat Ryan on competitive camogie squads Limerick woman Lisa GalvinLimerick woman Lisa GalvinGARDAI in Limerick have issued an appeal and are seeking the assistance of the public in tracing the whereabouts of a Limerick woman missing since Tuesday morning.51-year-old Lisa Galvin was last seen on Tuesday morning at approximately 10.30am in the Glasgow Park area of Limerick.Lisa is described as being approximately 5’ 2’’ tall with short brown hair and green eyes.Sign up for the weekly Limerick Post newsletter Sign Up When last seen, Lisa was wearing a pink jacket, blue jeans and blue runners.Anyone who has seen Lisa or who can assist in locating her is asked to contact Roxboro Road Garda Station on 061-214340, The Garda Confidential Telephone Line 1800 666 111 or any Garda Station.UPDATE – Lisa has been found safe and well.Gardai say that no further assistance is required and have thanked the public for their help. Twitter Email Billy Lee names strong Limerick side to take on Wicklow in crucial Division 3 clash Limerick Artist ‘Willzee’ releases new Music Video – “A Dream of Peace” Linkedin Facebook WhatsApp Printcenter_img Predictions on the future of learning discussed at Limerick Lifelong Learning Festival Limerick’s National Camogie League double header to be streamed live Advertisement Previous articleSteamboat Music: Record Store Day – Saturday April 22Next articleO’Connell St works will not impact on businesses Staff Reporterhttp://www.limerickpost.ie NewsPublic appeal for missing Limerick womanBy Staff Reporter – April 19, 2017 583 RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR TAGSfeaturedGardaílimerickLisa Galvinmissing Limerick Ladies National Football League opener to be streamed live last_img read more

Telangana HC’s Powerful Decision On Right To Health In Times Like COVID-19

first_imgColumnsTelangana HC’s Powerful Decision On Right To Health In Times Like COVID-19 Swapnil Tripathi25 May 2020 4:39 AMShare This – xThe Court’s reiteration of its role of enforcing the protections under Article 21 even in times of an emergency is particularly important.The world is currently dealing with the unfortunate COVID crisis. Almost every government across the world has brought in radical measures to curb the transmission of cases and save its citizens from dying. The central and state governments in India have also done the same. The laws and regulations framed by the governments, to either keep COVID infections in check or to provide…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe world is currently dealing with the unfortunate COVID crisis. Almost every government across the world has brought in radical measures to curb the transmission of cases and save its citizens from dying. The central and state governments in India have also done the same. The laws and regulations framed by the governments, to either keep COVID infections in check or to provide services to the people, have been criticised for alleged violation of fundamental rights. More than the government, it is the judiciary that has been accused of abdicating its responsibility of protecting fundamental rights, so much so, that some have compared these times to the days of ADM Jabalpur. While I do not wish to comment on these allegations, there is a significant verdict of the High Court of Telangana (GantaJai Kumar v. State of Telangana and Ors., W.P. (PIL) 75 of 2020), which deserves praise. The Court here has strongly reiterated the principles of the Right to Life and the importance of this Right even during a crisis like the present one. In this post, I shall discuss the judgment and the key takeaways from it. Before I discuss the judgment, a brief overview of the legal provisions involved in it i.e. Article 21 of the Constitution and Section 2 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, would be helpful. Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees to every person in India (not just citizens) the Right to Life and Liberty. The Article states that the said right can be restricted only by a procedure established by law. The ‘law’ in question has to be just, fair and reasonable. It should be noted that judicial pronouncements have read the Article expansively to include the Right to Food, Right to Health, Right to Sleep, Right to Clean Environment etc. The Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 (“Act”) is a short legislation that aims at preventing the spread of dangerous epidemic diseases. Section 2 of the Act allows the state government to prescribe temporary regulations during the time of an outbreak of a dangerous epidemic disease, if it believes that the ordinary provisions of law are insufficient for preventing the outbreak or spread of the disease. Facts and Issues- In the said case, the Petitioner filed a Public Interest Litigation (“PIL”) before the High Court challenging the order of the state government, according to which private hospitals and diagnostic centres (equipped with the necessary equipment and personnel, and willing) were not permitted to conduct diagnostic tests for the COVID-19 virus and admit patients for isolation and treatment (“Order”). The Petitioner had argued that Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees to every person the Right to Life which includes the Right to Choose her/his doctor and hospital. Therefore, the state cannot restrict this right in the guise of taking steps to prevent the spread of the pandemic. The Petitioner further contended that there is nothing in Section 2 of the Act which allows the government to issue a blanket prohibition on private institutions and hospitals from testing and treating the patients for Covid-19. The Petitioner had emphasised that there was a need to allow private hospitals to conduct the tests and treat the patients as the government facilities were inadequate, lacked hygiene and that methods of treatment adopted were very ordinary. The government had justified its Order stating that the prohibition did not violate the rights enshrined under Article 21, as it was a just, fair and reasonable procedure. The Court agreed with the Petitioner and held that the Act did not empower the government to pass the Order. Therefore, the prohibition on private hospitals and institutions was sans any valid law and it also violated the Right to Life and Choose/Choice of the people. The Court ultimately allowed private hospitals having the capacity for treatment /isolation as per the standard operating procedure/ guidelines to treat/isolate such patients. Key takeaways from the Judgment: The judgment has certain key takeaways that shall be very significant in similar matters in future. a.Maintainability of the Petition- A PIL is admissible only if (a) the petitioner has bona fide credentials, (b) the Court is prima facie satisfied over the correctness of its contents; (c) it has an element of substantial public interest involved; and (d) there is no personal gain or private motive behind it. I have argued previously, that Courts often ignore these guidelines and entertain PILs that do not confirm with them. The High Court in the present case, is an exception to this trend. In the present case, the government opposed the Petition stating that it did not disclose any public interest and was engineered by vested interests on behalf of the private hospitals. The Court outrightly rejected this contention. It held that the question of a citizen having the right to choose her/his doctor or hospitals, certainly involves public interest. Further, (akin to the Tripura High Court in another matter), the Court also remarked that the government cannot make bald allegations regarding the bona fides of the Petitioner without any basis. Such an approach is welcome for two reasons. First, the Court applied the test for admitting the PIL (which it should ideally do) and second, it did not allow the flimsy argument of lack of bona fides, without the Respondents (i.e. the government) tendering any proof. b.Right to Life includes Right to Choose medical care- The Court interpreted the Right to Health under Article 21 expansively to include within its ambit the Right to Choose one’s Medical Care. It held that the Right includes the freedom to get tested in a laboratory of one’s choice and the government cannot take that right away. It should be noted that nature of the disease in question (which is fatal), also played a role in the Court’s interpretation. The Court opined, ‘The State cannot incapacitate him by restricting his choice particularly when it comes to a disease which affects his life/health or that of his kith and kin.’ By adopting such an interpretation, the Court has not only reiterated that the State has a duty to secure the health of its citizens, but has also held that the citizens also have an individual right to a choice of medical treatment (i.e. the doctor and the hospital) and the state cannot restrict it without a valid law. c.The Limited Scope of the Epidemic Act- For restriction of a Right under Article 21, there must be a procedure prescribed by a law, which is just, fair and reasonable. The government contended that the Order in question, is a valid law for the purposes of Article 21, as it has been passed under Section 2 of the Act. The Court here analysed Section 2 of the Act, and held that there is nothing in the Section which can possibly empower the government to pass an Order preventing private hospitals from testing or treating COVID patients or suspects. It can be gleaned from the Court’s observations that the Section only allows the government to pass such temporary regulations which are reasonable in nature. The Court placed reliance on the guidelines issued by the Union Government for testing of COVID patients by private hospitals and laboratories, to reach this conclusion. It observed, “61. The Ministry Of Health and Family Welfare, Union of India and the ICMR cannot be said to have ignored these provisions of the Epidemic Diseases Act,1897 and this Court has good reason to believe that the Union of India and the ICMR did give due consideration to this provision of law while permitting testing and treatment of COVID-19 patients by private laboratories and hospitals.” Therefore, the Court concluded that the Order in question was not ‘law’ for the purposes of Article 21. It observed, “48. Thus, in the instant case the freedom of the citizen of the State to get tested in a laboratory of his choice or get treated in a private hospital of his choice is curtailed by the State without support of any “law”, much less a reasonable, fair and just law. It’s action is thus patently arbitrary and unreasonable and violates Art.21 of the Constitution of India and is unsustainable.” d.Observations on Inviolability of Article 21 during times of Emergency- During the course of the hearing, the learned Advocate General appearing for the Respondents contended that COVID-19 pandemic constitutes a state of emergency in the State and therefore, the drastic State action is justified. The Court rejected this contention remarking that there is no declared Emergency in India. It further observed, that even if there was, it would not be an excuse for the government to infringe the rights of an individual under Article 21. The Court traced the entire saga of the unfortunate judgment in ADM Jabalpur and KS Puttaswamy (where ADM was overruled) and observed that the Court has the power to see that even in times of emergency, the state acts in a fair, just and reasonable manner. The Court opined, “57… An emergency of any sort is not an excuse to trample on the rights under Art.21 and the Courts have the power to see that the State will act in a fair, just and reasonable manner even during emergencies. Whether the State has done so or not is judicially reviewable in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court.” Concluding Remarks- The High Court’s verdict is important for various reasons. However, the Court’s reiteration of its role of enforcing the protections under Article 21 even in times of an emergency is particularly important. Further, the decision is reasoned in its conclusions and allows private testing taking into account the policies of the government, making implementation not an issue. I would call this decision ‘bold’ also because the Court has not shied away from commenting upon the poor state of medical infrastructure in the country. The Court has observed, “72. The Covid-19 pandemic has exposed the poor medical infrastructure in the States where there are too few Hospitals/Primary Health centres, too few Doctors and nurses in Government sector, lack of medicines, and general poor-quality medical infrastructure with honourable exceptions. In fact, the long lockdown was imposed to ramp up the medical infrastructure – buy more medicines, create more isolation facilities, get more ventilators, import a lot of testing kits etc.” [Views are personal] ± The author is a lawyer practicing in New Delhi. The post was first published on his personal blog “The ‘Basic’ Structure”. Next Storylast_img read more

Oxford to use socioeconomic data for DPhil applicants in graduate access push

first_imgOxford will consider socioeconomic data in PhD applicants, as the University looks to improve access to postgraduate courses. Tutors across departments use contextual data in undergraduate admissions, but this is the first time a similar approach will be taken for DPhil candidates. Professor Preston said: “Some applicants leave out information that we would like to know about, while others have greater support when filling out these applications.” A University spokesperson said: “This pilot scheme for doctoral training programmes forms part of the long-term, University-wide efforts to increase the number of promising postgraduate students from under-represented groups at Oxford. We are making steady progress towards improving postgraduate access through a number of recently-introduced initiatives and will be announcing further new schemes very shortly.” Oxford announced the launch of ten scholarships to Black UK research students last week. It acknowledged that Black students are under-represented at Oxford, accounting for only 1.5% of postgraduate students. Gail Preston, Director of the Interdisciplinary Bioscience doctoral programme training, added that socio-economic data may level the playing field for applicants unable to take up research placements: “Many applicants will spend their summers going to different research groups and getting researching experience, but others find it hard to do this.” Applicants will also submit standardised forms rather than their CVs. This aims to give tutors “fairer and more consistent” information.   “We had a few people come up to us at open days, saying they didn’t think Oxford was for them, but this kind of thing showed we are taking these issues seriously,” he said. Conway hopes anonymisation will ensure students from ethnic minority backgrounds do not face discrimination. Admissions staff will consider information such as whether UK applicants received free school meals at secondary school when shortlisting for interview. The new scheme will cover five doctoral training programmes across the sciences and medicine, starting with applications for 2021 entry.  center_img This is the latest in a series of steps to improve postgraduate access at Oxford, mirroring efforts to support undergraduate applicants from under-represented backgrounds.  The Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Education, Professor Martin Williams, said: “I am thrilled to announce Black Academic Futures programme – the next step towards our vision of ensuring over time that finance is not a barrier to educational opportunity… at Oxford.” Stuart Conway, Professor of Organic Chemistry, told the Times Higher Education magazine: “Some students are working to support themselves throughout university. They will be on an upward trajectory if they are applying to us, but they may not have seen the full results [of what they can achieve].” Oxford will also remove names and gender pronouns from applications to ensure more equal gender balance. 52.5% of graduate students admitted for 2019 entry were male, compared to 45.6% of undergraduates. Oxford has 11,813 postgraduate students, 63% of whom come from outside the UK. The University also voted to remove the £75 application fee for postgraduate applicants, after pressure from the Oxford SU and student campaigners.  Image credit to Jonathan Billinger.last_img read more

Rare arch-shaped cloud over Aceh goes viral, sparks concern, ‘fake news’

first_imgMeanwhile, user Agus Maulana (@a_mantu71) posted a video clip to his account on Monday afternoon, calling the “uncommon phenomenon” a “tsunami cloud”.Fenomena yg tdk lazim, awan tsunami di Mbo Aceh Barat pic.twitter.com/FrVySSFIaP— Agus Maulana (@a_mantu71) August 10, 2020Weather forecast and early warning head Miming Saepudin of the Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Agency (BMKG) identified the rare weather phenomenon spotted over Meulaboh.”It is a relatively rare phenomenon called an arcus cloud,” Miming said on Monday as reported by kompas.com.Miming said that arcus clouds formed as a result of atmospheric instability caused when air masses of different temperatures and humidity met A large, greyish white cloud appeared on Sunday morning over  Meulaboh in Aceh province to shock the city’s residents, some of whom thought that the low-lying, horizontal cloud formation resembled a tsunami. Videos and photos of the strange cloud made their rounds on social media, sparking some concerns among local residents.Twitter user Arief Arbianto tweeted using the handle @masawep on Monday morning: “Let us pray that Meulaboh city will be all right. A view of a this morning’s cloud above Meulaboh, West Aceh regency.”Mohon doanya Kota Meulaboh baik2 saja. Pemandangan awan pagi ini di atas kota Meulaboh, Aceh Barat. pic.twitter.com/gU4jTSa7Zo— Arief Arbianto (@masawep) August 10, 2020 “The cooler air masses push the warmer air up to form horizontal clouds,” he said, adding that an arcus cloud could be a sign of bad weather in the area where it appeared, such as strong winds and thunderstorms.”So we urge all residents to stay alert, especially fishermen, as the cloud could cause strong winds and heavy rainstorms accompanied by thunder,” he said. Miming debunked suggestions by several social media users that the cloud signified an impending earthquake or tsunami.“Such a cloud is purely a [natural weather] phenomenon due to atmospheric dynamics and has nothing to do with potential earthquakes or tsunamis or mystical things,” he stressed. (nal)Topics :last_img read more