The U.S. Supreme Court defied its usual 6-to-3 conservative/liberal split in two decisions on Wednesday. One involved who qualifies for overtime pay. The other, Arizona's refusal to apply a Supreme Court precedent in death penalty jury instructions.
Olivier Douliery /AFP via Getty ImagesThe U.S. Supreme Court defied its usual 6-to-3 conservative/liberal split in two decisions on Wednesday. One involved who qualifies for overtime pay. The other, Arizona's refusal to apply a Supreme Court precedent in death penalty jury instructions.
The sole question in the case was whether, under the Fair Labor Standards Act, he should be paid time and a half for hours worked beyond 40 hours a week. Helix Energy claimed that Hewitt, who earned $200,000 a year, was exempt from the overtime requirment because he was a"bonafide executive." "Daily-rate workers of whatever income level" are not paid a base salary under Labor Department regulations, Kagan wrote, adding that"Helix's various policy claims cannot justify departing from what the rules say." Those rules, date back to the 1940s, she observed, noting that a salary is defined as"fixed compensation regularly paid, as by the year, quarter, month, or week.
Joining Kagan's opinion were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Sonia Sotomayor, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.The death penalty opinion was the latest rebuke to the state of Arizona for refusing to comply with a 1994 U.S. Supreme Court decision that required judges to instruct juries in capital cases that a sentence of life in prison means life without the possibility of parole in states where that is the case.
France Dernières Nouvelles, France Actualités
Similar News:Vous pouvez également lire des articles d'actualité similaires à celui-ci que nous avons collectés auprès d'autres sources d'information.
Supreme Court rules for Arizona inmate in death penalty caseThe Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a man on Arizona’s death row should be resentenced because jurors in his case were wrongly told that the only way to ensure he would never walk free was to sentence him to death.
Lire la suite »
Supreme Court rules for Arizona inmate in death penalty caseThe Court has ruled a man on Arizona’s death row should be resentenced because jurors in his case were wrongly told that the only way to ensure he would never walk free was to sentence him to death.
Lire la suite »
Supreme Court Reverses Death Sentence for Arizona DefendantThe justices ruled that an inmate was illegally barred from telling jury he was ineligible for parole.
Lire la suite »
Supreme Court rules for Arizona inmate in death penalty caseWASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday for a man on Arizona's death row who wants a new sentencing hearing because jurors in his case were wrongly told that the only way to ensure he would never walk free was to sentence him to death.
Lire la suite »
Arizona Opinion: Arizona needs to better support start-upsOPINION: 'Investment in quality pre-revenue companies can help foster data for future rounds of investments, proof of concept on a larger scale, and place Arizona as a leader in the start-up world,' writes entrepreneur Andrew Weinberg.
Lire la suite »