This writ petition has been preferred by Lawyers for Dignity Foundation, a Non-Governmental Organization, challenging the constitutional validity of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalizes sexual acts "against the order of nature" beyond heterosexual penile-vaginal intercourse. Respondents include the Union of India, various State Governments and AIDS Control organizations who defend the constitutional validity of Section 377 IPC. The petition was dismissed by the Court in 2012 on the ground that there is no cause of action in favor of the petitioners and such a petition cannot be entertained to examine the academic challenge to the constitutionality of a
1) Twelve same-sex couples in Iowa filed a lawsuit challenging the state's statute limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples as unconstitutional.
2) They argued the statute violated their rights to due process and equal protection under the Iowa Constitution by denying them the benefits of marriage.
3) The county defended the statute by arguing it promoted childrearing within heterosexual marriages and the traditional concept of marriage, but the plaintiffs provided evidence that children raised by same-sex couples are well-adjusted and that sexual orientation does not determine parental effectiveness.
This case involves seven same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses and sued, arguing that New Jersey's marriage laws violated their equal protection and due process rights under the state constitution. The New Jersey Supreme Court held that same-sex couples are entitled to the same legal rights and benefits as married heterosexual couples but left it to the legislature to determine whether to amend marriage laws or create a separate statutory structure like civil unions. The court found no fundamental right to same-sex marriage under the state constitution but that denying benefits to same-sex couples violated equal protection. The legislature was given 180 days to comply. Chief Justice Poritz concurred in part and dissented in part.
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that the state's ban on same-sex marriage violates the state constitution. The Court found that (1) the statutory scheme discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, (2) sexual orientation should be considered a quasi-suspect classification under the state constitution, and (3) the state failed to provide sufficient justification for excluding same-sex couples from marriage. The Court reversed the trial court's ruling in favor of the state and directed the trial court to grant summary judgment to the plaintiffs.
1. This document is a ruling from the Supreme Court of California regarding challenges to California statutes that limit marriage to opposite-sex couples.
2. The court must determine whether limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples while granting same-sex couples virtually all the same legal rights and obligations through domestic partnerships violates the state constitution.
3. The court concludes that the right to marry under the California constitution must be understood to apply to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples. However, reserving the designation of "marriage" only for opposite-sex couples risks denying same-sex couples equal dignity and respect.
The document summarizes the key capabilities and benefits of IBM Power Systems and IBM i. It discusses how IBM i provides an integrated operating environment that enables efficient and resilient business processing. It also highlights how IBM i lowers total cost of ownership, simplifies operations, and protects application investments over time through its technology-independent architecture.
This writ petition has been preferred by Lawyers for Dignity Foundation, a Non-Governmental Organization, challenging the constitutional validity of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalizes sexual acts "against the order of nature" beyond heterosexual penile-vaginal intercourse. Respondents include the Union of India, various State Governments and AIDS Control organizations who defend the constitutional validity of Section 377 IPC. The petition was dismissed by the Court in 2012 on the ground that there is no cause of action in favor of the petitioners and such a petition cannot be entertained to examine the academic challenge to the constitutionality of a
1) Twelve same-sex couples in Iowa filed a lawsuit challenging the state's statute limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples as unconstitutional.
2) They argued the statute violated their rights to due process and equal protection under the Iowa Constitution by denying them the benefits of marriage.
3) The county defended the statute by arguing it promoted childrearing within heterosexual marriages and the traditional concept of marriage, but the plaintiffs provided evidence that children raised by same-sex couples are well-adjusted and that sexual orientation does not determine parental effectiveness.
This case involves seven same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses and sued, arguing that New Jersey's marriage laws violated their equal protection and due process rights under the state constitution. The New Jersey Supreme Court held that same-sex couples are entitled to the same legal rights and benefits as married heterosexual couples but left it to the legislature to determine whether to amend marriage laws or create a separate statutory structure like civil unions. The court found no fundamental right to same-sex marriage under the state constitution but that denying benefits to same-sex couples violated equal protection. The legislature was given 180 days to comply. Chief Justice Poritz concurred in part and dissented in part.
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that the state's ban on same-sex marriage violates the state constitution. The Court found that (1) the statutory scheme discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, (2) sexual orientation should be considered a quasi-suspect classification under the state constitution, and (3) the state failed to provide sufficient justification for excluding same-sex couples from marriage. The Court reversed the trial court's ruling in favor of the state and directed the trial court to grant summary judgment to the plaintiffs.
1. This document is a ruling from the Supreme Court of California regarding challenges to California statutes that limit marriage to opposite-sex couples.
2. The court must determine whether limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples while granting same-sex couples virtually all the same legal rights and obligations through domestic partnerships violates the state constitution.
3. The court concludes that the right to marry under the California constitution must be understood to apply to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples. However, reserving the designation of "marriage" only for opposite-sex couples risks denying same-sex couples equal dignity and respect.
The document summarizes the key capabilities and benefits of IBM Power Systems and IBM i. It discusses how IBM i provides an integrated operating environment that enables efficient and resilient business processing. It also highlights how IBM i lowers total cost of ownership, simplifies operations, and protects application investments over time through its technology-independent architecture.
This document provides information about upcoming technical talks on Power Systems hosted by IBM. It outlines several upcoming webcasts focused on topics like high availability solutions, IBM i clustering enhancements, and storage sizing considerations for PowerHA. Attendees can learn about IBM technologies like IASPs, CBUs, PowerHA and get guidance on how to position these solutions for clients. The document provides details on dates, registration information, and how to access presentation files and replays.
This document summarizes key events and legal cases related to LGBTQ+ rights in Colombia from 1991-2012. It outlines developments in areas such as discrimination protections, same-sex relationships and families, health care access, adoption, and social security benefits. Major court rulings established that sexual orientation and gender identity are protected categories under the Colombian constitution. However, same-sex marriage and joint adoption by gay couples were still pending legalization and recognition.
This document discusses harm reduction strategies for crack cocaine users in Bogota, Colombia. It outlines the background of drug policy and harm reduction in Colombia. It then describes the problem of over 7,000 crack users in the Bronx area of Bogota, where there are high levels of violence, homicides, and health issues. The document proposes several strategies to address this, including a local political strategy spearheaded by the mayor's office, a judicial strategy to frame it as a constitutional rights issue, and a legislative initiative to decriminalize minor drug offenses. It argues that a harm reduction approach focusing on health, social determinants of health, and human rights could help address the complex issues faced by crack users in Bogota.
This document is a Supreme Judicial Court case from 2003 regarding same-sex marriage in Massachusetts. The court ruled that denying marriage licenses and benefits to same-sex couples violated the state constitution. Specifically, it found that:
1) Marriage is a cherished social institution that provides legal, financial, and social benefits and obligations.
2) Denying these benefits and protections to same-sex couples based solely on their sexual orientation created second-class citizens, which is forbidden by the state constitution.
3) The state failed to provide a constitutionally adequate reason for restricting marriage only to opposite-sex couples. Therefore, the ban was incompatible with principles of individual autonomy, respect, and equal treatment under the law
The document discusses perspectives on freedom of speech from an American viewpoint. It outlines key Supreme Court cases that have shaped the understanding of free speech in the US. It also discusses different viewpoints on where to draw the line on hate speech from philosophers and legal scholars. Additionally, it examines how international human rights bodies and regional systems have approached regulating hate speech that incites discrimination, hostility or violence. Finally, it provides elements that should be considered in differentiating between prohibited hate speech and other types of permitted speech.
Este documento resume el Acto Legislativo 02 de 2009, el cual reforma el artículo 49 de la Constitución Política de Colombia. La reforma establece que la atención de la salud y el saneamiento ambiental son servicios públicos a cargo del Estado y garantiza el acceso a los servicios de salud para todos. También determina las responsabilidades del Estado en la organización, dirección y regulación de la prestación de servicios de salud y saneamiento ambiental.
Este documento presenta una demanda de constitucionalidad contra ciertas expresiones en el Código Civil de Colombia y la Ley 294 de 1996. El demandante argumenta que estas normas vulneran derechos constitucionales al restringir los derechos de las personas homosexuales a constituir familias y contraer matrimonio. El documento analiza los conceptos de familia y matrimonio, y argumenta que excluir a las parejas del mismo sexo de estas instituciones es discriminatorio y va en contra de la neutralidad del Estado respecto a los planes de vida de los ciudadanos.
1) Se demanda la inconstitucionalidad de ciertas expresiones del Código Civil y la Ley 294 de 1996 que restringen el derecho de las parejas homosexuales a conformar familias y contraer matrimonio civil.
2) Las normas demandadas vulneran principios de igualdad y libre desarrollo de la personalidad.
3) Se argumenta que la noción constitucional de familia es diferente a la concepción religiosa de matrimonio y no debe restringirse a parejas heterosexuales.
Este documento resume una comunicación presentada al Comité de Derechos Humanos de Naciones Unidas por cuatro mujeres neozelandesas en una relación lesbiana. Ellas alegaron que la prohibición del matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo en Nueva Zelandia violaba varios artículos del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos. El Estado de Nueva Zelandia rechazó los argumentos, alegando que el Pacto no requiere que los Estados autoricen el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo. El Comité consider
This document summarizes a Supreme Court of California case regarding challenges to Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that amended the state constitution to define marriage as only between a man and a woman. The court finds that Proposition 8 constitutes a constitutional amendment, not a revision, and is therefore a valid exercise of the people's right to change the state constitution. The court explains that Proposition 8 has a narrow effect of reserving the designation of marriage for opposite-sex couples while leaving other rights of same-sex couples intact. It also finds no basis to exempt constitutional rights from modification by amendment approved by majority vote through the initiative process.
Este documento resume la decisión de la Corte Suprema de California en el caso Strauss v. Horton sobre la Proposición 8. La corte decidió que la Proposición 8 es válida y que efectivamente prohibió el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo en California. Sin embargo, las parejas del mismo sexo que se casaron entre junio y noviembre de 2008 permanecen legalmente casadas. El documento también responde preguntas frecuentes sobre el estatus legal de parejas del mismo sexo en California a raíz de esta decisión.
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that barring same-sex couples from civil marriage violates the state constitution. The court found that denying the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage to same-sex couples who wish to marry deprives them of equal dignity and creates second-class citizens. However, the court stayed its ruling for 180 days to allow the legislature to take any action it deems appropriate. Three justices dissented, arguing that the definition of marriage is a policy decision for the legislature.
Este documento presenta la norma técnica para la prevención del cáncer ocupacional en Colombia. Establece definiciones, requisitos de evaluación de conformidad, obligaciones de las diferentes partes involucradas como autoridades, empleadores y trabajadores, límites de exposición a agentes carcinógenos, medidas de monitoreo y control en los lugares de trabajo, uso de elementos de protección personal, manejo de residuos peligrosos y supervisión de la salud de los trabajadores. El objetivo es establecer pautas para prevenir el desarrollo
Este documento presenta un borrador de reglamento técnico para la prevención del cáncer ocupacional en Colombia. Establece las bases legales y objetivos del reglamento, así como su campo de aplicación. Detalla los contenidos específicos como definiciones, requisitos, procedimientos de evaluación de conformidad, entidades de vigilancia y control, y disposiciones sobre revisión, derogatorias y vigencia. El objetivo general es reducir la exposición a agentes carcinogénicos en el trabajo y prevenir efectos adversos a la salud de los trabaj
Demanda de inconstitucionalidad contra 25 leyes que discriminaban a la parejas del mismo sexo en Colombia. Esta demanda fue realizada por el Centro de Estudios Derecho Justicia y Sociedad (Dejusticia), Colombia Diversa y el Grupo de Derecho de Interés Público de la Universidad de los Andes (GDIP).
Información resumida del caso en: Corte Constitucional decidió la Igualdad http://www.colombiadiversa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=634
La Corte Constitucional de Colombia emitió una sentencia declarando la inexequibilidad de numerosas disposiciones legales relacionadas con los derechos de residencia, unión marital, beneficios de salud y alimentos. La sentencia analizó las disposiciones acusadas de inconstitucionalidad en demanda presentada por varios ciudadanos y declaró que varios artículos de decretos y leyes violaban principios de igualdad y derechos fundamentales.
This document provides information about upcoming technical talks on Power Systems hosted by IBM. It outlines several upcoming webcasts focused on topics like high availability solutions, IBM i clustering enhancements, and storage sizing considerations for PowerHA. Attendees can learn about IBM technologies like IASPs, CBUs, PowerHA and get guidance on how to position these solutions for clients. The document provides details on dates, registration information, and how to access presentation files and replays.
This document summarizes key events and legal cases related to LGBTQ+ rights in Colombia from 1991-2012. It outlines developments in areas such as discrimination protections, same-sex relationships and families, health care access, adoption, and social security benefits. Major court rulings established that sexual orientation and gender identity are protected categories under the Colombian constitution. However, same-sex marriage and joint adoption by gay couples were still pending legalization and recognition.
This document discusses harm reduction strategies for crack cocaine users in Bogota, Colombia. It outlines the background of drug policy and harm reduction in Colombia. It then describes the problem of over 7,000 crack users in the Bronx area of Bogota, where there are high levels of violence, homicides, and health issues. The document proposes several strategies to address this, including a local political strategy spearheaded by the mayor's office, a judicial strategy to frame it as a constitutional rights issue, and a legislative initiative to decriminalize minor drug offenses. It argues that a harm reduction approach focusing on health, social determinants of health, and human rights could help address the complex issues faced by crack users in Bogota.
This document is a Supreme Judicial Court case from 2003 regarding same-sex marriage in Massachusetts. The court ruled that denying marriage licenses and benefits to same-sex couples violated the state constitution. Specifically, it found that:
1) Marriage is a cherished social institution that provides legal, financial, and social benefits and obligations.
2) Denying these benefits and protections to same-sex couples based solely on their sexual orientation created second-class citizens, which is forbidden by the state constitution.
3) The state failed to provide a constitutionally adequate reason for restricting marriage only to opposite-sex couples. Therefore, the ban was incompatible with principles of individual autonomy, respect, and equal treatment under the law
The document discusses perspectives on freedom of speech from an American viewpoint. It outlines key Supreme Court cases that have shaped the understanding of free speech in the US. It also discusses different viewpoints on where to draw the line on hate speech from philosophers and legal scholars. Additionally, it examines how international human rights bodies and regional systems have approached regulating hate speech that incites discrimination, hostility or violence. Finally, it provides elements that should be considered in differentiating between prohibited hate speech and other types of permitted speech.
Este documento resume el Acto Legislativo 02 de 2009, el cual reforma el artículo 49 de la Constitución Política de Colombia. La reforma establece que la atención de la salud y el saneamiento ambiental son servicios públicos a cargo del Estado y garantiza el acceso a los servicios de salud para todos. También determina las responsabilidades del Estado en la organización, dirección y regulación de la prestación de servicios de salud y saneamiento ambiental.
Este documento presenta una demanda de constitucionalidad contra ciertas expresiones en el Código Civil de Colombia y la Ley 294 de 1996. El demandante argumenta que estas normas vulneran derechos constitucionales al restringir los derechos de las personas homosexuales a constituir familias y contraer matrimonio. El documento analiza los conceptos de familia y matrimonio, y argumenta que excluir a las parejas del mismo sexo de estas instituciones es discriminatorio y va en contra de la neutralidad del Estado respecto a los planes de vida de los ciudadanos.
1) Se demanda la inconstitucionalidad de ciertas expresiones del Código Civil y la Ley 294 de 1996 que restringen el derecho de las parejas homosexuales a conformar familias y contraer matrimonio civil.
2) Las normas demandadas vulneran principios de igualdad y libre desarrollo de la personalidad.
3) Se argumenta que la noción constitucional de familia es diferente a la concepción religiosa de matrimonio y no debe restringirse a parejas heterosexuales.
Este documento resume una comunicación presentada al Comité de Derechos Humanos de Naciones Unidas por cuatro mujeres neozelandesas en una relación lesbiana. Ellas alegaron que la prohibición del matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo en Nueva Zelandia violaba varios artículos del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos. El Estado de Nueva Zelandia rechazó los argumentos, alegando que el Pacto no requiere que los Estados autoricen el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo. El Comité consider
This document summarizes a Supreme Court of California case regarding challenges to Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that amended the state constitution to define marriage as only between a man and a woman. The court finds that Proposition 8 constitutes a constitutional amendment, not a revision, and is therefore a valid exercise of the people's right to change the state constitution. The court explains that Proposition 8 has a narrow effect of reserving the designation of marriage for opposite-sex couples while leaving other rights of same-sex couples intact. It also finds no basis to exempt constitutional rights from modification by amendment approved by majority vote through the initiative process.
Este documento resume la decisión de la Corte Suprema de California en el caso Strauss v. Horton sobre la Proposición 8. La corte decidió que la Proposición 8 es válida y que efectivamente prohibió el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo en California. Sin embargo, las parejas del mismo sexo que se casaron entre junio y noviembre de 2008 permanecen legalmente casadas. El documento también responde preguntas frecuentes sobre el estatus legal de parejas del mismo sexo en California a raíz de esta decisión.
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that barring same-sex couples from civil marriage violates the state constitution. The court found that denying the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage to same-sex couples who wish to marry deprives them of equal dignity and creates second-class citizens. However, the court stayed its ruling for 180 days to allow the legislature to take any action it deems appropriate. Three justices dissented, arguing that the definition of marriage is a policy decision for the legislature.
Este documento presenta la norma técnica para la prevención del cáncer ocupacional en Colombia. Establece definiciones, requisitos de evaluación de conformidad, obligaciones de las diferentes partes involucradas como autoridades, empleadores y trabajadores, límites de exposición a agentes carcinógenos, medidas de monitoreo y control en los lugares de trabajo, uso de elementos de protección personal, manejo de residuos peligrosos y supervisión de la salud de los trabajadores. El objetivo es establecer pautas para prevenir el desarrollo
Este documento presenta un borrador de reglamento técnico para la prevención del cáncer ocupacional en Colombia. Establece las bases legales y objetivos del reglamento, así como su campo de aplicación. Detalla los contenidos específicos como definiciones, requisitos, procedimientos de evaluación de conformidad, entidades de vigilancia y control, y disposiciones sobre revisión, derogatorias y vigencia. El objetivo general es reducir la exposición a agentes carcinogénicos en el trabajo y prevenir efectos adversos a la salud de los trabaj
Demanda de inconstitucionalidad contra 25 leyes que discriminaban a la parejas del mismo sexo en Colombia. Esta demanda fue realizada por el Centro de Estudios Derecho Justicia y Sociedad (Dejusticia), Colombia Diversa y el Grupo de Derecho de Interés Público de la Universidad de los Andes (GDIP).
Información resumida del caso en: Corte Constitucional decidió la Igualdad http://www.colombiadiversa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=634
La Corte Constitucional de Colombia emitió una sentencia declarando la inexequibilidad de numerosas disposiciones legales relacionadas con los derechos de residencia, unión marital, beneficios de salud y alimentos. La sentencia analizó las disposiciones acusadas de inconstitucionalidad en demanda presentada por varios ciudadanos y declaró que varios artículos de decretos y leyes violaban principios de igualdad y derechos fundamentales.