The recent enforcement action led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta against Amazon marks a defining moment in modern competition law. What appears, at first glance, to be a routine antitrust dispute is, in reality, a deeper confrontation with the architecture of digital marketplaces and the subtle mechanisms through which dominant platforms shape prices without explicitly fixing them. California has sued Amazon, alleging it blocked lower prices on other websites. By pr

In a significant reaffirmation of maintenance jurisprudence, the Supreme Court in Deepa Joshi v. Gaurav Joshi (2026 INSC 370) has drawn a clear line: a husband’s financial commitments especially loan repayments leading to asset creation cannot dilute his primary legal obligation to maintain his wife. What's The Matter? The case arose from a relatively short-lived marriage where the wife, left without independent income, sought ₹50,000 as maintenance. The Family Court grante

The Supreme Court’s decision in this case offers a sharp reaffirmation of the limits of judicial review in disciplinary matters, particularly when the plea of parity is invoked under Article 14 of the Constitution. equality does not mean uniformity when responsibility and rank differ. At the heart of the dispute was the respondent, a Senior Manager, who was dismissed from service following disciplinary proceedings that found him guilty of misappropriation and misconduct in

The ongoing legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni over their film It Ends With Us has taken a significant turn, with a U.S. federal judge dismissing most of Lively’s claims, including allegations of sexual harassment. The ruling, delivered by Judge Lewis Liman in New York, narrows what was initially a wide-ranging lawsuit into a more focused legal dispute centered primarily on retaliation and contractual issues. Lively had filed the lawsuit in late 2024, all

A recent ruling by a U.S. federal court has once again placed judicial limits on executive immigration powers, highlighting the centrality of due process in administrative decision-making. In Judge blocks Trump termination of parole for migrants , a Massachusetts district judge restrained the Trump administration from terminating the legal status of migrants who had lawfully entered the United States through the Biden-era CBP One application. What's the matter? The administ

Update: A U.S. federal judge has temporarily blocked the government’s move to terminate the parole of migrants who legally entered through the CBP One system, providing immediate relief to thousands facing sudden loss of legal status. The recent class action filed before the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts presents a deeply consequential challenge to executive immigration authority, exposing the fragile balance between administrative discreti

The case of Trump v. Barbara has reopened a major constitutional debate on birthright citizenship in the United States. At the heart of the dispute is a simple but powerful question: does being born on U.S. soil automatically make a person a citizen, or does the Constitution require something more like a deeper connection or allegiance to the country? The issue began with an Executive Order issued in January 2025, which denies citizenship to children born in the United Stat

The enactment of An Act respecting the laicity of the State by Quebec in 2019 represents a deliberate legislative effort to redefine the contours of secularism within a constitutional democracy. Unlike abstract articulations of neutrality, the statute transforms laicity into a binding legal norm, compelling state institutions to not only uphold but visibly demonstrate religious neutrality. The law declares Quebec a “lay State” and grounds this assertion in four princip

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act remains the foundational legal shield governing internet platforms, yet its contemporary relevance is increasingly under scrutiny. Enacted in 1996, it provides that platforms such as Meta Platforms, YouTube, and X Corp cannot ordinarily be treated as the “publisher or speaker” of third-party content, thereby insulating them from liability arising out of user-generated material. Complementing this immunity, the provision also

A judge of the International Criminal Court has reported being unable to use credit cards or access online services after facing U.S. sanctions linked to arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu. Legally, this raises serious concerns. Sanctioning a sitting judge for judicial acts challenges the core principle of judicial independence and risks turning international law into a space influenced by geopolitical power. The move also highlights how deeply global financial syst

The recent jury verdict in the U.S. against Meta and Google marks a turning point in how courts view social media liability. A California jury held both companies negligent for contributing to a young user’s mental health harm , awarding about $6 million in damages. The case focused not on harmful content, but on platform design features like autoplay, infinite scroll, and algorithm-driven engagement that allegedly foster addiction. Legally, this shifts the debate from inter

(हिंदी अनुवाद नीचे है) The order in Vishvjeet and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2026 INSC 254) is not merely a bail determination it is an institutional indictment. It exposes a fracture within the justice delivery system where those entrusted as “custodians of justice” themselves became instruments of coercion, effectively paralysing the accused’s access to legal representation and thereby striking at the heart of Article 21. What's The Matter? At its core, the case ar

The Supreme Court’s decision in Anurag Krishna Sinha v. State of Bihar represents an important reaffirmation of the constitutional doctrine that arbitrariness in legislation is incompatible with the guarantee of equality under Article 14. The Court struck down the Srimati Radhika Sinha Institute and Sachchidanand Sinha Library (Requisition & Management) Act, 2015 , holding that the statute, which sought to acquire and take over the management of a historic educational inst

The decision of the Supreme Court of India in Rama Rao & Ors v. M.G. Maheshwara Rao & Ors (27 August 2007) is a significant reaffirmation of a foundational principle of service jurisprudence: courts and tribunals may test the validity of rules, but they cannot step into the shoes of the rule-making authority and reframe them. What's The Matter? The dispute arose from promotions within the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal establishment. The Government had framed Recruitment

The Supreme Court in this case delivers a sharp rebuke against nepotism and institutional favouritism in cooperative housing allotments, reaffirming that transparency and fiduciary responsibility cannot be diluted merely because a body is structured as a registered society. What's The Matter? The dispute arose from the allotment of two “super deluxe” flats by the HUDA Employees Welfare Organization (HEWO), a society constituted ostensibly for the benefit of employees of the

The Supreme Court’s judgment in this case revisits a constitutional fault line that has repeatedly surfaced in recent years the misuse of criminal law to penalise speech and the delicate balance between public order and individual liberty. The decision does not merely determine the fate of one prosecution; it clarifies the boundaries of State power when invoking penal provisions against expression that is controversial, critical, or uncomfortable . The case arose from the r

The Allahabad High Court’s judgment in Writ-C No. 35171 of 2025 and connected matters, (decided on 1 7 December 2025) marks one of the most comprehensive judicial engagements with the constitutional status of live-in relationships in India. The ruling firmly situates personal autonomy, choice of partner, and the right to cohabit within the protective ambit of Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution, while decisively rejecting moral objections as a basis for denying State pro

The Supreme Court’s decision in this case is a significant restatement of the limits of disciplinary jurisdiction over advocates and the procedural safeguards that must govern findings of professional misconduct. The judgment serves as a cautionary note to disciplinary authorities against mechanically sustaining complaints once their factual foundation has collapsed, and against diluting basic principles of natural justice in the name of professional regulation . What's The

The decision of the Singapore Magistrate’s Court in Century Housing Services Pte Ltd v Koh Chiep Chong (Xu Jiecong) offers a clear and timely reaffirmation of orthodox landlord tenant principles in an era where co-living business models increasingly test the limits of traditional tenancy agreements. At its core, the case turns on a deceptively simple question : whether a tenant can rely on past informal arrangements and commercial practice to override clear contractual pro

The Supreme Court’s decision in offers a careful reminder of the limits of criminal law at the stage of bail, particularly in emotionally charged cases involving allegations of suicide, marital discord and dowry-related offences. While the facts of the case evoke deep sympathy for the deceased, the judgment reiterates that bail jurisprudence cannot be driven by moral outrage or post-event suspicion alone , but must remain anchored in evidentiary thresholds and procedural fair