Latest news with #SeparationofPowers
Time of India
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Justice Kant: Indian judiciary shaped democracy's moral spine
NEW DELHI: Indian judiciary has been instrumental in shaping the democracy's moral spine by interpreting the Constitution's textual commands in a way that gave vibrancy and dynamism to the country's governance structure, said Justice Surya Kant, who will become the 53rd Chief Justice of India in Nov. Speaking to legal scholars and students in Seattle (US), he said in Kesavananda Bharti case, SC established the 'basic structure doctrine', which elucidated that while Parliament could amend the Constitution, it could not alter its fundamental identity. Justice Kant said, "When courts act to empower the powerless, grounded in constitutional text and moral clarity, they do not usurp democracy - they deepen it." While judiciary's proactive stance has often filled legislative or executive voids in advancing rights and justice, it has also, at times, drawn criticism for encroaching upon policy domains traditionally reserved for elected branches of govt, he said. "This tension invites a deeper inquiry into the legitimacy and limits of judicial intervention in a constitutional democracy," he added. He said principles such as the Rule of Law, Separation of Powers and Judicial Review were deemed unamendable. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo This doctrine, unprecedented at the time, was rooted not in textual literalism, but in an ethical reading of democratic continuity, he said. He juxtaposed the Bharti judgment with the infamous ADM Jabalpur case, in which during emergency SC had acquiesced to the govt's draconian diktat "no right available to citizens", and said it was only following the Maneka Gandhi case, immediately after the end of Emergency, that the true expansion of rights happened through SC's interpretative exercises. "In this period, SC has reaffirmed the supremacy of the Constitution and underscored that its foundational values, especially those relating to life and liberty, are inviolable and beyond compromise," Justice Kant said. Explaining judicial independence, he said it encompasses the ability to have intellectual and moral independence, that stretches beyond mere institutional autonomy. "The underlying purpose of the independence of the judiciary is that judges must be able to decide a dispute before them according to law, uninfluenced by any other factor," he said, addingit is ingrained in the system ," he said.
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Court sides with Denver over Trump administration's threats to withhold grant funding
DENVER (KDVR) — A Washington federal court granted Denver and other plaintiffs a preliminary injunction on Tuesday in their lawsuit against the Trump administration over threats to withhold grant funding for transportation programs and priorities. The court ruled the Trump administration is likely acting in violation of the Separation of Powers principle by 'attempting to condition disbursement of funds in part on grounds not authorized by Congress, but rather on Executive Branch policy.' Data: Income levels in Colorado among highest in the US, according to report 'The Court concludes that Plaintiffs are likely to prevail in their claim that in attemptingto impose the new funding conditions on recipients of the (Continuum of Care Program) funds, Defendants have run afoul of the Separation of Powers doctrine, and were acting in excess of statutory authority, and that under the (Administrative Procedure Act), those conditions must be set aside,' the order states. The judge overseeing the complaint also determined that the threat of losing out on funds itself constituted harm, writing, 'It is this looming risk itself that is the injury, and one that Plaintiffs are already suffering.' Denver Mayor Mike Johnston applauded the decision on Wednesday. 'Denver follows all laws — federal, state, and local — and it should not be so much to ask the White House to do the same,' Johnston said in a statement. 'We appreciate the court's swift and precise ruling protecting the federal funding that Denverites deserve,' said Johnston. FOX31 Newsletters: Sign up to get breaking news sent to your inbox U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy issued a memo in April to federal funding recipients, warning they could lose taxpayer dollars if they did not align with the Trump Administration's stance on diversity, equity and inclusion programs. The memo also warned federal funding recipients could be cut off if they did not assist in the enforcement of federal immigration policy. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
PBS sues Trump administration in wake of calls to strip funding
PBS is suing President Trump's administration on First Amendment grounds, arguing the president is trying to pull funding the from the broadcaster because of editorial coverage he disagrees with. The suit filed Friday in federal court in Washington, D.C., accused the president of trying to 'upend public television' and argues the law 'forbids' him from pulling funding to it and other public broadcast outlets. PBS's suit follows a similar lawsuit filed earlier this week by NPR, which similarly argued Trump's executive order targeting funding to public media 'violates the Separation of Powers and the Spending Clause by disregarding Congress's express commands.' In a statement to The Hill on Friday, a spokesperson for PBS said, 'after careful deliberation, PBS reached the conclusion that it was necessary to take legal action to safeguard public television's editorial independence, and to protect the autonomy of PBS member stations.' Trump and his allies have long attacked NPR and PBS over their funding, some of which comes from taxpayer dollars but a larger portion of which is derived from private donations and member stations. On Capitol Hill, a push among Republicans to strip federal funding from public broadcasters is gaining steam, though some lawmakers expressed skepticism. At a hearing last month, PBS president Paula Kerger defended the outlet's editorial strategy and funding model, arguing the network provides vital services to Americans and particularly children through educational programming. But Trump, in his executive order that has now sparked a pair of lawsuits, argued PBS and NPR are biased against his agenda in their news coverage and are undeserving of federal dollars. 'No media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies, and the Government is entitled to determine which categories of activities to subsidize,' his executive order on the matter reads. 'Which viewpoints NPR and PBS promote does not matter. What does matter is that neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to tax paying citizens.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
30-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
PBS sues Trump administration in wake of calls to strip funding
PBS is suing President Trump's administration on First Amendment grounds, arguing the president is trying to pull funding the from the broadcaster because of editorial coverage he disagrees with. The suit filed Friday in federal court in Washington, D.C., accused the president of trying to 'upend public television' and argues the law 'forbids' him from pulling funding to it and other public broadcast outlets. PBS's suit follows a similar lawsuit filed earlier this week by NPR, which similarly argued Trump's executive order targeting funding to public media 'violates the Separation of Powers and the Spending Clause by disregarding Congress's express commands.' In a statement to The Hill on Friday, a spokesperson for PBS said, 'after careful deliberation, PBS reached the conclusion that it was necessary to take legal action to safeguard public television's editorial independence, and to protect the autonomy of PBS member stations.' Trump and his allies have long attacked NPR and PBS over their funding, some of which comes from taxpayer dollars but a larger portion of which is derived from private donations and member stations. On Capitol Hill, a push among Republicans to strip federal funding from public broadcasters is gaining steam, though some lawmakers expressed skepticism. At a hearing last month, PBS president Paula Kerger defended the outlet's editorial strategy and funding model, arguing the network provides vital services to Americans and particularly children through educational programming. But Trump, in his executive order that has now sparked a pair of lawsuits, argued PBS and NPR are biased against his agenda in their news coverage and are undeserving of federal dollars. 'No media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies, and the Government is entitled to determine which categories of activities to subsidize,' his executive order on the matter reads. 'Which viewpoints NPR and PBS promote does not matter. What does matter is that neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to tax paying citizens.'
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
NPR Sues Trump Administration Over Ongoing Funding Feud
In more recent days, the highly publicized feud between President Donald Trump and the National Public Radio has only continued to escalate. After issuing an executive order aimed at cutting all funding for the nonprofit radio station on May 1, NPR promptly responded by suing Trump, citing the order as unconstitutional and a politically-motivated attack on the part of the presidential administration, as reported by CNBC. According to the lawsuit presented by NPR and three other talk radio stations, Trump's executive order "violates the expressed will of Congress and the First Amendment's bedrock guarantees of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of association, and also threatens the existence of a public radio system that millions of Americans across the country rely on for vital news and information." In the view of NPR and fellow plaintiffs Colorado Public Radio, Aspen Public Radio and KSUT Public Radio, Trump's orders also undermine the freedoms associated with the First Amendment, serving as a calculated decision to undermine NPR's operations. "These fundamental First Amendment principles apply in full force in the context of public media and doom Executive Order 14290, which expressly aims to punish and control Plaintiffs' news coverage and other speech the Administration deems 'biased,'" the lawsuit states. "The Order also violates due process, the Separation of Powers and the Spending Clause of the Constitution," the plaintiffs continue. "It cannot stand." Trump' and his Administration have been openly critical of NPR, with White House spokesperson Harrison Fields believing the station 'is creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayers' dime." 'Therefore, the President is exercising his lawful authority to limit funding to NPR and PBS," Fields continued. "The President was elected with a mandate to ensure efficient use of taxpayer dollars, and he will continue to use his lawful authority to achieve that objective." NPR Sues Trump Administration Over Ongoing Funding Feud first appeared on Parade on May 27, 2025
