Harvard University's secondary insurance provider has no obligation to cover $15 million of legal fees incurred in the school's failed attempt to defend its use of racial preference in admissions, the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.
In 2014, amid the high-profile racial discrimination lawsuit brought by Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), Harvard bought an excess insurance policy with Zurich American Insurance for legal fees exceeding $25 million. The policy had a $15 million limit and covered claims made between Nov. 1, 2014, and Nov. 1, 2015.
Under the terms and conditions of the policy, Harvard must formally notify Zurich about its legal claims within 90 days after passing the $25 million cap in order for the secondary policy to kick in. The 90-day window closed in January 2016, but Zurich didn't receive a written notice from Harvard until May 2017.
Who is in charge of your children? That has been a perennial question that has grown in importance over the last few years. When I was a child, it was understood that, with rare exceptions, parents were in charge of a child’s upbringing. This included medical, religious, and educational decisions. However, over the last few decades, the role of the parent in these decisions has been replaced by experts. What happens when the goal of the experts differs from those of the parents? Who decides the future of the rising generations? It was understood that the state acted in loco parentis, in place of the parents, only for the safety of the child. A recent case in U.S. District Court shows that be it health departments, child services, schools, or even the courts. Government not only believes they know better than the parents, they are more than willing to act in loco parentis tyrannis.
https://constitutionstudy.com/?p=8897
With the release of ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence (AI) applications, there has been a lot of speculation and downright assertions about our future. With over 30 years of experience in Information Technology (IT), not more than a passing understanding of AIs, I've come to the conclusion that much of what I've heard is more science fiction than fact. A recent court case decided in the D.C. District Court revolved around one very important question. Do AIs have rights?
In this third installment of the three-part series on the branches of government, we look at the role of the third and weakest branch. At least that is what our Founding Fathers thought of it. What is the role of the federal judiciary? What are the extent of their powers, how do they related to the other two branches of government, and why is a proper understanding of the role of the judiciary critical if the United States is to remain a constitutional republic?
https://constitutionstudy.com/?p=8575
The nation’s first Chief Justice, John Jay, said “Every member of the State ought diligently to read and to study the constitution of his country, and teach the rising generation to be free.” Well, it’s obvious that most people have not read, much less studied the Constitution. How else do you explain these violations of the supreme law of the land? - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
As screwed up as the United States is, people still want to come here. With all of the immigration problems, fiscal problems, and social problems, people still flood our borders. Have you ever wondered why? - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
During the COVID scamdemic, I and many others pointed out the numerous violation of medical ethics by those in the healthcare system. Was this a one-off emergency, or did it expose a more serious problem. And just how can the Constitution be used to protect us against these violations? - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
