Supreme Court news

It is the Supreme Court's first sitting since President Muhammadu Buhari violated the court's 8 February order directing that the 10 February deadline set ...

11: 28a.m: Sokoto State: We align ourselves with the processes filed by the plaintiffs in this suit. It should be dismissed on the merit. 11:35am: Agabi: If your Lordships hold that all the reliefs are rooted in Section 20 of the CBN Act, then it holds that this action cannot be commenced in the Supreme Court. Good journalism costs a lot of money. Even before the president gave the directive, Nigerians were already rejecting the old banknotes. We urge the court to dismiss the substantive suit. This makes the total number of co-plaintiffs 10. But we will hear this matter today by all means. We urge the court to dismiss the preliminary objections filed by the defendant. We urge the court to dismiss all the preliminary objections by the Plaintiffs We urged the court to grant all the reliefs and dismiss all the preliminary objections Reacting to Mr Onigbanjo’s application, Johh Okoro said, people are looking for a scapegoat, so that they can blame the judiciary.

Federal goment Lawyer Kanu Agabi SAN say if di court hold all di reliefs of di originating summons wey dey inside di CBN Act, di Supreme Court no get ...

Oga Agabi say “nobody go lose dia money if dem try to comply. “I dey adopt all di briefs wey I file. Owonikoko, SAN wey dey represent Zamfara state say dem don file application to set aside di president Muhammadu Buhari directive on 16th February, a day afta di court sit. Im add say Lagos na one of di states wey di policy dey affect well-well in terms of revenue wey dem dey collect and if e kontinu like dis e go affect di pipo well well wey fit lead to more violence for di state. E say if di court hold all di reliefs of di originating summons wey dey inside di CBN Act, di Supreme Court no get jurisdiction to hear di mata. Lawyer wey dey represent Zamfara state A.

Five more states have joined the suit challenging the naira redesign policy of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). They are Kano, Niger, Jigawa, Nasarawa, ...

After hearing the arguments made by representatives of the states, the seven-member panel of the supreme court adjourned the matter till March 3 for judgment. Subsequently, several states approached the apex court to be joined in the suit. Five more states have joined the suit challenging the naira redesign policy of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

The Supreme Court has resumed proceedings after a break over the naira redesign and swap policy brought against the federal government by some states. The.

We refuse to be made scapegoat.” “You are not a stranger in this country as you are a participant,” he said. However, the Attorney General of Lagos State, Moyosore Onigbanjo (SAN), raised an objection to the continued participation of the Attorney General of the Federation, whom he said was in contempt of the court.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday in Abuja consolidated various suits instituted by 10 states against the Federal Government, challenging the mode of.

The 10 states are slugging it out with the Federal Government in the battle against implementing the Cashless Policy of the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN. In a brief ruling, Justice John Inyang Okoro, who is leading a 7-man panel of Justices of the Court, granted the request and ordered the consolidation of the ten suits into one. The Supreme Court on Wednesday in Abuja consolidated various suits instituted by 10 states against the Federal Government, challenging the mode of implementation of the newly introduced Cashless Policy regime.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday consolidated various suits instituted by state governments, numbering 10, with the most recent joiner being Abia State.

We don’t want a situation where the judiciary will be a scapegoat. On the resumed sitting, Abia State, which was initially denied joining the suit on the ground that it came late to the suit and was advised to present its case at a later date, became the most recent joiner. We refuse to be the scapegoat.

The Supreme Court has insisted that the dispute over naira redesign and swap policy must be decided today. The seven-member panel led by Justice Inyang.

The panel, therefore, consolidated by the Rivers State Government alongside other suits. He said new parties would abide by the outcome of the existing suits or file a new one after the determination of the present suit, but that the matter must be determined today. The Supreme Court has insisted that the dispute over naira redesign and swap policy must be decided today.

The apex court adjourned the case to March 3 for judgement. Advertisement. Earlier, the apex court consolidated the suits instituted by over 12 state ...

He further said that they have security report that there will be breach of law and order if nothing is done to address the issue of cash scarcity. He also said old N500 and N1,000 banknotes cease to be legal tender in Nigeria. The court, however, refused to join Abia State in the suit on the ground that it came late with its originating summons. He added that Nigerians had already began rejecting the old notes way before the President’s directive. He insisted that the President is not in violation of the Supreme Court order as under the constitution, the President is empowered to veto any legislation. He said the reliefs are against the CBN, yet they didn’t deem it fit to bring the CBN into the matter.

Over 10 states have joined a suit by Kaduna, Zamfara and Kogi states to sue the Government over the Naira notes redesign policy of the CBN.

10, 2023 to April 10 2023,” Buhari said. The court had previously issued an order saying the old notes should remain in circulation. READ ALSO:

The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned judgement in the new naira policy suit to March 3, 2023.

Agabi also asserted that by asking Nigerians to deposit their old naira at the CBN designated centres, the president was abiding by the court order and that Buhari is empowered under the constitution to veto any legislation. He also contended that the plaintiffs did not deem it fit to the CBN to court as a respondent despite making reference to the apex bank 32 times in their originating summons and despite the fact that seven of the reliefs sought relate to the CBN. The Supreme Court had on February 8 restrained the Federal Government from implementing the February 10 deadline for swapping the old naira notes with new ones, but the Central Bank of Nigeria refused to shift the deadline.

The Supreme Court adjourned the naira redesign suit for judgement after hearing arguments for and against it on Wednesday.

Good journalism costs a lot of money. A seven-member panel of the court had ordered that the 10 February deadline set for the ending of the validity of the old banknotes be suspended. It was the first sitting of the Supreme Court on the matter after President Muhammadu Buhari violated the court’s 8 February order for continued use of the old N200, N500, and N1,000 banknotes.

The supreme court says it will deliver judgment in the suit challenging the naira redesign policy of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) on March 3.

It is a disrespect to the authority of the court,” he said. Kaduna and Kogi states, represented by Abdulhakeem Mustapha, asked the supreme court to set aside the preliminary objection of the AGF in opposition to the suit for being in contempt of the supreme court order of February 8. The supreme court says it will deliver judgment in the suit challenging the naira redesign policy of the

Over 10 states have joined a suit by Kaduna, Zamfara and Kogi states to sue the Government over the Naira notes redesign policy of the CBN.

10, 2023 to April 10 2023,” Buhari said. The court had previously issued an order saying the old notes should remain in circulation. READ ALSO:

The Supreme Court on Wednesday consolidated various suits instituted by 16 State Governments against the Federal Government challenging...

By Peter Duru, Makurdi. The Association of Local Government of Nigerian, ALGON, has decried the decision of President Muhammadu Buhari led Federal ...

“As leaders of the third tier of government that has direct contact with the people, we urge Mr. The Chairman said, “as you aware, we are Chairmen of local government councils in Benue State. Mike Aba Wednesday in Makurdi lamented the government’s indifference to the hardship Nigerians were facing as a result of the policy.

Top US court considers second lawsuit this week over whether social media companies are liable for 'terrorist' content.

That case involves a bid to hold Google liable for recommending to certain YouTube users content from ISIL. But Kneedler said Twitter’s services were too remote from the act of terrorism in the case. The lower court dismissed that case largely based on Section 230 immunity. The lawsuit alleges that Twitter failed to police the social media platform for ISIL accounts or posts. [Neil Gorsuch](/news/2017/4/7/us-senate-confirms-neil-gorsuch-to-supreme-court) said the Anti-Terrorism Act focuses liability on aiding a person who engaged in a “terrorist” act. [a separate lawsuit](/news/2023/2/21/us-supreme-court-hears-arguments-in-internet-legal-immunity-case) against Google LLC-owned YouTube, part of Alphabet Inc, by the family of a US woman killed in the [2015 Paris attack](/news/2022/6/29/french-court-convicts-19-men-in-2015-paris-attacks-trial), for which ISIL also claimed responsibility.

The Federal Government on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to dismiss a suit instituted against it by ten states of the Federation against the.

Specifically, the Federal Government maintained that the ten states are crying against the Naira re-designing at the wrong court and argued that the Supreme Court should pursue the states to the Federal High Court. It claimed that the Apex Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit because the dispute that arose over the Naira Re-designing was not between it and the ten states that can lead to invocation of the Supreme Court’s direct intervention. The Federal Government on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to dismiss a suit instituted against it by ten states of the Federation against the re-designing of the Naira Notes and the implementation of the Cashless Policy.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court seemed skeptical Wednesday of a lawsuit trying to hold social media companies responsible for a terrorist attack at a ...

A decision in the case — Twitter v. At one point during two and a half hours of arguments, Justice Sonia Sotomayor told Waxman to help her sketch out what an opinion would look like if the court ruled for his clients. The justices seemed more willing to accept the arguments of a lawyer for Twitter, Facebook and Google, Seth Waxman. Gorsuch told lawyer Eric Schnapper that he was “struggling with how your complaint lines up with the three requirements of the statute” that the companies knowingly helped a person commit a terrorist act. If the court bars the lawsuit involving the attack in Turkey from going forward it could avoid a major ruling on the companies’ legal immunity. A lower court let the lawsuit go forward.

In Twitter v. Taamneh, the justices are considering whether the company can be held responsible for aiding terrorism for failing to remove some posts.

Coney Barrett said such an opinion might say that in order to find Twitter liable for aiding and abetting the terrorist act, the complaint would have to prove that Twitter's service was directly used toward the terrorist attack, not just for general recruitment or radicalization. Still, he said, the potential terrorist actions "would be fairly implicit in his name," he said. Eric Schnapper, the attorney for Taamneh, conceded that they were not alleging specific ways Twitter was used to carry out the terrorist attack, but rather general recruitment. Justice Samuel Alito said he could see two different arguments for how Twitter could win, but it's difficult to say in each where to draw the line. Twitter's lawyer Seth Waxman argued the company should not be held responsible for aiding and abetting terrorism in instances where it is not directly aware of the specific post or account in question. In Wednesday's case, such a consensus was more elusive, as justices tested a variety of hypotheticals on lawyers for either side as well as a representative for the U.S.

The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, fixed March 3 to deliver its judgement on the consolidated suit that states filed to set aside the decision of the Federal ...

All the suits the apex court consolidated and heard on Wednesday, were marked: SC/CV/162/23, SC/CV/162/23, SC/CS/197/23, SC/CV/200/23, SC/CV/210, SC/CV/227, SC/CV/229/23 and SC/CV/222/23. It will be recalled that though only three northern states- Kaduna, Kogi and Zamfara- initially approached the Supreme Court to challenge FG’s decision, other states subsequently persuaded the Justice Inyang Okoro led panel to join them as interested parties in the matter. The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, fixed March 3 to deliver its judgement on the consolidated suit that states filed to set aside the decision of the Federal Government to ban the use of old N200, N500 and N1000 banknotes as valid legal tenders.

A case before the court is challenging social media platforms' legal protections. The outcome could be huge for the future of the web.

And that is going to lead to a splintering of the network.” Starting in 2018, prominent conservatives began demanding changes to the law that would expressly hinge Section 230’s liability protections on how companies treat political speech. At the heart of the case is the question of whether tech companies should be held liable for harmful content posted on their platforms by their users—something for which they are currently protected under Section 230 of the Telecommunications Act, a 1996 piece of legislation whose primary purpose was to increase competition in broadcasting and telecoms markets. “If you start to mess with this, you’re fundamentally messing with the design of the internet. The outcome of the case could decide the future of social media platforms worldwide. Google,](https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/04/in-lawsuit-against-google-involving-isis-recruitment-videos-a-chance-for-the-court-to-take-up-section-230/) a case brought by Reynaldo Gonzalez, whose daughter was killed in a 2015 ISIS terror attack in Paris and who alleges that YouTube’s algorithm aided in the attack by recommending the group’s recruitment videos to people who would be most susceptible to their message.

•Says it won't be scapegoat for FG, states. •Breakdown of law, order, looms, Kano State cries out. By Ikechukwu Nnochiri. The Supreme Court yesterday slated ...

He only helped the nation to avert calamity”. Godwin Emefiele to prison for allegedly flouting the interim order, they, however, failed to join him or the apex bank as parties to the suit. The Supreme Court has no original jurisdiction to entertain this matter. “My lords, this suit cannot be commenced here at the Supreme Court. He sidelined members of the FEC and proceeded with the policy. Abubakar Malami, SAN, was initially cited as the sole defendant in the matter, however, both Edo and Bayelsa states filed applications to be joined as co-defendants in the case. “The issue was never discussed at the FEC meeting. The state, through its team of lawyers led by Mr. However, FG’s team of lawyers led by a former AGF, Mr. “In order to save the nation, the President asked that the old banknotes be submitted to the CBN. Kanu Agabi, SAN, and Tijjani Gazzali, SAN, prayed the court to dismiss all the issues that were raised by all the states that are opposed to the Naira redesign policy. The development came on a day the court warned that it would not allow either the federal government or the aggrieved states to turn the Judiciary to a scapegoat in the legal dispute trailing the new monetary policy that was introduced by the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN.

The cases involved who qualifies for overtime pay, and Arizona's refusal to apply a Supreme Court precedent in death penalty jury instructions.

South Carolina) 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. In Arizona, however, judges continued to avoid doing that, and in 2016 the Supreme Court drove home its original point, ruling in an unsigned opinion (Lynch v. The death penalty opinion was the latest rebuke to the state of Arizona for refusing to comply with a 1994 U.S. Helix Energy claimed that Hewitt, who earned $200,000 a year, was exempt from the overtime requirment because he was a "bonafide executive." Writing for the majority, Justice Elena Kagan said that Helix did not pay Hewitt a salary, as defined by federal regulations. The other, Arizona's refusal to apply a Supreme Court precedent in death penalty jury instructions.

The Supreme Court adjourned the naira redesign suit for judgement after hearing arguments for and against it on Wednesday.

The Supreme Court adjourned the suit for judgement after hearing arguments for and against it on Wednesday. It was the first sitting of the Supreme Court on the matter after President Muhammadu Buhari violated the court's 8 February order for continued use of the old N200, N500, and N1,000 banknotes. The Supreme Court adjourned the naira redesign suit for judgement after hearing arguments for and against it on Wednesday.

ARI SHAPIRO, HOST: It's day two of the big tech arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court. On one side are Twitter, Google, Facebook and other major companies ...

The justices that I played cuts from were two conservatives and two liberals. But you said yesterday the justices are also worried about these companies facing a wall of litigation in cases that might not ultimately be able to be proved. Did the same seem to be true today? So the cases argued yesterday and today are testing what that means for these big companies, all of which have, to one degree or another, allowed material to be posted online by known terrorist groups - groups that were responsible for terrorist attacks that killed the relatives of the plaintiffs in these cases. On the other side are the American families of people killed in terrorist attacks. TOTENBERG: Well, when the internet was in its infancy, Congress passed, in 1996, a law that granted interactive platforms virtual immunity from most civil lawsuits.

The Supreme Court adjourned the naira redesign suit for judgement after hearing arguments for and against it on Wednesday.

It sought to end the use of the old versions by 10 February. Good journalism costs a lot of money. The proceedings lasted for over three hours. “We seek an order prohibiting the defendants from being granted audience before this court until the defendants or their principal, President Muhammadu Buhari, in this matter until the comply the order made by this court on 8 February, directing that old 200,500 and 1000 banknotes remain legal tender pending the determination of this suit,” Mr Onigbanjo argued. Mr Sanusi, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), told the court that “There are security reports that if the naira redesign policy is not reversed, there might be breakdown of law and order due to the hardship it has brought on the citizens.” The suit was originally filed by Kaduna, Kogi and Zamfara states on 3 February to challenge the 10 February deadline set to end the validity of the old N200, N500, and N1,000 banknotes.