Latest news with #Section504
The Sun
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Sun
Former UMany president granted leave to appeal RM10,000 fine
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has granted leave to former Universiti Malaya Association of New Youth (UMany) president Wong Yan Ke to challenge his conviction and RM10,000 fine for insulting the university's then vice-chancellor. A three-judge panel ruled that his case raised legal questions under Section 504 of the Penal Code requiring further deliberation. Wong, now deputy chairman of electoral reform group Bersih, was found guilty in October 2023 of disrupting the 59th UM convocation ceremony in 2019. He had staged a protest on stage, demanding the resignation of then vice-chancellor Prof Datuk Dr Abdul Rahim Hashim. The Magistrate's Court initially fined him RM5,000, but the High Court later doubled the penalty. The offence, committed at UM's Tunku Chancellor Hall on Oct 14, 2019, falls under Section 504, which penalises intentional insult with potential to provoke public disturbance. Punishment includes up to two years' jail, a fine, or both. Wong's legal team proposed seven questions of law, including whether the charge was defective for not specifying the offending act. Deputy Public Prosecutor Zaki Asyraf Zubir opposed the appeal, arguing the issues were not novel. The court's decision allows Wong's appeal to proceed, focusing solely on legal arguments. – Bernama
Perth Now
02-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Perth Now
Rob Delaney joins Being Heumann film
Rob Delaney has joined the cast of Being Heumann. The Dying For Sex actor is the latest star announced for the civil rights drama movie, alongside Ballroom actress Madeline Delp, and The Piano Lesson star Ray Fisher. Mark Ruffalo, Ruth Madeley, and Dylan O'Brien will also appear in the film, which is based on the memoir Being Heumann: An Unrepentant Memoir of a Disability Rights, by disability activist Judy Heumann. According to Deadline, Delaney will portray Congressman Miller in the Apple movie. The character is said to be inspired by George Miller, who supported Heumann in her disability rights battle in the 1970s. Disability advocate Delp is to portray disability rights activist Kitty Cone and Fisher will appear as Chuck Jackson, a member of the Black Panther Party. Heumann - who was left paralysed from polio aged 18 months old - is best known for leading a 28-day sit in at the US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) in San Francisco in 1977. She led more than 100 people to take over the building, to protest that the Rehabilitation Act's Section 504 - which protects qualified individuals from discrimination based on their disability - should be enforced. The Act had been signed in 1973, but Section 504 had not been enforced, but the protest resulted in the signing of Section 504, meaning all federal spaces were accessible. President Jimmy Carter had vowed to enforce Section 504 after he was elected president in 1976, but Joseph Califano, Carter's Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, then said he wanted more time to review it, sparking the protest. Heumann previously told the BBC: "We were very, very concerned that they were going to make drastic changes to the rules. "We had been fighting very hard for many years to get the rules [to] where they were. So we said, if the regulations were not signed by a certain day there would be demonstrations around the country in nine or 10 cities." Madeley will take on the role of Heumann - who died in 2023, aged 75 - and Ruffalo will portray Califano. Sian Heder will direct the Apple Studios movie.
India.com
25-06-2025
- India.com
Vinod Kambli once beat his wife Andrea with a cooking pan, star Indian cricketer was then...
In this collection of pictures we shall why Vinod Kambli beat his wife Andrea with a cooking pan and we shall also know what happened to star India cricketer after that. Let's dive in. When Andrea was unmarried, she was a popular fashion model. Then after getting married to Vinod Kambli she faded off from the spotlight due to managing her home, which became a new phase in her life. Vinod Kambli and Andrea Hewitt first met each other in the early 2000s and they were in a relationship for six years. Then both got married in an intimates ceremony. Their marriage was known for winning of love over life challenges. Star India cricketer Vinod Kambli fell in trouble when his wife Andrea Hewitt registered an FIR against him to the Bandra Police. Everyone were shocked when this news came out. Let's know the reason why Andrea registered an FIR against Vinod Kambli. Talking about the incident, it is been said that Vinod Kambli came home drunk and beat his wife Andrea on the head with a cooking pan. Then Andrea Hewitt went to nearby hospital for treatment of her head injuries and then went to the Bandra police station for taking action against the Indian cricketer. According to the crime Vinod Kambli committed, star India cricketer was booked under Section 324 (voluntarily causing hurt with dangerous weapons) and Section 504 (insult). This was confirmed by a police official at the Bandra Police Station. A report in the Times of India mentioned Andrea saying that "the matter is now getting sorted out". Talking abut the incident, it took place between 1:00 and 1:30 pm IST when Vinod Kambli reportedly came home drunk and began fighting with his wife. Vinod Kambli's son saw everything and tried to stop but the Indian cricketer hit his wife with a coocking pan. "Despite trying to pacify him, he abused me and my son for no reason. He charged at us. After hitting the cooking panhandle, he charged again with a bat. I managed to stop him before leaving with my son, and rushed to the hospital," Andrea has put on record in the FIR.
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Supreme Court Unanimously Sides With Disabled Student in Lawsuit vs. District
In a unanimous opinion delivered by Chief Justice John Roberts, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday sided with the family of Ava Tharpe, a teen with a rare form of epilepsy whose suburban Minneapolis district denied her request for a modified school day. The decision, A.J.T. vs. Osseo Area Schools, means K-12 students do not have to meet a higher standard of proof than others suing under the Americans with Disabilities Act. If the justices had agreed with the district's longstanding argument, children with disabilities would have had to prove their school system intentionally acted in bad faith in denying them in-school accommodations. In 'friend of the court' briefs, numerous advocacy groups had warned that holding special education students to a different — and extraordinarily strict — definition of discrimination would have made it virtually impossible for families to assert their rights. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter The court agreed, saying everyone who files suit under the ADA should have to meet the same standard of 'deliberate indifference,' or disregard for an individual's need for accommodations. 'That our decision is narrow does not diminish its import for A.J.T. and 'a great many children with disabilities and their parents,' ' Roberts wrote, citing language from a lower court decision. 'Together they face daunting challenges on a daily basis. We hold today that those challenges do not include having to satisfy a more stringent standard of proof than other plaintiffs to establish discrimination under Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.' In a concurring opinion, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson elaborated, citing examples of discrimination that, intent notwithstanding, must still be addressed. 'Stairs may prevent a wheelchair-bound person from accessing a public space,' Sotomayor wrote. 'The lack of auxiliary aids may prevent a dead person from accessing medical treatment at a public hospital; and braille-free ballots may preclude a blind person from voting, all without animus on the part of the city planner, the hospital staff or the ballot designer.' Related 'Today's decision is a great win for Ava, and for children with disabilities facing discrimination in schools across the country,' said Roman Martinez, a lead attorney on the case. 'This outcome gets the law exactly right, and it will help protect the reasonable accommodations needed to ensure equal opportunity for all.' In a statement to The 74, a district spokesperson said the high court 'declined to decide what the particular intent standard is for such claims,' noting that 'the case will now return to the trial court for next steps consistent with the court's ruling.' In 2015, when Ava was in fourth grade, her family moved from Kentucky to Minnesota. Because her severe form of epilepsy causes frequent seizures during the morning, she had been allowed to attend school in the afternoon and early evening. Initially, the Osseo district agreed to a modified schedule, but reneged after the family moved, saying it was unwilling to provide services outside the normal school day. The state administrative law judge who heard the family's initial complaint called the district's arguments 'pretextual,' saying it was more concerned with 'the need to safeguard the ordinary end-of-the-workday departure times for its faculty and staff' than with outside evaluators' assessments of Ava's needs. As the case made its way to the Supreme Court, the district had consistently argued Ava had to prove the school system acted out of ill intent — a standard that would have applied only to K-12 students. But in the brief it submitted before oral arguments, Osseo widened its argument, saying that a showing of bad faith is required in all ADA cases, not just those involving schools. The April 28 hearing erupted in rare verbal fireworks when Justice Neil Gorsuch took exception to a statement by the district's attorney that lawyers for the U.S. Department of Justice, who sided with the family, were 'lying' when they said the district had changed its argument. Justice Amy Coney Barrett characterized the district's shift as 'a pretty big sea change,' while Jackson questioned whether the district was saying the ADA does not necessarily require accommodations for people with disabilities. In their concurring opinion, Sotomayor and Jackson noted that when they wrote the act, lawmakers addressed the question at the heart of the case head-on: 'Congress was not naïve to the insidious nature of disability discrimination when it enacted the ADA and Rehabilitation Act. It understood full well that discrimination against those with disabilities derives principally from 'apathetic attitudes rather than affirmative animus.' ' The decision comes at a time when disability protections have come under fire from the second Trump administration and a number of Republican governors. In October, motivated by new rules that said gender dysphoria could be considered a disability, 17 states sued the federal government. Gender dysphoria is the clinical term for distress caused when a person's gender does not match their sex assigned at birth. That suit, Texas vs. Kennedy, originally sought to have Section 504, the portion of the ADA that outlaws in-school discrimination, declared unconstitutional. The states have since dropped that demand from the suit but are still asking courts to overturn rules prohibiting discrimination in a wide array of public settings. Whether the states will continue to press the new, broader case in the face of Thursday's decision remains to be seen. For their part, disability advocates were quick to celebrate. The district's position was 'flatly inconsistent with the law and would have stripped millions of people with disabilities of the protections Congress put in place to prevent systemic discrimination,' said Shira Wakschlag, senior executive officer of legal advocacy and general counsel for The Arc of the United States, which submitted a brief on the issues. 'The very foundation of disability civil rights was on the line.'
Time of India
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
Mark Ruffalo joins Sian Heder's 'Being Heumann' as Joseph Califano
Actor Mark Ruffalo has been cast in the upcoming Apple Original Films feature 'Being Heumann,' directed by Sian Heder , known for her Oscar-winning film 'CODA.' According to the Hollywood Reporter, Ruffalo will play the role of Joseph Califano, opposite Ruth Madeley as disability rights activist Judy Heumann. 'Being Heumann' is based on Heumann's memoir of the same name and focuses on her leadership in a 28-day sit-in at the San Francisco Federal Building in 1977. The protest aimed to enforce Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, requiring accessibility for all federal spaces. Heder co-wrote the script with Rebekah Taussig, and Apple Studios, Permut Presentations, and The Walsh Company produced the film. Judy Heumann, who passed away in 2023 at 75, will receive an executive producer credit alongside Being Heumann co-author Kristen Joiner, Diana Pokorny, and Jim Lebrecht. Heder will also produce the film through her overall deal with Apple, as per The Hollywood Reporter. Ruffalo is a four-time Oscar-nominated actor who has recently appeared in films like 'Poor Things' and 'Mickey 17.' He will next be seen in the feature 'Crime 101,' opposite Chris Hemsworth and Halle Berry. Heder's previous collaboration with Apple includes directing the film 'CODA,' which won Oscars for best picture, best supporting actor for Troy Kotsur, and best adapted screenplay for Heder's script. She also executive-produced the series 'Little America.' (ANI)
