American elections are quite an exciting spectacle. Campaigns run for months or even years before election day. Television and print advertising sensationalize candidates and smear opponents.
The defeat of two incumbent supreme court justices has led some to consider making changes to the judicial election process. Neither justices’ qualifications were called into question, and both received higher ratings from the state bar association than did their challengers—one of whom was “not recommended.”
While the landmark decision of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), opened the door to unlimited corporate spending independent of candidates, it also opened the door to unlimited debate over the appropriate balance between freedom of speech and the disclosure of who is funding groups that are making independent expenditures or participating in issue advocacy.
Right there with employment, privacy law stands as one of the most interesting and most-discussed areas of law during President Barack Obama’s first term in office. Though we saw a lot of action, not all of it is attributable to the President, and the same may hold true during Obama’s second term. Joining me now to offer his thoughts on what the realm of privacy law will look like over the coming years—at both the federal and state level—is the Chair of Littler‘s Privacy and Data Protection Practice Group, Philip Gordon, author on their Workplace Privacy Counsel blog.
In the wake of last week’s re-election of President Obama and a Republican House majority, Americans are left with many questions: What is this “fiscal cliff” I keep hearing about? What are my responsibilities under Obamacare? Is there really a possibility of comprehensive immigration reform?
“You are pretending you are in New York, and we are pretending we are voting. Sigh! What a dream.” @I鸭梨山大 I have used the sub-title ‘A Hypothetical Election Between Nationalists And Communists Hits The Chinese Web’ because the title, ‘Electoral Map: What If China Became a Multiparty Democracy Tomorrow?’is a little misleading.
Elections have consequences. What are the consequences of the 2012 election on U.S. federal privacy, data security and breach notice legislation? We outline some key developments in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate and explain how these developments might affect legislative priorities and prospects for the 113th Congress beginning in 2013.
Obama Reelected: the Department of Labor Wants to Know if You Are Taking Steps to Comply with Healthcare Reform
With the reelection of President Obama, it is clear that employers should be preparing to comply with all of the applicable provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (the “Affordable Care Act”).
If Election 2012 showed us anything, it’s that immigration is a monumental issue for both parties to take on. In looking at the demographics that supported Obama and their reasons for doing so, some have looked at the his victory as a mandate for serious immigration reform. At the same time, it’s become the GOP most alter their stance on immigration if they’re going to appeal to a rapidly changing electorate. Joining me to discuss both these issues is Seyfarth Shaw attorney Angelo Paparelli, author of Nation of Immigrators.
The 2012 elections are over. And it is time to assess the implications for privacy and cybersecurity in Washington and beyond. With the continuation of a divided government — a Democrat in the White House, Republicans in control of the House, and Democrats in control of the Senate – for the next two years, many think the country in general is in for “more of the same” when it comes to politics, public policy and lawmaking.