List of All Articles with Tag 'on'

Friday night’s MLB action has some interesting pitchers on the mound, and I’m fading a few of them – one with an earned runs prop and two with a Yes Run First Inning pick.Plus, a familiar face returns to the MLB props column for yet another strikeout prop.Let’s dive i...

The Los Angeles Angels and Arizona Diamondbacks have both lost two straight games as they begin their weekend series on Friday night.Arizona has been one of the bigger surprises in Major League Baseball, sitting atop the NL West through the halfway point of the season. Los Angeles, on the other ...

Connor Bedard is going to work with the Chicago Blackhawks

Brazil's highest electoral court formed a majority to ban former President of Brazil Jair Bolsonaro from running for office until 2030 on Friday on charges alleging that he abused his political power and misused of public resources.

Chelsea have announced the signing of striker Nicolas Jackson from Villarreal. The Senegal striker has penned a long-term contract at Stamford Bridge.

A Christian website designer in Colorado did not want to provide her services to same-sex couples, potentially running afoul of state law that prohibits public-facing businesses from discriminating against LGBT+ people. The designer didn’t have any same-sex clients. She didn’t receive any requests from gay couples to work on their wedding websites. But in her legal challenge, supported by an influential right-wing legal group that backed a lawsuit ending Roe v Wade, she argued that Colorado’s law infringed on her First Amendment rights. In its final day of its current term, the US Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority agreed, potentially endangering already vulnerable rights of LGBT+ Americans and state governments’ abilities to protect them. But a crucial piece of evidence in the case appears to have been fabricated. A man who is named throughout the case, and whose phone number and email address were attached in court filings, claims he has nothing to do with it. In 2016, Lorie Smith claimed in filings that a man named “Stewart” contacted her website to help with his upcoming wedding to a person named “Mike”: “We are getting married early next year and would love some design work done for our invites, placenames etc. We might also stretch to a website.” The New Republic found “Stewart”. He said he is straight, married to a woman, and never contacted Ms Smith. His alleged request for services came within 24 hours after Ms Smith first filed her lawsuit in state court. “If somebody’s pulled my information, as some kind of supporting information or documentation, somebody’s falsified that,” he explained to The New Republic. “I’m married, I have a child – I’m not really sure where that came from? But somebody’s using false information in a Supreme Court filing document.” It remains unclear, even after the Supreme Court’s decision, how and why he is involved. In a statement to The Independent, attorneys for Ms Smith dismissed his reaction and claimed that the service request was genuine. A spokesperson for Colorado’s attorney general pointed to earlier claims that there was no proof that it was. Meanwhile, the statements “Stewart” claims to never have made, and arguments from attorneys who use his name and alleged statements, remain printed across several court documents. In a motion filed by attorneys for Colorado in 2016 to dismiss the case, they pointed out that Ms Smith had never received any request for services and had no standing to sue. A response from the Alliance Defending Freedom, the conservative Christian group representing Ms Smith, asserted that it was not necessary to have received any such inquiry before challenging state law. Months later, in February 2017, in an effort to bolster their challenge to state law, attorneys for the group said that Ms Smith received an inquiry, weeks before Colorado attorneys asked to dismiss the case. “Notably, any claim that Lorie will never receive a request to create a custom website celebrating a same-sex ceremony is no longer legitimate because Lorie has received such a request,” according to the filing. Later that year, following a court ruling in Colorado’s favour, the group mentioned “Stewart” and “Mike” in a press release. In a December 2021 filing with the Supreme Court, attorneys for Colorado responded to the alleged request again, noting that the inquiry “was not a request for a website at all, but just a response to an online form asking about ‘invites’ and ‘place-names,’ with a statement that the person ‘might also stretch to a website.’” The Alliance Defending Freedom fired back in a reply brief, once again mentioning a request that may not even exist: “Colorado’s claim – that a request from ‘Mike’ and ‘Stewart’ for a wedding website does not reflect a same-sex wedding request – blinks reality.” The Independent asked representatives for the Alliance Defending Freedom how “Stewart” became involved with the case. Senior counsel Kellie Fiedorek said The New Republic’s findings are a “last-minute attempt to malign Lorie [that] smacks of desperation to delegitimize her civil rights case and our judicial system.” “It’s undisputed that Lorie received this request through her website. She doesn’t do background checks on incoming requests to determine if the person submitting it is genuine,” she added. “Whether Lorie received a legitimate request or whether someone lied to her is irrelevant. No one should have to wait to be punished by the government to challenge an unjust law.” A spokesperson for the office of Colorado’s attorney general did not have a comment prior to the ruling but pointed The Independent to its brief with the Supreme Court noting that Ms Smith did not take “any steps to verify that a genuine prospective customer submitted the form.” The Supreme Court’s decision is a blow to LGBT+ advocates who fear the case could open the door for rollbacks to discrimination protections, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor noting that the ruling comes in the middle of a wave of state laws targeting LGBT+ people. “This case cannot be understood outside of the context in which it arises,” she wrote in her dissent. “In that context, the outcome is even more distressing. … In this pivotal moment, the Court had an opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to equality on behalf of all members of society, including LGBT people. It does not do so.” A statement from Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBT+ civil rights organization, said the court’s decision “is a dangerous step backward, giving some businesses the power to discriminate against people simply because of who we are.” President Joe Biden, noting the decision’s arrival on the final day of Pride Month, said he is “deeply concerned that the decision could invite more discrimination” against LGBT+ Americans. “More broadly, today’s decision weakens long-standing laws that protect all Americans against discrimination in public accommodations – including people of color, people with disabilities, people of faith, and women,” he added. Read More Supreme Court allows Colorado designer to deny LGBT+ customers in ruling on last day of Pride Month The Supreme Court just made me a second-class citizen ‘It’s hard on our family’: For these lawmakers with trans children, Republican attacks are personal

Byju’s and some of its lenders have restarted negotiations in a bid to restructure its $1.2 billion term

By Daniel Wiessner The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to decide whether workers can bring discrimination lawsuits

Twitter appears to be restricting access to its platform for anyone not logged into an account.

By Daniel Wiessner The U.S. Supreme Court ruling striking down race-conscious policies in college admissions includes some warnings

Max Verstappen accused Formula One’s referee of making the sport’s superstars look like “amateurs” in qualifying for the Austrian Grand Prix. Verstappen put his Red Bull on pole position for Sunday’s 71-lap race in Spielberg after he saw off a late flurry from Ferrari’s Charles Leclerc. Carlos Sainz starts third in the other scarlet car ahead of Lando Norris and Lewis Hamilton who qualified fourth and fifth respectively. Verstappen’s Red Bull team-mate Sergio Perez finished only 15th after all three of his laps in Q2 were deleted for exceeding track limits. Verstappen also had four runs scrubbed off by the stewards for putting his Red Bull over the white lines. In all, an extraordinary 47 laps were deleted by race director Niels Wittich. “This is a joke,” said Verstappen over the radio. “Honestly, with these track limits, f****** ridiculous.” Verstappen managed to fend off Leclerc by just 0.048 sec, but moments after he stepped out of his Red Bull, the Dutch driver took aim at Wittich’s refereeing. “Today, it was very silly,” he said. “It made us look like amateurs with the amount of laps that were being deleted and some of them were so marginal. “We spoke about it in the briefing before, and when it is very marginal, it is impossible to judge if the car is out or in, and yet laps were still getting deleted. It was not a good look today. “People will say, ‘you should have kept the car in the white lines’. If it was that easy, you can take my car and try it, but you probably wouldn’t get up to speed in time.” A Remote Operation Centre in Geneva consisting of six officials – FIA’s answer to football’s VAR system – flag up contentious laps to Race Control at the circuit using various camera angles. Wittich then has the final say. It is understood that if the laps in question are marginal, Wittich will lean in favour of the driver. But Verstappen continued: “We don’t do this on purpose. With these speeds and the high-speed corners it is so hard to judge where the white line is and that is why a lot of people got caught out. “My first lap in Q3 was just a banker lap which takes out the joy. Today showed that it is not easy to have a clear rule about it.” Despite the row, reigning world champion Verstappen will be favourite to take his seventh victory from the nine rounds so far this season and extend his 69-point championship lead over struggling team-mate Perez. Behind the Dutchman, Norris impressed to take fourth spot in his revamped McLaren, one place ahead of Hamilton who finished 0.428 sec adrift of Verstappen. The Red Bull Ring is hosting F1’s second sprint event of the year with a shortened qualifying and race to follow on Saturday before Sunday’s main event. “Our car has not suited this circuit in the past and it showed again today,” said Hamilton. “It was a really tough and difficult session but we got through it, thank God. “We will try to do better in sprint qualifying tomorrow, and then fifth on Sunday is a strong position to start from.” Hamilton’s Mercedes team-mate George Russell managed only 11th on a disappointing afternoon for the Briton. Read More Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Lewis Hamilton calls for change, claiming new rule would ensure a ‘real race’ ‘Happy’ Lewis Hamilton still hungry for record eighth world title – Damon Hill Horner details what makes ‘mega talent’ Verstappen so special

President Nicolas Maduro’s quest to gain control of roughly $2 billion in Venezuelan gold held in the UK