The global outbreak of World Cup fever rages on as the highly anticipated and widely followed sporting event progresses into the next stage. Currently in the midst of the competition, goals, saves, controversial calls, and perhaps even more controversial player antics, take center stage. However, throughout the lead up to this World Cup, before the matches began, an interesting legal battle unfolded as tensions emerged between strictly-enforced FIFA law and host country Brazil’s constitutional law.
During the summer months, thousands of college students and recent graduates flock to companies and organizations for internships in the hopes of bolstering their resumes. About half of these positions do not offer the students any compensation.
A divided Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the government can strictly enforce a ban on purchasing a firearm for someone else, even if the other individual is lawfully allowed to own a gun. Regardless of whether or not the other person is entitled to have a gun, this type of transaction is known as a “straw purchase” and conflicts with the lawfulness of a gun sale. Because a gun purchase requires personal information, photo identification, and a background check, buying a gun with the intention of selling it to another person is a misrepresentation of the identity of the actual gun owner.
The confusion surrounding the status of unspent IRAs that parents leave to their children has finally been cleared up, following a unanimous Supreme Court decision. The Court ruled this week that inherited Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) are not shielded from creditors throughout bankruptcy proceedings. Typically, bankruptcy law protects retirement assets from being eaten up by creditors after filing, but inherited IRAs differ because the money can be accessed before the new owner actually retires.