Case Still Not Closed on ‘Nipplegate’ Incident
Legal battles famously have a way of dragging on, but in the case of the ongoing tussle over Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" during the 2004 Super Bowl, it's getting a little ridiculous. Yes, that was six years ago. No, the involved parties are not done with their various attempts at fining and appealing said fines.
Legal battles famously have a way of dragging on, but in the case of the ongoing tussle over Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction” during the 2004 Super Bowl, it’s getting a little ridiculous. Yes, that was six years ago. No, the involved parties are not done with their various attempts at fining and appealing said fines. –KA
Rooted in Truth.Broadcasting & Cable:
Oral argument has been set for Feb. 23 in the Third Circuit court of appeals re-hearing of the $550,000 indecency fine against CBS-owned stations for the 2004 Janet Jackson/Justin Timberlake Super Bowl reveal.
That is according to an attorney who received the notice from the court.
Argument is slated for 1:30 p.m., with 30 minutes per side, which is a lot of time as these arguments go, according to veterans of the process.
“The Third Circuit does longer arguments,” said an attorney for one of the parties backing broadcasters, “but this is a lot even for them. “The order shows that the court takes this case seriously.”
Independent by Design.
Your support helps ensure that rigorous reporting, thoughtful analysis, and investigative journalism remain accessible to everyone.
Support independent journalism.
Ear to the Ground
The Wikileaks founder may be near the end of his long battle to avoid U.S. extradition.
In a case likely to affect others, the corporate giant is told to pay $572 million after state says it misstated drug's effects out of greed.
At issue is money approved by Congress for the Pentagon that was diverted during the national emergency. Two high-priority projects are halted.
A tale of justice delayed and denied, Bobby Joe Maxwell's case exposes a fatal flaw in our court system.
Matthew Charles, although he committed no new crime, is back behind bars, and his case is generating a widespread demand for his release.
Despite the rejection, lawyers for the WikiLeaks founder say they are encouraged by the judges' 4-1 split, which may indicate that the court will change its decision.
You need to be a supporter to comment.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.