The fight over legalized sports gambling in New Jersey returned to a federal appeals court Tuesday, where attorneys for the state and the country's major sports leagues spent nearly an hour parsing language in a decades-old federal statute and in recent court rulings.
At issue: Whether a 2014 New Jersey law repealing prohibitions against sports gambling violates the 1992 federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, which says states cannot "sponsor, operate, advertise, promote, license or authorize" sports betting.
A good portion of Tuesday's oral arguments before the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals focused on the meaning of the word "authorize," and whether New Jersey did that when Gov. Chris Christie signed the law striking the betting prohibitions.
Attorneys from both sides endured sharp questioning from the court, which heard a previous incarnation of the case in 2013. In the ruling that followed that argument, the court said New Jersey couldn't be prevented from repealing its sports gambling laws. The state seized on that language to write its 2014 law.
Egypt's official news agency says a criminal court has sentenced 14 people, including the leader of the country's banned Muslim Brotherhood, to death.
The Giza Criminal Court issued its decision on Monday, however the court set an April 11 date to formally issue the ruling after consulting with the country's grand mufti; the mufti reviews all death penalty cases, but his ruling is not binding.
The case is rooted in violence that swept the country after the military-led ouster of Islamist President Mohammed Morsi, whose supporters set up large protest encampments in Cairo.
Security forces violently ended the sit-ins, killing hundreds. In retaliation, many police stations and churches came under attack by alleged Morsi supporters. The court convicted Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohammed Badie and 13 others of orchestrating the violence.
A judge scrapped the Netherlands' data retention law Wednesday, saying that while it helps solve crimes it also breaches the privacy of telephone and Internet users.
The ruling by a judge in The Hague followed a similar decision in April by the European Union's top court that wiped out EU data collection legislation it deemed too broad and offering too few privacy safeguards.
The Security and Justice Ministry said it was considering an appeal.
Under the Dutch law, telephone companies were required to store information about all fixed and mobile phone calls for a year. Internet providers had to store information on their clients' Internet use for six months.
The written judgment by Judge G.P. van Ham conceded that scrapping the data storage "could have far-reaching consequences for investigating and prosecuting crimes" but added that this could not justify the privacy breaches the law entails.
The judge did not set a deadline for disposing of the data.
Privacy First, one of the organizations that took the government to court, said the ruling "will bring to an end years of massive privacy breaches" in the Netherlands.
The government said after last year's European court ruling that it would amend its law.
The government is taking the nation's biggest satellite TV provider to court, accusing DirecTV of misleading millions of consumers about the cost of its programming.
The Federal Trade Commission said Wednesday that its complaint charges DirecTV Inc. with deceptively advertising a discounted 12-month programming package. Consumers weren't clearly told that the package requires a two-year contract, the commission said.
The advertising, the FTC said, did not make clear that the cost of the package would increase by up to $45 more per month in the second year and that hefty early cancellation fees — up to $480 — would apply. The allegations of deceptive advertising date back to 2007 and cover more recent marketing campaigns, such as one in late 2014 that offered the company's subscription service on a limited basis for "only $19.99" a month.