Weekly News Update

weekly-news *News of a study’s finding that nearly 75% of Americans are solidly behind allowing cameras in the Supreme Court of the United States has not stopped many from resisting the idea. [Washington Post]

*The NYC’s new program, covering all eligible low-income immigrant city residents, is the first of its kind in the nation. Proponents say it has helped highlight a serious issue about the lack of legal representation in the immigration system and is helping address the backlogs and delays that result when immigrants without attorneys try to make their way through the system. [NBC New York]

*The first year of enrollment under the federal health care law was marred by the troubled start of HealthCare.gov, rampant confusion among consumers and a steep learning curve for insurers and government officials alike. But insurance executives and managers of the online marketplaces are already girding for the coming open enrollment period, saying they fear it could be even more difficult than the last. [NY Times]

*Many attorneys and judges have recently opted to go paperless, using iPads and PDFs instead of paper documents. While there are many positives to being ahead of the technology curve, there can also be negative aspects. The following article displays the drawbacks as experienced by a Federal Judge of the Second Circuit–Judge Richard Wesley. [Above the Law]

*A federal judge officially approved New York City’s $41 million settlement with the Central Park Five, bringing to an end a decades-long legal battle for the five men wrongfully convicted in a high-profile sexual assault case in 1990. [Huffington Post]

*Around 25 people with apartments listed on the online accommodation-sharing website Airbnb are suing the company to prevent what they claim is a breach of their privacy. [TIME]

*Business owners were howling last week over a federal appeals court decision that appears to open the door for Yelp to base its reviews on whether a business advertises with the online reviewer. While Yelp denies ever basing a review on whether it receives advertising revenue from the business — and the court did not find any evidence of such a practice — the court said it is perfectly okay if the company traded advertising for better reviews. [New York Post]

*Across the country, a growing body of legal decisions and local rulings are coming out against artists, particularly in the case of public art. And when the artist loses, the works—some of them long-standing, beautiful or neighborhood favorites—are often removed immediately or destroyed. [New York Observer]