This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The WGAD demanded Khan’s immediate release, claiming that his arrest was arbitrary and in violation of international law. Khan has been in jail since August 2023 and was convicted in some cases ahead of a Pakistan national election which took place in February 2024.
The book is particularly notable for its observation—citing Professor Robert McCorquodale—that FDL claims intersect with various fields of law, such as domestic criminallaw, tort law, contract law, human rights and constitutionallaw, comparative law, public international law, and private international law.
The question before the Court is: “Does the National Bank Act preempt the application of state escrow-interest laws to national banks?” The post SCOTUS Ends February Sitting With Oral Arguments in Six Cases appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. McIntosh v. Please check back for updates.
While none of the cases are considered “blockbusters,” the Court considered key issues related to employment, securities, healthcare, and white-collar criminallaw. The post SCOTUS Hears Oral Arguments in Four Cases appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. Last week, the justices heard oral arguments in four cases.
Moreover, PICA did not just regulate the rights of the people to defend themselves; it restricted that right, and in some cases, completely obliterated that right by criminalizing the purchase and the sale of more than 190 “arms.” Law enforcement and prosecutors should take their obligations to enforce these laws seriously.
The southern border in 2024 is, constitutionally, suffering no more an “invasion” than the Capitol riot in 2021 was an “insurrection.” There is a difference between the colloquial and constitutional meaning of such terms. However, “invasion” was clearly meant in the traditional sense of a foreign power or army.
Most recently, the left expressed nothing short of horror that Judge Cannon allowed the Trump team to argue a point of constitutionallaw in a hearing. So, yes, not only has the issue of whether the special counsel comports with the structures of constitutionallaw, that’s been settled.
The two graphs below track the Justices word counts across all argument in the 2023/2024 Term and those already completed in this 2024/2025 Term. The remainder of this piece proceeds by breaking down and comparing their argument styles across eight oral arguments, four from the 2023/2024 Term and four from the 2024/2025 Term.
With cliffs to the left and the right, the justices are looking at a free-fall dive into the scope of constitutional and criminallaw as they apply to presidential conduct. Alvin Bragg is the very personification of the danger immunity is meant to avoid. They may be looking not for a foothold as much as a shorter drop.
Trump potentially faces four major prosecutions in the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia and New York before the 2024 election. Trump and his co-defendants must stand trial for these allegations, but criminal cases are supposed to be tests of evidence, not of endurance or exposure. In Washington, U.S.
The political culture of short selling is nowhere more evident than in the “ballot-cleansing” efforts of Democratic officials and activists to remove Trump’s name from 2024 ballots as well as to remove primary opponents against Biden.
Donald Trump announced his 2024 run for the presidency on Nov. In his address he railed against what he perceived as the “persecution” of himself and his family, but made scant mention of his legal woes.
It will be difficult to get through a trial before the 2024 presidential election. The 2024 election could become a referendum on this case. Jonathan Turley, an attorney, constitutionallaw scholar and legal analyst, is the Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law at The George Washington University Law School.
He could wait to see if Biden does not run for reelection or loses in 2024. Hur can bring charges against third parties, who would not be barred from indictment under the DOJ policy. But what does Hur then do if he has evidence against the President himself?
United States , 603 U.S. _ (2024), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a former President is entitled to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. United States appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. In Trump v. Madison , 5 U.S.
Some Republican presidential candidates have stated already that they will (or would consider) pardons for Trump if they are elected in 2024. Jonathan Turley, an attorney, constitutionallaw scholar and legal analyst, is the Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law at The George Washington University Law School.
The court dismissed the “tawdry tales” offered by the DOJ and declared that it was far more concerned with the damage that Smith was causing to the legal system with his virtually limitless interpretation of criminality. Some of us have previously denounced the gag order issued by U.S. District Judge Tanya S.
Jonathan Turley, an attorney, constitutionallaw scholar and legal analyst, is the Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law at The George Washington University Law School. That is what is called a “happy ending” in Washington.
In the end, free speech should be vindicated but these lawsuits also could bring a type of legal vindication for Trump before the 2024 election. The complaints make sweeping and, in my view, reckless claims of liability for political expression. Here is the complaint: Blassingame v.
Here is the column: The 2024 presidential campaign technically began months ago with the first announced candidates. Those challenges will likely take some time to resolve, and if this case follows the customary schedule of criminal matters, it still may be pending when Americans go to the polls to select the next president in 2024.
Thus, the odds of Trump going to prison could well be the same as the odds of him or another Republican winning the 2024 presidential election. Jonathan Turley, an attorney, constitutionallaw scholar and legal analyst, is the Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law at The George Washington University Law School.
On the New Yorker map circa 2024, once you cross the Hudson River eastward, you enter a legal wilderness. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University School of Law. He is the author of “ The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage ” (Simon and Schuster, 2024). and Maurice C.
Here is the column: With the arraignment of Donald Trump in Miami, Department of Justice (DOJ) special counsel Jack Smith is pushing forward with a historic criminal prosecution that could result in a terminal prison sentence for the 76-year-old former president and, at least for now, the leading Republican candidate in the 2024 election.
However, relying on bad advice or bad law is not a crime. President Joe Biden, like his predecessors, has been accused of knowing disregard of statutory and constitutionallaw, including repeated losses before the Supreme Court. We have never criminalized such interpretations.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content