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
604 U.S. __ (2025), the U.S. The Court went on to find that background principles of corporate law support its holding. The post Supreme Court Rules Trademark Infringement Damages Include Only Named Defendants Profits appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. In Dewberry Group, Inc. Dewberry Engineers, Inc.,
604 U.S. _ (2025), the U.S. Finally, the Supreme Court found that the Courts reading is buttressed by historical context, as Rule 60(b) was modeled after a California statute previously interpreted to extend to voluntary dismissals without prejudice. In Waetzig v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. , The Courts decision was unanimous.
Simon , 604 U.S. _ (2025), the U.S. In support of its decision, the Court cited the FSIAs structure, history, and purpose of the statute, emphasizing that Court interprets the FSIA to avoid producing friction in international relations or inviting reciprocal actions against the United States in foreign courts. In Hungary v.
In its petition for certiorari, the agency argued that the fund relies on a constitutional delegation of congressional power because the relevant statute provides several intelligible principles to guide the FCCs actions when setting fees. Oral arguments are scheduled for March 26, 2025.
Sections 401 and 403 of the statute apply to offenses committed after the FSA’s enactment on December 21, 2018, and to “any offense that was committed before the date of enactmentif a sentence for the offense has not been imposed as of such date of enactment.” Thompson v. Please check back for updates.
Cornell University : The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) prohibits a plan fiduciary from engag[ing] in a transaction, if he knows or should know that such transaction constitutes a direct or indirect furnishing of goods, services, or facilities between the plan and a party in interest.
United States , 604 U.S. _ (2025), the U.S. Facts of the Case The federal statute at issue, Title 18 U.S.C. Delligattis indictment charged him with attempted murder under the violent-crimes-in-aid-of-racketeering (VICAR) statute, 1959(a)(5), which required proof that Delligatti had attempted second-degree murder under New York law.
United States: The supervised-release statute, 18 U.S.C. In that list, Congress omitted the factors set forth in section 3553(a)(2)(A) the need for the sentence to reflect the seriousness of the offense, promote respect for the law, and provide just punishment for the offense. Goertz , 598 U.S. 3583(e) , lists factors from 18 U.S.C.
VanDerStok , 604 U.S. _ (2025), the U.S. Instead, [the plaintiffs] burden is to show that the Rule itself is inconsistent with the statute on its face.’ The post Supreme Court Upholds Ghost Gun Regulation appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. In Bondi v. has two requirements. First, there must be a weapon.
On March 15, 2025, President issued Proclamation No. On March 15, 2025, the District Court for the District of Columbia issued two temporary restraining orders (TROs) preventing any removal of the named plaintiffs and preventing removal under the AEA of a provisionally certified class consisting of [a]ll noncitizens in U.S.
By Livia Solaro, PhD candidate at Maastricht University, working on the transnational restitution of Nazi-looted art On 21 February 2025, the US Supreme Court issued a ruling in Republic ofHungaryv.Simon , [1] a Holocaust restitution case with a lengthy procedural history. 277, 9 December 1948, [link] [accessed 29 April 2025]. [15]
In a series of recent decisions, federal courts across the United States have addressed a range of significant legal issues, from civil rights and constitutionallaw to administrative authority and criminal justice. Area of Law: ConstitutionalLaw, Civil Rights, Federal Authority: 25 points. Other Areas: 15 points.
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.
2025 NYC Rule of Law Rally 2025 by David Lat is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Thanks to excellent reporting from David Lat in his Substack newsletter Original Jurisdiction , we have a photo essay documenting the NYC Rally for the Rule of Law that makes you almost feel like you were there. And now for the headlines.
Biden appointed the most judges to the Second Circuit in 2021, to the Ninth in 2022, and even had one judge begin active service in 2025 ( Embry Kidd in the Eleventh Circuit). strict comparator requirements in discrimination claims), and uphold conservative interpretations of statutes (e.g., 1983), and qualified immunity.
However, the majority also offered key support for the Administration’s argument over presidential authority, writing “[c]hallenges to removal under the AEA, a statute which largely ‘preclude[s] judicial review,’ Ludecke v. S. , (2025) (JACKSON, J., Watkins, 335 U. 160, 163164, (1948), must be brought in habeas.”
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