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
Paralegals cannot appear in court on behalf of a client. This is a pretty simple rule to adhere to; paralegals are not recognized in most courts. However, this is not always the case, as a limited number of administrativelawcourts may allow paralegal client representation in special cases. Disciplinary Counsel v.
An important development occurred yesterday evening in both the OSHA and CMS vaccine mandate cases pending before the Supreme Court. The Court took the very rare step of scheduling a special hearing for both sets of cases. Suffice to say, it is exceedingly rare for the Court to hear oral argument on stay applications.
Latty Distinguished Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center for Innovation Policy at Duke Law In a flurry of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has continued its skepticism of administrative agencies. Consider first stare decisis and the Court’s overruling of Chevron deference (i.e. Guest post by Arti K.
Share This week we highlight cert petitions (and one original action ) that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, whether New Jersey can withdraw from its Waterfront Commission Compact with New York concerning governance and law enforcement over the Port of New York and New Jersey. In New York v. However, the U.S.
Share Ohio Adjutant General’s Department v. Federal Labor Relations Authority , which the Supreme Court will hear on Monday, involves the collective-bargaining rights of “dual status” military technicians who work in the Ohio National Guard. The Guard defends against the FLRA charges on jurisdictional grounds.
Improving justice system outcomes has long been considered the responsibility of judges, probation, jail administrators, law enforcement, and other justice-system stakeholders. Cuyahoga County, Ohio. Tara Kunkel. The ten sites involved in this initiative are: Albemarle County and the City of Charlottesville, Va.
The bar section is filled with quite a few lawyers who will be sworn in to the Supreme Court Bar after the day’s opinions, including the California Lawyers Association Taxation Section with an especially well-timed visit. Such letters are a tradition at the court for newly retired members. Federal Labor Relations Authority.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit that found the funding mechanism for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unconstitutional. To enforce these laws, Congress created the SEC. Diaz-Rodriguez v.
International Trade Commission on March 29, 2022, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Apeks, LLC of Johnstown, Ohio. International Trade Commission gave notice that on April 4, 2022, the presiding administrativelaw judge (“ALJ”) issued a Final Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337.
Share The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Tuesday in a clash over whether a North Carolina-based company can challenge the Food and Drug Administrations denial of its application to market e-cigarettes in the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, based in Louisiana. The company, R.J.
Koblitz & JP Ellison — Back in July, the United States Supreme Court turned the world of administrativelaw on its head, adding new layers of judicial oversight to what might have previously been thought of as fairly non-descript Federal agency functions. One of those cases was Loper Bright v. Corner Post v.
Share The Supreme Court will again weigh the executive branch’s authority to set immigration policy as some red states claim that the Biden administration’s enforcement decisions are too lax. The justices will hear the case in late November without waiting for a federal appeals court to weigh in. In a filing by U.S.
The OMB memorandum was immediately challenged in multiple lawsuits, temporarily stayed by two federal district courts, and then rescinded. This may be due in part to the fact that the underlying Executive Order still stands, and in part to the governments failure to comply with the court orders. In State of New York v.
Criminologically speaking, how does a schism exist between his 2024 supporters who believe in Trump’s persecution by the state and those who oppose the habitually corrupt former president’s third run for POTUS as Trump continues to provoke violence in violation of court orders not to?
(Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images) Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, once celebrated as a stalwart conservative and a crowning achievement of the Trump presidency, now finds herself under fire from the very base that championed her confirmation. Her recent vote in Department of State v. Lets unpack the data.
Court of International Trade (CIT) The U.S. An Ohio-based supplier of aircraft parts and three employees were charged for an illicit export scheme involving Russia. A FMC administrativelaw judge ordered Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) to pay $16 million in civil penalties for violating U.S. shipping laws.
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