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
Study finds Supreme Court on far right of American public (Kelsey Reichmann, Courthouse News Service). Arizona prisoner asks Supreme Court to delay his execution (Jacques Billeaud, Associated Press). How states are preparing for a Supreme Courtdecision that could overturn Roe v. Bromwich, The New York Times).
Share Two men on Arizona’s death row are not entitled to present new evidence in federal court to support their arguments that their trial lawyers bungled their cases, the Supreme Courtruled Monday in a 6-3 decision. In an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court sided with Arizona. “[O]nly
Share Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Wednesday morning read: Supreme CourtRules on Tribal Police and Immigrants’ Testimony (Adam Liptak, The New York Times). billion cancer case award (Robert Barnes, The Washington Post).
To recap the issue in the two cases: A 1996 statute, the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, bars federal courts from holding evidentiary hearings in habeas corpus cases if a prisoner “has failed to develop the factual basis of a claim in State court [post-conviction] proceedings.” The question raised in Shinn v.
In a 2-1 panel decision, the court also found that the was overly broad. In so ruling, the appellate court reversed a January 2019 district courtdecision. Courts in Arizona , Kansas and Texas have also ruled against these laws. There are good-faith objections to the BDS movement.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit handed down a decision in California Restaurant Association v. The court overturned a District Courtruling to invalidate a Berkeley, California, prohibition on natural gas infrastructure in newly-constructed buildings. O n Monday, April 17, 2023, the U.S. City of Berkeley.
A team of researchers from Arizona State University and John Jay College of Criminal Justice recently received a federal grant to study 1,000 911 calls. But when prosecutors cross the line and intentionally circumvent courtrules for evidence standards, he said, that’s cause for concern.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) Tuesday filed a lawsuit against the state of Arizona over an election law that requires state residents to provide proof of citizenship in order to vote in presidential and other federal elections. House Bill 2492 was signed by Arizona Governor Doug Ducey in March. Inter Tribal Council, Inc.
The appellate court also found that even if the trial court erred, the error was harmless because the State proved both acts beyond a reasonable doubt. Hawaii CourtRuled that Commercial Aquarium Fishing Required Environmental Review. Zepeda , No. 80593-2-I (Wash.
US law student and undergraduate delegates passed four proposed amendments Sunday at the first-ever Model Constitutional Convention hosted by Arizona State University (ASU) Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. This followed two days of discussion and deliberation in Phoenix, Arizona. New London.
Federal Court Barred Timber Management in Arizona National Forests Pending New Jeopardy Analysis for Mexican Spotted Owl but Upheld Climate Change Analysis. The federal district court for the District of Arizona enjoined the U.S. The case was argued before the High Court on January 22, 2019. 97182-0 (Wash.
They contended that it would seem to follow from Apprendi that a jury must find any facts necessary to support a (nonzero) restitution order, and they suggested that the court should take up a lower courtruling to the contrary. Judicial factfinding for restitution Under Apprendi v. 13 and Jan. 10 conferences.)
Below is my column in the Hill on overheated rhetoric of revolution that seems to have overtaken our public discourse, particularly with regard to the Supreme Court. This week, Arizona Democrats pushed a “ F–k the Fourth Event” and told people to “Bring comfortable shoes, water, lawn chairs, posters, and your anger.”
DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district courtdecision that vacated the listing of the Arctic ringed seal as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). 22, 2018; consolidated ruling Jan. Arizona Board of Regents , No. order setting schedule Mar. judgment Feb.
Additionally, cases that reversed lower courtdecisions or set new legal precedents were considered more significant. Case Outcome: Reversal of Lower CourtDecision: 5 points. Affirmation of Lower CourtDecision: 2 points. Area of Law: Constitutional Law, Civil Rights, Federal Authority: 25 points.
Washington Supreme Court Said Climate Activist Was Entitled to Present Necessity Defense Based on Evidence that Legal Alternatives Were Not “Truly Reasonable”. The Ninth Circuit declined to remand with instructions for dismissal of the underlying action and also declined to vacate any district courtdecisions. United States.
The threat to the free press is obvious and was the basis for foundational courtdecisions. The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision over 50 years ago in New York Times v. Like “disinformation,” it is heavily laden with subjectivity.
The latest example of which was on July 1, 2021 when the Supreme Court decided Brnovich (which had been consolidated with Arizona Republican Party v. The Supreme Court did not even tackle the 15th Amendment arguments and rather ruled on a crabbed statutory interpretation of the Voting Rights Act.
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