SCOTUSBlog
JUNE 28, 2024
Under that doctrine, if Congress has not directly addressed the question at the center of a dispute, a court was required to uphold the agency’s interpretation of the statute as long as it was reasonable. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.) This article was originally published at Howe on the Court.
SCOTUSBlog
JANUARY 16, 2022
Four of them – the 2nd, 5th, 6th, and District of Columbia Circuits – have answered in the affirmative. In support of this argument, the museum points to both the text of the statute and the circumstances of its enactment: Congress removed foreign states from ordinary diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Does Klaxon apply?
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
DECEMBER 11, 2020
The federal district court for the District of Columbia ruled that the U.S. The companies filed their brief on November 16, arguing that the Fourth Circuit erred by concluding that it was limited to reviewing removal based on the federal-officer removal statute. FEATURED CASE. Bernhardt , No. 4:16-cv-00615 (N.D.
SCOTUSBlog
MARCH 30, 2022
Kavanaugh said it would be “bizarre” to allow suits against states under the Family and Medical Leave Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, among others, but not under statutes enacted pursuant to Congress’ war powers, “where the national interest is at its apex as compared to those other areas.” It is likely that, as in Alden v.
SCOTUSBlog
JUNE 20, 2024
Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit held that as a former employee, Stanley lacked a cause of action under the ADA. City of Naperville, Illinois , 23-880 Issues : (1) Whether the state of Illinois’ ban of certain handguns is constitutional in light of the holding in District of Columbia v. In Stanley v. Kentucky ex rel.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
NOVEMBER 16, 2020
The First Circuit—like the Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits in other climate change cases—concluded that the scope of its appellate review was limited to whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. District of Columbia v. Exxon Mobil Corp. , 1:20-cv-01932 (D.D.C.): Delaware v.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
JANUARY 13, 2021
On December 22, 2020, the federal district court for the District of Columbia issued an order pursuant to the All Writs Act temporarily enjoining any ground-disturbing work undertaken pursuant to the anticipated approval by the U.S. 1442, or the civil-rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
145 
Let's personalize your content