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
After a few slow weeks on the relist front, the Supreme Court came roaring back this week with four newly relisted petitions that, if granted, will likely be added to the March 2023 argument calendar. District courts have discretion to impose either consecutive or concurrent sentences unless a statute mandates otherwise.
Colorado , 600 U.S. _ (2023), the U.S. Supreme Court held that to establish that a statement is a “true threat” unprotected by the First Amendment, the state must prove that the defendant had some subjective understanding of the statements’ threatening nature, based on a showing no more demanding than recklessness. In Counterman v.
also a Navajo Nation citizen, on the Ute Mountain Ute Indian Reservation, which is located in Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah. How is it possible that the sentence rendered by the Court of Indian Offenses was dramatically less severe than the sentence rendered in federal court? Code of Federal Regulations.
Circuit also rejected EPA’s argument that the court did not have authority to review stays issued under Section 307(d)(7)(D) of the Clean Air Act. The Second Circuit said the Connecticut statutes authorizing the solicitations did not compel utilities to enter into contracts with specific bidders. ADDITION TO THE NON-U.S.
The federal district court for the District of Columbia granted BLM’s and federal officials’ motion for voluntary remand without vacatur of claims that they failed to comply with NEPA in connection with 27 oil and gas leasing decisions across Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, and Montana between September 2016 and March 2019.
Supreme Court held that the First Amendment prohibits Colorado from forcing a website designer to create expressive designs speaking messages with which the designer disagrees. Ultimately, the district court held that Smith was not entitled to the injunction she sought. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed.
We’ll see if the court is persuaded. Elenis , 21-476 , presenting a recurring question the court first confronted in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. Moving on to potential blockbusters that don’t explicitly call on the court to overrule precedent. Then there’s 303 Creative LLC v. They invoke Rapanos v.
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled Thursday that a federal statute requiring people to be 21 to purchase handguns from Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) conflicts with previous Supreme Courtdecisions and the Second Amendment.
While the Supreme Court routinely throws out lower-courtdecisions granting prisoners habeas relief, its fairly uncommon for the justices to summarily grant relief to habeas petitioners. City of Carbondale, Illinois , 24-57 Issue: Whether this Court should overrule Hill v. Relisted after the Nov. 10 and Jan. 10 and Jan.
1442, or the civil-rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C. The district court rejected eight grounds for removal, but the Fourth Circuit concluded its appellate jurisdiction was limited to determining whether the companies properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore , No.
Colorado Federal Court Remanded Local Governments’ Climate Case to State Court. District Court Rejected Climate Change Arguments in Challenge to Listing Determination for Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout. The federal district court for the District of Colorado rejected arguments that the U.S. Rhode Island v.
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed , holding that because a federal agency now has the final say over how the private horse-racing authority implements the federal statute, the amended law did not impermissibly delegate authority to a private entity. In a one-paragraph order, the justices granted the authoritys request.
A series of Supreme Courtdecisions have weighed in on the 1971 laws campaign-spending rules. Valeo , the court struck down the limits on independent expenditures but generally upheld the limits on contributions. A quarter-century later, in 2001, the court in FEC v. In its landmark 1976 ruling in Buckley v.
1442, or the civil-rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C. The district court rejected eight grounds for removal, but the Fourth Circuit concluded its appellate jurisdiction was limited to determining whether the companies properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. Chevron Corp. County of San Mateo , No.
Supreme Court held that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals erred when it concluded that its review of the remand order in Baltimore’s climate change case against fossil fuel companies was limited to determining whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute.
The Court held that the provision used “extension” in its “temporal sense,” but that the statute did not impose a “continuity requirement” and instead allowed small refineries to apply for hardship extensions “at any time.” In re Enbridge Energy, LP , Nos.
In a series of recent decisions, federal courts across the United States have addressed a range of significant legal issues, from civil rights and constitutional law to administrative authority and criminal justice. Additionally, cases that reversed lower courtdecisions or set new legal precedents were considered more significant.
After the developers terminated the Keystone XL pipeline project, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on July 16, 2021 dismissed for lack of jurisdiction an appeal of the district court’s denial of a motion for a preliminary injunction barring work on the pipeline. The cases were filed in 2016 , 2020 , and 2021.
Circuit majority opinion’s interpretation was foreclosed by the statute and violated separation of powers. The states argued that the Supreme Court’s stay of the Clean Power Plan while it was under review by the D.C. DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. The court found that both parties were entitled to intervene as of right.
In Minnesota, the district court granted the State of Minnesota’s motion to remand its case, which asserts state law claims under common law and consumer protection statutes. s consumer protection statute. On March 26, 2021, the court denied Exxon’s emergency motion for a temporary stay of the remand order. 20-1026 (D.C.
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