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
The survivors and families of the victims joined in a lawsuit against the US government, alleging negligence under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act due to the government’s failure to prevent Kelley from purchasing a firearm despite his prior felony convictions.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, two involve cases in which the court called for the views of the solicitor general, thus indicating (since it takes the vote of four justices to CVSG ) that there was already a high level of interest among the justices in the case. Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc. trademarks. 14 and Oct. Khorrami v.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. Kentucky , the Supreme Courtruled that it is unconstitutional to strike jurors in a criminal trial because of their race. A list of all petitions we’re watching is available here. United States and Rita v.
Colorado Civil Rights Commission (relisted 14 times). As a statistical matter , a case that the Supreme Court repeatedly relists is more likely to be the subject of an opinion respecting denial or — where existing precedent is clear — a summary reversal or vacatur. relisted after the Feb. United States , 20-7617.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a West Virginia federal district court had erred in concluding that it had jurisdiction to consider the coal company Murray Energy Corporation’s and its affiliates’ lawsuit that sought to compel EPA to conduct evaluations of the Clean Air Act’s employment effects.
Share This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, a potential replacement for the now-dismissed Servotronics Inc. Oklahoma should apply retroactively, and whether the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act violates a website designer’s First Amendment rights. In last year’s McGirt v.
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.
In 1977, the Supreme Courtruled in Trans World Airlines v. The court agreed on Friday to review the case of Gerald Groff, a Christian and U.S. Hardison that the “undue hardship” standard is met whenever the accommodation would require more than a trivial or minimal cost. Counterman v.
on four felony counts relating to efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Trump’s lawyers have also indicated that they plan to ask the Supreme Court to review a decision by the Colorado Supreme Court that bars the Colorado secretary of state from listing Trump on the state’s presidential primary ballot.
Colorado, the Supreme Courtruled that criminal threats must be based on a showing of a culpable mental state. Threatening or intimidating pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 1 or 2 is a class 1 misdemeanor, except that it is a class 6 felony if: 1. It is now the bona fides of every Democratic prosecutor.
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