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
Share Tired of reading jargon-filled law review articles with hundreds of footnotes? The perfect antidote is Painting ConstitutionalLaw: Xavier Cortada’s Images of Constitutional Rights , edited by Professors M.C. Cortada’s painting reminds us that Gideon’s petition started a constitutional debate that is still ongoing.
The justices recently granted certiorari in two cases challenging state laws that restrict social media companies’ ability to moderate content on their platforms. The key issue before the Court is whether the Texas and Floridalaws violate the First Amendment. Facts of the Cases The two cases before the Court, Moody v.
Supreme Court unanimously held that the Constitution permits the retrial of a defendant following a trial in an improper venue conducted before a jury drawn from the wrong district. Facts of the Case Timothy Smith was indicted in the Northern District of Florida for theft of trade secrets from a website owned by StrikeLines.
Supreme Court unanimously held that the Constitution permits the retrial of a defendant following a trial in an improper venue conducted before a jury drawn from the wrong district. Facts of the Case Timothy Smith was indicted in the Northern District of Florida for theft of trade secrets from a website owned by StrikeLines.
The Florida case has been referred to that state’s highest court for an advisory ruling on the state of the state’s law on the issue, and earlier this week, the same thing happened in California.
In Florida, Smith unwisely loaded up the prosecution with controversial charges on the retention of classified material. It not only triggered difficult challenges but slowed the case to a crawl as the parties dealt with classification laws. His overloaded criminal complaints created this disaster for his team.
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