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
Supreme Court has agreed to consider a closely watched Louisiana redistricting dispute involving a map that created a second majority-Black congressional district in the state. The two cases, Louisiana v. Callais and Robinson v. In the first round of redistricting litigation, Robinson, et al v.
Supreme Court ruled that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to challenge a Biden Administration immigration enforcement policy. According to the eight-member majority, “federal courts are generally not the proper forum for resolving claims that the Executive Branch should make more arrests or bring more prosecutions.”
Louisiana , the U.S. District Courts in Louisiana and Kentucky agreed with the plaintiffs and preliminarily enjoined enforcement of the rule in the plaintiff States. In Department of Education v.
Having lived through Dred Scott , he was deeply conscious of how mistakes by the court could lead to terrible outcomes. Comparing courtdecisions with which he disagreed to Dred Scott was almost a reflexive tactic of his. In the Civil Rights Cases , he attacked the idea that Black people had been special favorites of the law.
In a series of recent decisions, federal courts across the United States have addressed a range of significant legal issues, from civil rights and constitutionallaw to administrative authority and criminal justice. Area of Law: ConstitutionalLaw, Civil Rights, Federal Authority: 25 points.
For instance, the National Right to Life Committee and the Louisiana Right to Life Federation argue that the court should reject the “categorical viability line” and replace it with a new “roadmap” under which courts would consider all state interests when analyzing the constitutionality of prohibitions on pre-viability elective abortions.
The intermediate appellate court held that the defendant was not entitled to present the defense because he had “reasonable legal alternatives” to trespass and obstruction even if those alternatives were not effective. States Moved for Preliminary Injunction in Social Cost of Carbon Lawsuit in Louisiana. Louisiana v.
That world is already taking shape with states crafting their laws reflecting the values of their citizens from Colorado passing a law protecting the right to abortion up to the moment of birth to Louisiana banning all abortions except in limited circumstances. Thus, we remain deeply divided. The process just might surprise us.
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