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 court addressed concerns from victim’s families by stating that their desire for justice was not an appropriate reason for the legislature to broaden statutory framework in order to obtain “substantively more correct justice.”
The Indian Supreme Courtruled on Wednesday that women can sit for the NDA (National Defence Academy) admission exam in a landmark interim order which will allow more women to serve in India’s armed forces.
He claimed the interpretation of articles 1 and 19 of the Treaty on European Union are inconsistent with the Constitution. Filipek, a specialist at the Faculty of ConstitutionalLaw, represented the opposite side and defended the constitutionality of the EU law.
“Circuit Scoop: January 2025; January 2025 brought pivotal federal appeals courtrulings that challenge agency power, shape business regulations, and influence constitutionallaw, with long-lasting effects on future legal battles.”
As Justice Kagan noted, All we hold today is that the courts below were wrong to treat Dewberry Group and its affiliates as a single entity in calculating the defendants profits. The justices left it to the lower courts to address any new theories.
The US Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal from the South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism (SCDPR) challenging a lower courtruling that found the state had waived sovereign immunity by participating in a federal antitrust lawsuit against Google.
As Justice Breyer explained, the first requirement produces an incentive to lie, while the second requirement introduces a new standard into search and seizure law and creates a problem of interpretation that will arise frequently given the prevalence of non-Indians in Indian reservations.
The Tunisian Workers’ Union and the Tunisian Association of ConstitutionalLaw criticized the ISIE decision to reject a courtruling that reinstated three presidential candidates. The ISIE has also barred 14 candidates from running in upcoming elections.
After the Amendment took effect on January 1, 2018, Circuit City, a US chain of electronics retail stores, refused to pay the increased fees and brought suit in the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, claiming that the 2017 Amendment, which creates nonuniform bankruptcy laws, was unconstitutional.
The justices remanded the case back to the lower court to consider the latter argument. The post US Supreme CourtRules Germany Entitled to State Immunity in the Nazi Art Case appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
The ability of the court to review parliamentary decisions is a key feature of UK constitutionallaw and ensures one body does not hold too much power, thereby protecting the rule of law. This comes after the UK Supreme Courtruled in November 2023 that the Rwanda policy was unlawful.
The post Divided CourtRules CA Donor Disclosure Rules Violate First Amendment appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. She added: “Regulated entities who wish to avoid their obligations can do so by vaguely waving toward First Amendment ‘privacy concerns.’”.
Yesterday the Knesset’s constitution, law, and justice committee scheduled votes on two bills. One will change the committee’s structure for the appointment of Supreme Court justices, giving politicians control over the committee.
S. _ (2021), the Supreme Courtruled that the Federal Tort Claims Act barred college student James King’s claims of police brutality. The Court unanimously held that the district court’s dismissal of King’s claims under the FTCA triggered the “judgment bar” in 28 U.S.C. In Brownback v.
Heller , the Supreme Court in 2008 ruled the right to bear arms is an individual right. City of Chicago , the courtruled that this right applied against the states. Since then, courts have rejected efforts to limit aspects of gun ownership from barring concealed weapons to restricting ammunition.
The crossed-out language is what will be removed from the constitution if Proposal 2 is adopted. According to the author of Proposal 2, Vermont constitutionallaw professor Peter Teachout, the amendment makes no change to substantive rights. Evidence lies in both the constitutional language and judicial precedent.
The post Supreme CourtRules Bribery Statute Doesn’t Criminalize Gratuities for Past Acts appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. “The bribery statute for federal officials, §201(b), uses the term ‘corruptly.’ But the gratuities statute for federal officials, §201(c), does not.”
Applying the regulatory approach used in the “free-world” has significant advantages over constitutionallaw in mitigating abusive conditions in prisons and jails, according to a paper published in the Yale Law Journal. Constitutionallaw does not fill the gap,” Littman writes. “[It
The post Supreme CourtRules Federal Agencies Can Be Sued Under Fair Credit Reporting Act appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. “Both provisions thus exempt government agencies from the Act’s otherwise-broad definition of ‘person’ for particular reasons in particular contexts,” he emphasized.
“This interpretation quite sensibly gives federal courts at each level primary discretion over costs relating to their own proceedings.”. The post SCOTUS Rules District Courts Can’t Second Guess Appellate Courts’ Ruling on Costs appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
The post Divided CourtRules U.S. Railroad Retirement Board Decision Subject to Judicial Review appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. “Because the Board’s decision below did not determine any right or liability, the RRA does not provide for judicial review.”.
If Georgia Gwinnett College wanted to foster greater unity in its use of “free speech zones,” it succeeded in prompting a near unanimous Supreme Court in ruling against it in favor of free speech this week.
The Courtruled that these allegations did not amount to race-based discrimination under Title VII and the law “does not protect free speech in a private workplace.”It It is a problem faced by other companies with other political expressions.
I previously wrote about the latest New York gun law passed after the Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Suddaby issued a temporary restraining order against a substantial part of the law, including barring the provisions previously discussed as presumptively unconstitutional.
There is an interesting ruling this week out of New York where a federal court has ruled in favor of a conservative student group alleging that the State University of New York at Binghamton has engaged in a pattern of censorship of conservative speakers and events. We previously discussed the controversy.
“Expansion of the jury trial right would constitute a meaningful structural reform in democratizing criminal justice, at a time when such change is needed to establish the popular legitimacy of the criminal justice system,” writes J.D. King in a paper published in the University of Pennsylvania Journal of ConstitutionalLaw.
We previously discussed concerns over free speech on the campus of the University of North Texas, including the canceling of an event on child gender transitioning. Students and faculty were not content to protest such events but acted to prevent others from hearing opposing views.
We have been discussing the state laws requiring contractors and employees to swear that they do not support the the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (“BDS”) movement against Israel. I have long maintained that the law is unconstitutional as a limitation of free speech and associational rights.
Ironically, the United States Supreme Court made that plain in an important Wisconsin case argued just the day before the state election. The case is Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission. Catholic Charities is one of the world’s oldest and most respected charities.
In a 5-4 decision, the court dismissed the suit and upheld the current policy that only medical professionals can give tattoos. Upholding this decision, the court characterized tattooing as an invasive procedure that raises important safety concerns.
Many observers are waiting for the United States Supreme Court to decide whether to delve again into college admissions with a pending case out of Harvard University in which Asian and white students claim discrimination. We have been following that case for a couple years.
In 1984, the Supreme Courtruled in Chevron U.S.A. Natural Resources Defense Council that judges should defer to the reasonable interpretation of agencies in administering ambiguous federal laws. However, the courtruled that “the Service’s interpretation of the Act as allowing it to do so is reasonable.”
In analyzing the two essential elements of an FCA violation — the falsity of the claim and the defendant’s knowledge of the claim’s falsity — the District Courtruled against SuperValu on the falsity element. The Supreme Court remanded the case back to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals for further proceedings.
Supreme Courtruled that public officials may be held liable for their social media activity in certain circumstances. The District Court found that because Freed managed his Facebook page in his private capacity, and because only state action can give rise to liability under §1983, Lindke’s claim failed. In Lindke v.
Supreme Courtruled that the National Rifle Association (NRA) may continue its First Amendment lawsuit against the former head of New York’s Department of Financial Services. The Supreme Court remanded the case back to the Second Circuit to evaluate the NRA’s claims in accordance with its opinion.
Moreover, the courtruled that it would not matter: “Minnesota states that from the founding, states have had the power to regulate guns in the hands of irresponsible or dangerous groups, such as 18 to 20year-olds.
Gore , the 2000 case that halted the recount in Florida in the presidential election, then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote a concurring opinion (joined by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas) in which he explained that, in his view, the state court’s recount conflicted with the deadlines set by the state legislature for the election.
On February 8, 2022, the Chamber of Deputies of the Italian Republic gave its final approval to the proposed constitutionallaw A.C.3156-B 3156-B providing environmental protection amendments to Articles 9 and 41 of the Italian Constitution. By Riccardo Luporini, Matteo Fermeglia, and Maria Antonia Tigre. In Neubauer, et al.
Supreme Courtruled in Tandon v. Accordingly, the Court granted an injunction pending disposition of the appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The post Divided Court Strikes Down COVID-19 Restrictions on In-Home Religious Gatherings appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
In the final decision of the Supreme Court before its summer break, Chief Justice John Roberts delivered a major ruling striking down the California law requiring the disclosure of donors for charities.
The post Canada Supreme Courtrules mandatory minimum sentencing for child luring unconstitutional appeared first on JURIST - News. She iterated that Parliament has the autonomy to prioritise denunciation and deterrence, as long as it does not completely exclude rehabilitation.
In 2008, the Supreme Court recognized the right to bear arms as an individual right in District of Columbia v. City of Chicago , the courtruled that this right applied against the states. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f) Two years after Heller, in McDonald v. This case concerned concealed-carry restrictions under N.Y.
In an unanimous 6-0 ruling, the Michigan Supreme Court held that her office committed a fatal and inexplicable error in prosecuting nine officials for the Flint water crisis, including former Gov. Rick Snyder. Now the cases have been tossed out.
The District Courtruled that all class members had Article III standing on each of the three statutory claims. The post Supreme Court Limits Standing for Class-Action Suits Under FCRA appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
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