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
Under existing Court precedent, the statute has been interpreted to require that a defendant both engage in deception and have money or property as an object of his fraud. The Court next turned to Supreme Court cases interpreting the wire fraud statute. Citing Carpenter v. United States and Shaw v.
Under existing Court precedent, the statute has been interpreted to require that a defendant both engage in deception and have money or property as an object of his fraud. The Court next turned to Supreme Court cases interpreting the wire fraud statute. Citing Carpenter v. United States and Shaw v.
His career at the Justice Department spanned nine presidential administrations and coincided with remarkable changes in constitutionallaw and statutory interpretation. The Constitution as interpreted by the courts is very different today from what it was in the final years of the Carter administration.
The Court went on to find that background principles of corporate law support its holding. The post Supreme Court Rules Trademark Infringement Damages Include Only Named Defendants Profits appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. The justices left it to the lower courts to address any new theories.
Finally, the Supreme Court found that the Courts reading is buttressed by historical context, as Rule 60(b) was modeled after a California statute previously interpreted to extend to voluntary dismissals without prejudice.
According to the unanimous Court, because Mexico’s complaint did not plausibly allege that the gun manufacturers aided and abetted gun dealers’ unlawful sales of firearms to Mexican traffickers, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act barred the suit. The statute provides that a “qualified civil liability action.
All types of law offices, including prosecutors, defense attorneys, marital, occupational, and moreemploy paralegals to conduct critical aspects of their work. The program will prepare you for an entry-level position as a legal assistant in a number of areas of law.
We hold that this additional ‘background circumstances’ requirement is not consistent with Title VII’s text or our case law construing the statute,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote. The post SCOTUS Sides With Employee in Reverse Discrimination Case appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled that President Donald Trump violated federal law in firing Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel. The various inspector generals were also terminated and, at the time, some of us raised concerns over compliance with underlying federal statutes. Late Saturday, D.C.
This does not put [the Court] in the business of invalidating laws by reason of the evil motives of their authors." Accordingly, "[i]t is a familiar principle of constitutionallaw that [courts] will not strike down an otherwise constitutionalstatute on the basis of an alleged illicit legislative motive.
To protect such families in the future, a new law called the P’Nut Law has been introduced. Even though Peanut was a pet, he was still considered a wild animal in New York, both by statute and common law. ” Under Section 11-0512 of New York’s Environmental Conservation Law, 1.
Musk freezing the payouts violated the law. The one where the government follows the law and pays its bills to contractors who already did the work? Yet now hes stunned that a district court would enforce congressional appropriations law against executive impoundment. But which status quo? 78, at 525 (A. at 522; see id.,
In her opinion, Judge Talwani wrote: If their parole status is allowed to lapse, plaintiffs will be faced with two unfavorable options: continue following the law and leave the country on their own, or await removal proceedings. Parole is not a legal status under immigration laws. All of this presents another novel legal question.
Last year, the justices took a major step to weaken the power of administrative agencies when they overturned the Chevron doctrine, which significantly curtailed the power of agencies to interpret the laws they implement. Congress, the coalition asserts, has outlined the controlling general policies that are the basis for 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. Fontes , which involved election law and constitutional questions, and Foote v. Other Areas: 15 points.
” His point was that courts are skeptical of using minor provisions in a statute to achieve sweeping new legal changes. Jonathan Turley is a Fox News Media contributor and the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University.He Let’s start with the language.
note : Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson back to the pages of Above the Law. 2025 NYC Rule of Law Rally 2025 by David Lat is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. The rally was held on May 1, established as Law Day by President Dwight Eisenhower May 1, 1958, as a day of national dedication to the principles of government under law.
It is the minutiae that distinguish the rule of law from mere judicial impulse. She delivered a haymaker in writing that “JUSTICE JACKSON would do well to heed her own admonition: “[E]veryone, from the President on down, is bound by law.” Justice Barrett clearly had had enough with the self-aggrandizing rhetoric. ” N.B.:this
She challenges assumptions, pressing lawyers to grapple with broader systemic consequences and the lived experiences behind the law. Their exchanges in oral arguments offer more than just legal analysisthey reveal two distinct visions for how the law should function and who it should protect.
Andrew Leyden/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom) Stanford law professor, leading conservative constitutionallaw scholar, and former federal judge Michael McConnell has an excellent New York Times op ed on the cases challenging Trump's tariffs, and their significance. Is that right?
Facts of the Case The federal statute at issue, Title 18 U.S.C. Delligattis indictment charged him with attempted murder under the violent-crimes-in-aid-of-racketeering (VICAR) statute, 1959(a)(5), which required proof that Delligatti had attempted second-degree murder under New York law. 924(c)(3)(A). Castleman , 572 U.S.
In support, the Court cited the statute largely precludes judicial review. History is no stranger to such lawless regimes, but this Nations system of laws is designed to prevent, not enable, their rise. The post SCOTUS Rules Non-Citizens Must Challenge Removal Under Alien Enemies Act appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
But the law does not indicate what those services are. Instead, the law directs the task force to make that determination, and it requires its recommendations to be independent, and to the extent practicable, not subject to political pressure.
, 85 Southern California Law Review 1451, 1485-1487 (2012). But when it comes to the Seventh Amendment, 36 out of 37 State Constitutions in 1868, guaranteed the right to jury trials in all civil or common law cases. The civil jury has a long and distinguished history in Anglo-American law. of the U.S. 73,77 (1789).
And it upholds the law by concluding that the "strict scrutiny" test—which the Court generally uses to evaluate content-based restrictions on speech that falls outside the First Amendment exceptions—doesn't apply to such age verification rules. Humanitarian Law Project (2010). See Holder v.
The board members sought in their complaint declaratory relief, and alleging “Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act Not in Accordance with Law/In Excess of Statutory Authority, Violation of Separation of Powers/Ultra Vires Presidential Action, Violation of the Presentment, Appropriations, and Take Care Clauses.”
Brothers in Law is a recurring series by Professors Akhil and Vikram Amar. For more content from Akhil and Vikram, please see Akhil’s free weekly podcast, “ Amarica’s Constitution ,” and Vikram’s regular columns on Justia. Every justice takes an oath to support the Constitution itself as the supreme law of the land.
District court: No preliminary injunction on his First Amendment claim, but supplemental state law claims are likely to succeed. Second Circuit : Perhaps, but the state statutes are kind of unclear and new. Qualified immunity is the Veg-O-Matic of modern constitutionallaw—It slices! It kicks plaintiffs out of court!—but
Subscribe Δ NEXT: Another Boston Judge Enters Ex Parte TRO Hours After Filing, Without Any Time To Actually Read Filings Josh Blackman is a constitutionallaw professor at the South Texas College of Law Houston and the President of the Harlan Institute. Follow him @JoshMBlackman.
The German Constitutional Court on Tuesday ruled a law allowing double jeopardy in criminal cases where new evidence was available was unconstitutional. Originally, the law allowed four reasons for reopening a case: forgery of documents, false statements by a witness, judicial negligence or valid confessions post-trial.
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. United States v.
The US Supreme Court Thursday held that Social Security disability claimants are not bound by the issue-exhaustion requirement in administrative law judge (ALJ) hearings. Often, the requirement is mandated by statute. Writing for a 9-0 court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor concluded that although the Social Security claimants in Carr v.
Under § 2255, federal inmates can collaterally challenge their convictions on any ground cognizable on collateral review, with successive attacks limited to certain claims indicating “factual innocence” or relying on “constitutionallaw decisions made retroactive” by the Supreme Court. Cochran is.
By a vote of 8-1, the Court held that to plead facts sufficient to support a domestic application of the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. Where the statute does not apply extraterritorially, plaintiffs must establish that “the conduct relevant to the statute’s focus occurred in the United States. Facts of the Case.
2401(a) ’s default six-year statute of limitations until the plaintiff is injured by final agency action. The complaint challenged Regulation II on the ground that it allows higher interchange fees than the statute permits. 2401(a), the default six-year statute of limitations applicable to suits against the United States.
Facts of the Case As the Court explained in its opinion, Federal and state law distinguish between two kinds of payments to public officials—bribes and gratuities. While American law generally treats bribes as inherently corrupt and unlawful, the law’s treatment of gratuities is more nuanced,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh explained.
Supreme Court narrowed the scope of a federal aggravated identity theft statute. Section 1028A(a)(1) applies when a defendant, “during and in relation to any [predicate offense, such as healthcare fraud], knowingly transfers, possesses, or uses, without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person.” In Durbin v.
The overwhelming majority of those books, though, analyze the work of the court interpreting the Constitution. The court’s other task — interpreting federal statutes — remains markedly underrepresented. Other justices who preceded Powell on the court could claim an expertise in securities law.
To leave the decision unreviewed would force Congress to revise substantially the affected portions of the securities laws solely based on the opinion of one divided lower court panel – hence, the Supreme Court’s buffet of constitutionallaw topics on Wednesday morning.
Danielle Smith, who took office as the new Premier of the western Canadian province of Alberta in October, said Saturday that her government is considering revising the provisions of the proposed provincial Sovereignty Act which would empower the provincial cabinet to unilaterally rewrite laws without legislative approval.
As Justice Alito noted in his opinion, the presumption against extraterritoriality is a “longstanding principle of American law that legislation of Congress, unless a contrary intent appears, is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”
Supreme Court upheld a federal law that prohibits individuals subject to a domestic violence restraining order from possessing a gun. 922(g)(8) , a federal statute that prohibits individuals subject to a domestic violence restraining order from possessing a firearm. In United States v. Rahimi , 602 U.S. _ (2024), the U.S.
By a vote of 6-3, the Court held that Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether a federal agency has acted within its statutory authority, and courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous.
A federal judge has temporarily blocked a new Tennessee law limiting drag shows on constitutional grounds. Putting that concern aside, I have serious free speech concerns over the reach of these laws. Federal district judge Thomas Parker granted an injunction on the ground that the Tennessee law is vague and overly broad.
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