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
Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, dissented , calling the independent-state-legislature theory “an exceptionally important and recurring question of constitutionallaw” and indicating that “further review of the judgment below may be warranted once a petition for a writ of certiorari is filed.”
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. The court’s securities law docket ballooned during Powell’s tenure – from approximately 1.5
The referral shows how such ambiguous statutes undermine free speech. (d) Conduct arising from posting the message causes the victim to suffer emotional distress and to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.”. All four criteria must be met.
In the 2003 decision, the Court ruled that the University of MichiganLaw School’s race-sensitive admissions program was narrowly tailored because the consideration of race was merely one factor in the decision-making process and individualized consideration was given to each applicant. . Bollinger , 539 U.S. 306 (2003).
Facts of the Case Petitioner Miguel Luna Perez (Perez), who is deaf, attended schools in Michigan’s Sturgis Public School District (Sturgis) from ages 9 through 20. The post SCOTUS Sides With Deaf Student in ADA Suit appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
In 2014, Freed updated his Facebook page to reflect his position as city manager of Port Huron, Michigan. The post Supreme Court Clarifies When Public Officials Can Be held Liable for Social Media Activity appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
Likewise, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals this month affirmed such a preliminary injunction against Western Michigan University. The issue reached the Supreme Court this week when health workers challenged a similar law in Maine allowing for medical but not religious exemptions.
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. Nessel then restarted the prosecutions anew but ignored statutes that clearly do not allow the use of a single judge to issue indictments.
the outcomes in Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania were worryingly close.”. This proposal would decouple voting rights from cases and statutes designed to protect the equality of voting. Yet in the end, Joe Biden was elected by a sizable number electoral votes. t is ours, too. It must be ours.”.
Now, the Michigan Attorney General and others are suggesting that Republicans who oppose certification or even meet with President Donald Trump on the issue could be criminally investigated or charged. Chief Justice John Roberts eviscerated what he called the “boundless interpretation of the federal bribery statute.” McNally, 483 U.
Most recently, the left expressed nothing short of horror that Judge Cannon allowed the Trump team to argue a point of constitutionallaw in a hearing. This is a novel and intriguing constitutional objection that is based on the text of the Constitution, which requires that high-ranking executive officers like U.S.
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