Constitutional Law Ohio Statute 
Constitutional Law Reporter
MARCH 5, 2024
One of the most closely watched is Ohio v. Ohio, Indiana, and West Virginia filed suit, arguing that EPA’s rulemaking process circumvented the Clean Air Act’s cooperative-federalism mandate by forcing its own top-down control over state-level air-pollution reduction, and moved to stay the federal plan pending judicial review.
Constitutional Law Reporter
JANUARY 26, 2023
The Ohio Adjutant General’s Department v. Federal Labor Relations Authority: The case stems from a collective-bargaining dispute between the Ohio National Guard and the union that represents its technicians. The post SCOTUS Kicks Off February Session With Four Cases appeared first on Constitutional Law Reporter.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Constitutional Law Reporter
AUGUST 28, 2023
According to the Court, such laws do not offend the Constitution’s Due Process Clause. Facts of the Case Robert Mallory worked for Norfolk Southern as a freight-car mechanic for nearly 20 years, first in Ohio, then in Virginia. After he left the company, Mallory moved to Pennsylvania for a period before returning to Virginia.
Constitutional Law Reporter
SEPTEMBER 3, 2024
However, the Court remanded the cases back to the lower courts after concluding that neither court properly analyzed “the facial First Amendment challenges” to the laws. Facts of the Case In 2021, Florida and Texas enacted statutes regulating large social-media companies and other internet platforms. Citing Zauderer v.
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 15, 2022
Share Under established constitutional law, states may generally not tax or regulate property or operations of the federal government. A 1936 federal law waives federal immunity from state workers’ compensation laws on federal land and projects. This principle is known as intergovernmental immunity. Washington.
JonathanTurley
JUNE 17, 2022
The Court wrote that “[s] ince the statute does not specify the elements of “attempt to kill,” they are those required for an “attempt” at common law, … which include a specific intent to commit the unlawful act. ” . Indeed, such a claim would contradict controlling Supreme Court precedent.
JonathanTurley
APRIL 2, 2022
Judge Carter notes that Eastman still believes that the statute is unconstitutional as written. The court simply brushes that aside and states the “ignorance of the law is no excuse” and “believing the Electoral Count Act was unconstitutional did not give President Trump license to violate it.”.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content