Remove Court Decisions Remove Court Rules Remove South Carolina
article thumbnail

Supreme Court declines South Carolina agency appeal in Google antitrust case

JURIST

The US Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal from the South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism (SCDPR) challenging a lower court ruling that found the state had waived sovereign immunity by participating in a federal antitrust lawsuit against Google.

Court 129
article thumbnail

South Carolina to carry out first firing squad execution in 15 years

JURIST

South Carolina is set to carry out the first execution by firing squad in 15 years. The US Supreme Court denies Friday the emergency petition to stay clears the way for the state to carry out the death penalty. The post South Carolina to carry out first firing squad execution in 15 years appeared first on JURIST - News.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Court weighs Louisiana redistricting with second majority-Black district

SCOTUSBlog

Several of the courts conservative justices expressed skepticism about the map and about whether the 2022 ruling on which Louisiana relied to justify the creation of a second majority-Black district in the state was actually correct, but it was unclear whether those concerns would be enough to uphold the lower courts ruling.

Court 132
article thumbnail

Supreme Court considers South Carolina’s effort to strip Planned Parenthood of Medicaid funding

SCOTUSBlog

Share The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Wednesday in a case that, at first glance, appears to involve only a technical interpretation of the federal Medicaid Act. Edwards and Planned Parenthood went to federal court in South Carolina. The Supreme Court, it says, has made clear that this is a stringent test.

Court 135
article thumbnail

June 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

Justice Sotomayor dissented, writing that she believed the Court’s interpretation would allow defendants to “sidestep” the general bar on appellate review by “shoehorning” a civil rights or federal officer removal argument into their case for removal. They seek a court decision setting aside government approvals of the power plant.

Court 45