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
I first stumbled on 911 call analysis while reporting on a police department in northern Louisiana. When they hear it,” a prosecutor in Louisiana once told Harpster, “it will be like a Dr. Phil ‘a-ha’ moment.” On it, Harpster has openly espoused misogynistic, transphobic, Islamophobic and anti-immigrant views. I was wrong.
Supreme Court ruled that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to challenge a Biden Administration immigration enforcement policy. According to the eight-member majority, “federal courts are generally not the proper forum for resolving claims that the Executive Branch should make more arrests or bring more prosecutions.”
A Louisiana judge rejected President Joe Biden’s push to end Title 42, which restricted access of would-be asylum seekers to the U.S. The Mexican Supreme Courtdecision came after immigration officers arrested three Indigenous Mexican migrants – all under the age of 24 – for how they looked, dressed, and their minimal Spanish use.
Share The Supreme Court will hear arguments early next year in the latest chapter in a protracted dispute over race and redistricting in Louisiana. Alabama had asked the justices to reverse an appeals courtdecision that lifted Smith’s death sentence. Louisiana v. The court also granted a third case, Riley v.
Here is a full list of the cases set for argument during the March argument session: Louisiana v. Callais ) (March 24) A challenge to a lower courtsdecision to strike down a map that created a second majority-Black congressional district in the state. Callais (consolidated with Robinson v.
Yet his record is not unblemished: He distrusted immigrants from China and even voted to deny citizenship to their U.S.-born Having lived through Dred Scott , he was deeply conscious of how mistakes by the court could lead to terrible outcomes. Harlan’s moral vision is memorialized in his lone dissent in Plessy v. born children.
DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district courtdecision that vacated the listing of the Arctic ringed seal as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Louisiana Federal Court Halted Work on Crude Oil Pipeline in Swamp Area. order setting schedule Mar.
Ninth Circuit Affirmed Rejection of NEPA Challenges to Immigration Policies. The plaintiffs—identified as environmentalists, environmental groups, natural resource conservation groups, and cattle ranchers—alleged, among other things, that the immigration actions resulted in increased greenhouse gas emissions. Louisiana v.
For instance, the National Right to Life Committee and the Louisiana Right to Life Federation argue that the court should reject the “categorical viability line” and replace it with a new “roadmap” under which courts would consider all state interests when analyzing the constitutionality of prohibitions on pre-viability elective abortions.
DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. Parties Voluntarily Dismissed Appeals of Federal CourtDecision Requiring More Climate Change Analysis for Wyoming Oil and Gas Leases. Louisiana v. Wyoming Asked Court to Restart Federal Oil and Gas Leasing; Federal Defendants Sought to Move Louisiana Case to Wyoming. Louisiana v.
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