Court Decisions Lawyers Stare Decisis 
The Crime Report
MAY 18, 2021
That not only amounts to a reversal of a precedent set earlier by the Court, but is an “alarming” step back in protecting juveniles, say Arthur Ago and Rochelle Swartz of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. The court is fooling no one,”” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in her dissent. In Miller v.
Conflict of Laws
DECEMBER 17, 2020
The concepts addressed are Characterisation; Substance and Procedure; and of course, Renvoi which the authors wittingly recall has been described in the past as a subject loved by academics, hated by students and ignored by lawyers and judges. Nigerian lawyers with cross border practices will find these two chapters particularly helpful.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Conflict of Laws
MARCH 10, 2021
There are five comments that could be made about the Court of Appeal’s decision (Hussaini JCA) in A.B.U. 6] First, the Court of Appeal (Hussaini JCA) in A.B.U. 8] It should be stressed that Oputa JSC’s obiter dictum is not binding on lower courts according to the Nigerian common law doctrine of stare decisis.
SCOTUSBlog
MAY 20, 2022
Federal Trade Commission (which involves essentially the same issue for that agency’s administrative process) that the court seems likely to hear both together next fall. That will reunite former Solicitor General Paul Clement (Axon’s lawyer) with his former #2 Greg Garre (Cochran’s lawyer), who succeeded him in that post.
SCOTUSBlog
NOVEMBER 30, 2021
Against stare decisis. Many amici focus on the principle of stare decisis – and urge the court not to follow it in this case. They say Roe and Casey are not worthy of the deference that the court typically affords to its prior decisions. In favor of stare decisis. Legislative authority.
The Crime Report
NOVEMBER 19, 2021
I think people are aware of high-profile issues… what the Supreme Court does on abortion, gun rights, affirmative action, but my guess is that people don’t realize that there has been no Supreme Court decision since 1986, 35 years ago, about eyewitness identification. Or does stare decisis make it stuck as a precedent?
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
98 
Let's personalize your content