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
“Courts Strike Down Gun Control Measures in Two States; The rulings in Maryland and Oregon come amid a shifting legal landscape in the wake of a Supreme Courtdecision that has imposed new limits on gun regulation”: David W. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit at this link.
The justices once again did not act on several high-profile petitions for review, including a challenge to Marylands ban on military assault-style weapons and Rhode Islands ban on large-capacity magazines. The announcement that the court had granted review in Barrett v. In March 2024, the Supreme Court threw out a ruling by the U.S.
The state trial court rejected that motion, and he was convicted. In his dissent from the denial of review, Thomas castigated the 6th Circuit for failing to give the state appeals courtsdecision the kind of substantial deference it deserved under the federal law governing state prisoners requests for post-conviction relief.
Share In its first opinion of the 2023-24 term in an argued case, the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning threw out a dispute over whether a self-appointed “civil rights tester” has a legal right to file a lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act alleging that a hotel had failed to provide information about its accessibility on its website.
Koblitz — You know a courtdecision is going to be worth reading when the judges compare FDA’s regulatory governance of flavored e-cigarettes to a Shakespearean gaslighting. FDA originally set the PMTA deadline as August 8, 2022, but a district court in Maryland ordered FDA to shorten it. By David B.
In total, at least 25 cases have been filed in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai’i, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Vermont. The Supreme Court sided with the fossil fuel company defendants, ruling that appellate courts could review all grounds of the remand order.
The case was currently pending before the Fourth Circuit after a federal district court in Maryland held that Maryland law preempted the local law. Federal Court in Washington Upheld Forest Restoration Plan. The federal district court for the Eastern District of Washington upheld the U.S. Williams , No.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district courtdecision that vacated the listing of the Beringia distinct population segment (DPS) of the Pacific bearded seal subspecies as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Energy & Environment Legal Institute v. Alaska Oil & Gas Association v.
The majority responded to this latter point by saying that “[t]he dissent’s view is akin to saying that incurring a debt has legal consequences, but forgiving one does not. The Second Circuit also distinguished the Connecticut program from a Maryland regulatory scheme that the U.S. Supreme Court determined was preempted in Hughes v.
The 1991 Supreme Court ruling in Payne v. Subsequent courtdecisions have muddied the legal waters on VIS. Two years later, the court reversed Booth , but failed to clarify precisely what the capital jury is to make of victims’ emotional losses. In Booth v.
To begin with the unhappy news (at least for petitioners), the court denied review without comment in one-time relist Kelly v. Animal Legal Defense Fund , involving the constitutionality of a Kansas statute criminalizing trespass by deception at animal facilities with intent to damage the enterprise. rescheduled before the Jan.
Both are legal titans who defeated a string of worthy contenders to reach the championship. But only one can be chosen by SCOTUSblog readers as the greatest justice in the court’s history. Ask any constitutional law student to name the most iconic Supreme Courtdecision, and they’ll probably answer Marbury v.
” Similarly, the report pointed to several courtdecisions that support the usage of the sort of surveillance programs used by the BPD. But while the courts upheld many cases involving police surveillance, the instances were specific. The study says the City Council should make most of the decisions.
1988 ; and (2) whether a party must obtain an enduring change in the parties’ legal relationship from a judicial act, as opposed to a non-judicial event that moots the case, to prevail under Section 1988.” Maryland and Napue v.
Share The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral argument in the case of a civil rights tester who searches the internet to find hotels whose websites do not provide information about the accessibility of their facilities, as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. A federal trial judge threw out Laufer’s case. But the U.S.
Appleseed Center for Law and Justice: “Smith was heartened, however, that the ruling the Supreme Court affirmed mentioned that Congress could legally grant voting rights to D.C., ” However, again, the Court makes repeated reference to the bar on non-state residents in voting. It is a recurring problem.
The court of appeals, it explained, rejected Andrews claim because, it thought, no holding of this Court established a general rule that the erroneous admission of prejudicial evidence could violate due process. That was wrong, the court concluded.
It was all part of an absurd claim (fostered by liberal legal experts) that Barrett was appointed to kill the ACA. Yet, there is virtually no mention of Jackson’s position on an advisory board for the now-defunct Montrose Christian School in Rockville, Maryland.
Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, by a 2-1 vote, held that conclusion was not unreasonable. Whatley argues that the Georgia Supreme Court unreasonably applied federal law when, in considering whether he was prejudiced, it failed to give weight to Supreme Courtdecisions holding that shackling is inherently prejudicial.
Respondent Greg Walters counters that the case self-evidently involves federal issues and a parallel case before the same trial judge has already been confirmed, making this case a bad vehicle because the questioned legal rule is unlikely to have affected the outcome. We’ll have a better idea next Monday whether the court agrees.
A Supreme Courtdecision Thursday upending a century-old New York State gun licensing restriction has been called a major blow to state gun control interventions across the country. The Court released its opinion in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v.
Minnesota Supreme Court Declined to Review Claims Regarding Environmental Review for Oil Pipeline. The Minnesota Supreme Court denied petitions for further review of an appellate courtdecision finding all but one aspect of the environmental review for the Enbridge Line 3 oil pipeline project to be adequate.
Robertss 2023 report discussed the legal profession and the role of artificial intelligence. His 2022 report , in the aftermath of the courtsdecision overturning the constitutional right to abortion, stressed the importance of judicial security.
But in response to legal challenges, Congress amended the law in 2022 to give the FTC the power to make changes to the authoritys rules. A group of states brought suit in a federal district court in Kentucky, challenging the constitutionality of the HISA and its funding mechanism. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit affirmed.
Where an agency cites a different source of purported authority to directly target a specific awardee, another source of legal relief may need to be found. Pursuant to the Clean Air Act and the 2007 Supreme Courtdecision in Massachusetts v. But in each of these cases, only the agencies non-individualized actions are covered.
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. District Court Stayed Briefing of Motion to Remand in Annapolis’s Climate Case.
The district court found the analysis of greenhouse gas and climate change impacts to be adequate but remanded for consideration of alternatives that did not involve leasing all nominated parcels. The conservation groups’ appeal of the district courtdecision is still pending, with the opening brief due on July 12. BP p.l.c. ,
The states argued that the Supreme Court’s stay of the Clean Power Plan while it was under review by the D.C. Circuit in 2016 signaled that the legal framework for the Clean Power Plan “hinges on important issues of federal that EPA then—and the court below now—got so wrong this Court was likely to grant review.”
Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a challenge to license renewals for the Turkey Point nuclear generating station in Florida as “incurably premature.” The court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction because administrative appeals that raised the same legal issues were still pending before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Washington Supreme Court Said Climate Activist Was Entitled to Present Necessity Defense Based on Evidence that Legal Alternatives Were Not “Truly Reasonable”. The Ninth Circuit declined to remand with instructions for dismissal of the underlying action and also declined to vacate any district courtdecisions.
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.
100 
Let's personalize your content