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
At its weekly conference yesterday, the Supreme Courtruled on only 76 matters, 59 if you don’t count disposals of previous grant-and-hold cases. But there were notable actions, including: Felony murder resentencing. Taking yet another Senate Bill 1437 case, the court agreed to decide People v.
Instead, it has trapped healthcare providers between a rock and a hard place—uncertain over when they can provide abortion care and fearful that they could face punishment if they do. We have seen how these laws have wreaked havoc on people’s lives across the country, and are urging the court to put a stop to these harms.
Burke dismissed the government’s motion without prejudice, noting that a stay may be appropriate if the Eleventh Circuit or Supreme Court take up these cases. This case had already made its way up to the Eleventh Circuit when the courtruled that the ban could go into effect.
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit to lift those orders while they appealed. The court of appeals refused, instead expediting argument. By a split vote, the 6th Circuit then reversed the lower courts’ rulings , concluding that the states were likely to win their appeals. The court thus allowed the laws go into effect.
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