Remove Court Rules Remove Felony Remove Massachusetts Remove Statute
article thumbnail

US Supreme Court rules states lack constitutional standing in key immigration case

JURIST

The US Supreme Court ruled Friday in US v. The crux of the case rests on Article III of the US Constitution, which governs the Court’s judicial purview. The US District Court Southern District of Texas ruled in favor of the states, enjoining Homeland Security from enforcing the memorandum.

article thumbnail

The first relists of October Term 2022

SCOTUSBlog

McDonough , a case that the court already rescheduled seven times last term, and which involves the construction of a statute providing disability pay for members of the military. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, by a divided vote , deferred to the Department of Veterans Affairs construction of the statute under Chevron U.S.A.,

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

First Amendment questions and California arbitration battles

SCOTUSBlog

Rollins challenges a Massachusetts law that makes it a felony to secretly record the speech of anyone other than a law enforcement officer, irrespective of motive. Two petitions ask the justices to take up novel First Amendment issues. Project Veritas Action Fund v. Project Veritas Action Fund v.

Felony 133
article thumbnail

July 2017 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

Circuit also rejected EPA’s argument that the court did not have authority to review stays issued under Section 307(d)(7)(D) of the Clean Air Act. The district court ruled that EPA was required to conduct such evaluations in October 2016 and set an expedited schedule for EPA’s compliance.

Court 40
article thumbnail

October 2019 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The federal district court for the District of South Dakota temporarily enjoined enforcement of provisions of a riot boosting statute enacted in South Dakota in 2019 in response to anticipated protests of the Keystone XL pipeline. The court also declined to “create a new tort named abusive litigation.” National Review, Inc. ,

Court 40