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
The US Supreme Court granted an emergency request for stay led by Idaho officials, allowing the state to temporarily enforce a statewide ban on gender-affirming care for certain minors. T his ban is one of the first cases related to transgender health care to reach the nation’s highest court. Labrador v.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit handed down a decision in California Restaurant Association v. The court overturned a District Courtruling to invalidate a Berkeley, California, prohibition on natural gas infrastructure in newly-constructed buildings. O n Monday, April 17, 2023, the U.S. City of Berkeley.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court in Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation heard oral argument in a case under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act concerning choice-of-lawrules.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. Over 40 years ago, the Supreme Courtruled in Baker v. A list of all petitions we’re watching is available here. The officers sought review by the full 11th Circuit, which disagreed with the panel.
Idaho Governor Brad Little Wednesday signed a new abortion bill into law, despite expressing grave concerns about the wisdom and constitutionality of the measure and warning that it could re-traumatize victims of sexual assault. Rapists cannot file a lawsuit under the law, but a rapist’s relatives potentially could. .
Democratic members and advocacy groups have pushed to pack the Supreme Court with an instant liberal majority. They have sought to negate state election laws and impose their own federal election standards on states. In 1981, a federal district courtruled in Idaho v. Yet, they still fell short.
The Supreme Court on Thursday threw out a lawsuit seeking to roll back access to mifepristone, one of the two drugs used in medication abortions. Thursday’s ruling means that mifepristone will continue to remain widely available in the United States, where it is used in over 60% of abortions by health care providers.
The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in the case concerning whether a 1986 federal law preempts Idaho’s near-total abortion ban. The Idaho statute criminalizes performing or attempting to perform an abortion unless not doing so would result in the mother’s death.
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overruled Monday a federal district court’s decision that doctors lacked standing to challenge an Arizona law banning abortion in cases of fetal abnormality. SB 1457 was passed in 2021 by a Republican-led legislature and signed into law by then-Governor Doug Ducey.
Here’s the Thursday morning read: Supreme Court Poised to Allow Emergency Abortions in Idaho (Greg Stohr, Kimberly Robinson, & Lydia Wheeler, Bloomberg & Bloomberg Law) Texas executes Ramiro Gonzales after failed appeals that argued he was no longer a threat nor eligible for death penalty (Dakin Andone, CNN) The Supreme Courtrules for Biden (..)
Bollinger , the court divided 5-4 on upholding race admissions criteria used to achieve “diversity” in a class at Michigan Law School. (On On the same day, the courtruled 6-3 to declare Michigan’s undergraduate admissions unconstitutional in the use of race in Gratz v. In 2003, in Grutter v. Bollinger.).
Each month, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP (APKS) and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. The court determined, moreover, that even if the plaintiffs’ claims could be construed as post-effective date claims (i.e., and non-U.S.
That federal law requires emergency rooms in hospitals that receive Medicaid funding to provide stabilizing treatment to patients who arrive with an emergency condition that seriously threatens their lives or health. The court dealt with a set of similar cases out of Idaho in June without reaching a conclusive decision on the federal law.
Last year, Tennessee and Kentucky were among a group of more than 20 states that enacted laws that prohibit giving transgender youths under the age of 18 medical treatment to align their appearance with their gender identity. Federal district courts in both states granted the challengers’ requests to block the laws from going into effect.
The phrase no harm, no foul doesnt apply to law enforcement personnel, whether theyre patrol officers or the chief local prosecutor. And so it is here, even if this case was last reviewed by the appeals court least likely to cut cops slack : the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Heres more of the story, via Oregon Lives reporting.
By invoking “leading legal constitutional scholars,” Biden only added redundancy to absurdity in claiming that the Equal Rights Amendment is now law. However, in 1981, a federal district courtruled in Idaho v. The Supreme Court later stayed that order but then declared the matter moot.)
But the court’s liberal justices pushed back sharply in their dissents. Justice Sonia Sotomayor cautioned that the majority’s decision would sweep expansively, so that “[i]n every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.” In an opinion by Roberts on June 28 , the court – again by a vote of 6-3 – did just that.
Even worse, four states Nebraska, Tennessee, Idaho, Kentucky rescinded their prior ratifications and a fifth, South Dakota, set its ratification to expire if the ERA was not adopted by the 1979 deadline. However, in 1981, a federal district courtruled in Idaho v. It failed to do so.
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