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
This week, we highlight petitions that ask the court to consider, among other things, whether a backpack that is outside the reach of a person in handcuffs falls within the warrant exception. A Kentucky appeals court agreed with Bembury that the search was likely unconstitutional. Acknowledging that the U.S. In Bembury v.
Despite this history, a new decision out of the High Court is still shocking in its implications for further attacks on free speech. The courtruled that newspapers and television stations that post articles on social media sites like Facebook are liable for other third party comments on those posts. 47 U.S.C. §
The American Civil Liberties Union on Tuesday filed a class action lawsuit challenging two Kentucky abortion bans for violating the state’s constitutional right to privacy and self-determination. In February 2023, the Supreme Court of Kentucky declined a similar challenge to the abortion bans. Wade in June 2022.
Accordingly, both courts of appeals held that the two laws work in tandem, even if in tension, to guide the executive branch’s authority over the Oregon forest. Biden , the challengers ask the justices to grant review and reverse the lower courts’ rulings. In American Forest Resource Council v. United States and Murphy Co.
Corpus linguistics is a tool used to identify the original public meaning of words – no small thing when the outcome of a case often hinges on the meaning of a single word in a statute or the Constitution. These examples underscore corpus linguistics’ utility in ascertaining the meaning of statutes. 20-56174, 2022 U.S. 6 (9th Cir.
The courtruled against her and found that the park’s duty was only to “make conditions as safe as they appear to be” and that Munoz “ was aware of the risk she encountered, and expected to be surprised, startled, and scared.” See Pennsylvania General Assembly Statute §7102. Kentucky v.
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. Relisted after the Jan. 10 conference.)
A5 (stating, “The Kentucky Resistance is going to hang you by your pussy lips and punish you,” but not identifying himself as being part of “The Kentucky Resistance”); Opp’n Ex. A8 (stating, “… the Kentucky Resistance is going to totally execute you. They have stated youare a deadman!
Kentucky ex rel. 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. Kentucky and Tennessee then asked the U.S. Skrmetti , L. Skrmetti , and Jane Doe 1 v.
Supreme Court held that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals erred when it concluded that its review of the remand order in Baltimore’s climate change case against fossil fuel companies was limited to determining whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute.
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