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
Share The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that a lawsuit filed by an Oregon man who was placed on the No Fly List can go forward even after the government has removed him from the list and pledged not to return him to it “based on the currently available information.” This article was originally published at Howe on the Court.
The US Supreme Courtruled Tuesday that Yonas Fikre’s challenge to his previous placement on the No Fly List can proceed, rejecting the government’s claim that his removal from the list rendered the lawsuit void. The decision, however, is seen as a victory for those who criticize the No Fly List as being overly inclusive.
There is an interesting case out of Oregon where Judge Marco Hernández has ruled for a Portland State University Professor Bruce Gilley who was excluded from a Diversity Twitter page by the Communication Manager of the Division of Equity and Inclusion at the University of Oregon.
On Friday, the justices agreed to decide whether the Nollan / Dolan test applies to a California man’s challenge to a development fee, or whether – as a California appeals courtruled – the fee is instead immune from such review because it was authorized by legislation. A federal appeals courtruled that Fikre’s case was not moot.
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.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. Hawaii CourtRuled that Commercial Aquarium Fishing Required Environmental Review. and non-U.S. Zepeda , No.
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. climate litigation charts. District Court for District of Oregon , No. and non-U.S. Klee , Nos. June 28, 2017).
This week,we highlight petitions that ask the court to consider, among other things, whether Barack Obama had the authority as president to expand a national monument in the forests of Oregon into land overseen by the Interior Department. The Oregon district court rejected the timber company’s challenge. But the D.C.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. In addition, the court found that the writer failed to allege elements of an abuse of process or a malicious prosecution claim.
The litigation over Trumps executive order is likely to focus on what it means for someone to be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The 14th Amendment was intended to overrule one of the Supreme Courts most notorious decisions, its 1857 ruling in Dred Scott v. citizenship to anyone born in the United States.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. Colorado CourtRuled on Venue for Colorado Local Governments’ Climate Change Claims. Wikimedia Commons. and non-U.S.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. Federal Court Upheld Environmental Review for Forest Thinning Project. By Margaret Barry and Korey Silverman-Roati. and non-U.S.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. Federal Court Denied Motions to Dismiss Challenges to 2019 Presidential Permit for Keystone XL. CLIMATE LITIGATION CHART.
The court added three new cases to its docket for arguments next fall, including a major new case (covered in this article ) on the scope of the Second Amendment right to carry a gun outside the home. The justices asked the Biden administration for more information in a trio of cases that the court granted in February.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. Court Said Climate Scientist Provided Sufficient Evidence of Actual Malice for Blog Authors but Not for Publisher. and non-U.S.
And the court’sruling, she suggested, told legislators who wanted to rely on race to “go right ahead.” Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit – or simultaneously did both. In Grants Pass v. The justices declined to weigh in on the merits of not one but two cases involving abortion access.
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