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 Courtruled unanimously Tuesday that tribal police officers have the authority to detain and search non-Indigenous persons on federal highways within their territories. ” The court went on to state that detention is only permissible if a violation of law is “apparent.” United States v.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday morning added one new case to its docket for the 2022-23 term, a technical dispute over the binding nature of the statute of limitations for a federal property law. A lower courtruled that the landowners filed their lawsuit too late and that the statute of limitations is jurisdictional.
United States is next in a protracted line of cases in which the court has considered whether statutory bars to causes of action are firm “jurisdictional” rules or instead more forgiving claims-processing rules. First, modern cases like Boechler require a clear statement for a statute of limitations to operate as jurisdictional.
Before trial, the district court rejected Struve’s argument that the officers had violated the Fourth Amendment in pulling him over without reasonable suspicion because they could not tell whether he was texting or using his cellphone legally. Lamoureux v. Bethany Hospice and Palliative Care LLC.
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.
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 courtruled that EPA was required to conduct such evaluations in October 2016 and set an expedited schedule for EPA’s compliance.
The federal district court for the District of Columbia granted BLM’s and federal officials’ motion for voluntary remand without vacatur of claims that they failed to comply with NEPA in connection with 27 oil and gas leasing decisions across Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, and Montana between September 2016 and March 2019.
Montana Department of Revenue , the Supreme Courtruled that although states are not required to subsidize private education, states that choose to do so cannot exclude religious schools from receiving funding simply because they are religious. A new case on public funding and religious education. Last year, in Espinoza v.
McCall , a tire manufacturer resists Georgia courts’ exercise of jurisdiction on the basis of its compliance with Georgia’s registration statute for foreign corporations. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court ). In Cooper Tire & Rubber Company v. These and other petitions of the week are below: Thacker v.
The New Jersey court also found no basis for Grable jurisdiction, rejecting the companies’ arguments that the City’s claims necessarily raised substantial and actually disputed issues of federal law such as First Amendment issues or issues addressed by federal environmental statutes. Northern Plains Resource Council v.
Five TikTok users filed a lawsuit in a federal Montanacourt on Wednesday to stop the state’s newly enacted TikTok ban from going into effect. The five TikTok users argue that the newly enacted law “attempts to exercise powers over national security that Montana does not have and to ban speech Montana may not suppress.”
Grimm , leaves in place a lower-courtruling that found that a Virginia school district violated federal law when it barred students from using the restrooms that align with their gender identities. corporations can be sued for violations of the Alien Tort Statute, the law on which the Iraqi plaintiffs were relying, at all.
Montana Federal Court Found Failure to Take a Hard Look at Costs of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Review of Coal Mine Expansion. In earlier litigation challenging the same mining plan modification, the court found procedural and substantive violations of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). WildEarth Guardians 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. Sierra Club v.
The states said the Wyoming federal court should complete its review and do so on an expedited basis to prevent harm to the parties even though BLM published a proposal to revise and rescind certain requirements of the rule on February 22. New York City’s response to the 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) issues is due on March 30.
Montana Federal Court Allowed Some Coal Mining Activity to Take Place While Federal Agency Completed Required NEPA Review. The company said the injunction would “[i]n a matter of weeks … cause severe consequences to the mine and its employees, in an area of Montana that can ill-afford economic displacement.” CP18-5 (FERC Oct.
If the renewal license was an order, the First Circuit asked the state court to address whether the CCA expressly preempted the ordinance challenged in this case. The court also found that the plaintiff’s claim was “frivolous because there is no legal theory on which he can rely.” Williams , No. 19-cv-6855 (E.D.N.Y. City of Oakland v.
With respect to federal-officer jurisdiction, the district court noted that this case was similar to County of San Mateo v. in which the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court finding that the federal-officer removal statute did not provide jurisdiction. The federal district court for the District of Montana denied the U.S.
Washington Supreme Court Said Climate Activist Was Entitled to Present Necessity Defense Based on Evidence that Legal Alternatives Were Not “Truly Reasonable”. In addition, the Ninth Circuit took no position on whether the underlying action was moot or whether vacatur was appropriate, instead leaving those matters to the district court.
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