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 heard oral arguments on Monday in Siegle v. Washington. The District Courtruled in the Circuit City trustee’s favor, and the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed and remanded the case. Fitzgerald and United States v. United States v.
In a unanimous decision on Wednesday, the US Supreme Courtruled that the heirs of Jewish art dealers cannot bring a lawsuit in US courts against Germany over the alleged forced sale of art and artifacts under the Nazi regime. The Court directed the lower court to reconsider the case in light of the opinion in Germany v.
50 years ago today, the Supreme Court in their opinion on Furman v. The decision forced federal and state governments to review their statutes to ensure that administration of the death penalty did not discriminate and was applied consistent to the Eight Amendment, prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment.
Dissatisfied with the decision, the heirs sued in Washington under the expropriation exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which provides that a foreign state is not immune from jurisdiction of the U.S. courts in cases “in which rights in property taken in violation of international law are in issue.”
Monsanto has again urged an appellate court to reverse a nearly $200 million jury verdict for PCB poisoning, arguing the Washington Supreme Court's recent decision throwing out the state's eight-year limit on malpractice claims did not invalidate the state's products liability statute of repose.
jurisprudence, according to a forthcoming Legal Studies Research Paper published under the auspices of George Washington University Law School. Howrey Professor of Law at the George Washington University Law School, state statutes vary widely on defining what constitutes aggression.
In June 2020, the Supreme Court issued a summary reversal – meaning it decided the case without merits briefing or oral argument – in Andrus v. Washington. On remand, the Texas courtruled that the inadequate counsel had not prejudiced Andrus. Filing a new petition in a second Andrus v. Animal Legal Defense Fund.
50-5-85’s inclusion of “other actions that are intended to limit commercial relations with Israel” makes the statute impermissibly vague. In addition, we have faced these controversies on campuses, including on the George Washington University campus. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on Feb. O.C.G.A. §
Although the district court agreed to confirm the award, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit disagreed, concluding that confirmation was inappropriate because Antrix lacked adequate contacts with the Western District of Washington, where Devas brought its suit.
Two pending petitions raise the question of the constitutionality of state statutes providing that corporations are deemed to have consented to “general” personal jurisdiction by virtue of having registered to do business in a state. Some older Supreme Court decisions support that theory of consent. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. ,
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.
The district courtruled for the company on Horn’s RICO claim. Because RICO authorizes lawsuits only for injury to business or property, the district court held, it does not extend to harm from a personal injury like being misled into purchasing an alternative health supplement. “If
The Supreme Court instructed the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to consider whether counsel’s inadequate performance had prejudiced Andrus – that is, whether but for counsel’s deficient performance, the mitigating evidence might have prompted at least one juror to opt for a sentence of life without parole rather than the death penalty.
The battle over services that record and stream over-the-air TV without compensation to TV broadcasters has become even more confusing, with a US District Court judge in Boston denying an injunction to stop the Aereo service in Massachusetts in a suit brought by Hearst Corporation, which owns a local TV station.
.” The language of the statute in my view is unconstitutional due to its sweeping criminalization of any “curse or abuse” that could “provoke a breach of the peace.” As the United States Supreme Courtruled in National Ass’n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Winston , 199 S.E.2d
In 2008, the Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling in District of Columbia v. City of Chicago , the courtruled that this right applied against the states. Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Two years after Heller, in McDonald v.
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. A-3393-15T4 et al. June 22, 2017).
“Supreme Court Upholds Native American Adoption Law; At issue in the case was whether a law aimed at keeping Native American adoptees within tribes is constitutional”: Abbie VanSickle of The New York Times has this report. ” David G. ” This morning, the U.S. .” ” This morning, the U.S.
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. Supreme Court. A new case on public funding and religious education.
“A Mississippi case leads US appeals court to strike down lifetime gun ban for drug users”: Margaret Baker of The Biloxi Sun Herald has this report. Lindsay Whitehurst of The Associated Press reports that “ Appeals courtrules against longstanding drug user gun ban cited in Hunter Biden case.”
Federal Court in Washington Upheld Forest Restoration Plan. The federal district court for the Eastern District of Washington upheld the U.S. The federal district court for the Western District of Washington vacated U.S. Hawaii CourtRuled that Commercial Aquarium Fishing Required Environmental Review.
David Goodman of The New York Times reports that “ Most Abortions in Texas Are Banned Again After CourtRuling; A federal appeals court panel temporarily reinstated the law that bans most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy while it considers a district judge’s ruling.” ” Ann E.
The Court could then have addressed the question in another case but elected to Arlene’s Flowers v. Washington in light of its decision. State of Washington and Arlene’s Flowers v. Then the Supreme court denied certiorari in July 2021. On June 15, 2021, a Colorado District Courtruled in Scardina v.
Lauren Handy and nine other anti-abortion activists were charged last year with conspiring to obstruct access to a Washington abortion clinic on Oct. They have asked for the dismissal of the indictment for lack of jurisdiction since the Courtruled in Dobbs that “the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion.”
David Goodman and Ruth Graham of The New York Times report that “ Small Court Victories Change Nothing for Women Seeking Abortions in Texas; A Texas statute that bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy was seemingly undercut by two courtrulings, but the reality on the ground has not changed.” Jackson , No.
Cohen – who first met the Lovings when he was just 29 – filed a lawsuit on their behalf, challenging the Virginia law and similar state statutes as violating the 14th Amendment. He and his co-counsel, Philip Hirschkop, took the case to the Supreme Court. Virginia , the court did find the statute unconstitutional.
The justices once again did not act, however, on the petition for rehearing filed by Washington state florist Barronnelle Stutzman, who declined to make custom flower arrangements for a same-sex wedding because of her religious beliefs. Abortion coverage by employers.
The National Advocates for Pregnant Women, a legal advocacy group, says Wisconsin’s fetal protection law is the most “egregious” of the civil statutes in the country. Loertscher’s legal team — which included now-Attorney General Josh Kaul — was most successful, securing a federal courtruling that deemed the law unconstitutional.
McCall , a tire manufacturer resists Georgia courts’ exercise of jurisdiction on the basis of its compliance with Georgia’s registration statute for foreign corporations. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit violated basic principles of Strickland v. In Cooper Tire & Rubber Company v. Stirling v.
Victor Morton of The Washington Times reports that “ Bump stocks not ‘machine guns’ and not subject to ATF ban, federal appeals courtrules.” ” You can access today’s ruling of a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. ” And at “The Volokh Conspiracy,” Jonathan H. .”
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. In re Enbridge Energy, LP , No. __ (Minn. 97182-0 (Wash. Sacchi et al. Argentina et al. (UN
Now, the Delaware Supreme Court has rejected a Democratic universal mail-in voting law as unconstitutional. The Delaware Supreme Courtruled on Friday that a state law enacting universal mail-in voting violated the state’s constitution. Now it appears that universal mail-in voting is barred in the state.
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. Shell Oil Products Co. , 19-1818 (1st Cir.).
Courts have uniformly upheld the right of employers to impose mandatory vaccination or testing requirements as a condition for employment; states have enhanced authority over such public health measures, too. Ironically, the Supreme Court warned against such sudden agency “finds” of regulatory authority.
The Washington Post confirmed that the United States is one of only seven out of the world’s 198 countries that allow for abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy.). The courtruled 5-4 to allow the Texas law to be enforced. Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University.
The court’s answer will determine not only whether Trump’s trial in Washington, D.C., A provision known as the executive vesting clause gives the president the “executive power,” which, under the principle of separation of powers, courts cannot sit in judgment over, Trump observes. before U.S. In the landmark Marbury v.
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.
That included a column by Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus asking “ Why is a prominent federal judge hiring a law clerk who said she hates Black people ?” The Supreme Courtruled that tort law could not be used to overcome First Amendment protections for free speech or the free press. 157, 168 (1979).
The federal district court for the Eastern District of California held that more analysis of the impacts climate change would have on a water transfer program for the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta was required under NEPA. The action involved closing valves on pipelines in Washington, Montana, Minnesota, and North Dakota.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday morning declined to take an appeal by anti-abortion activists in a First Amendment dispute with Planned Parenthood, as well as a test of New Jersey’s “slogan statutes.” A jury awarded Planned Parenthood nearly $2.5 million, but the group contended that its conduct was protected by the First Amendment.
In court papers, she was identified only as “L.C.”. Four years later, her case reached the Supreme Court. In a 6-3 opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the courtruled in Olmstead v. Dellinger lost both of those cases, but he notched plenty of victories, including in Washington v.
The court also granted motions to strike the state law claims pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute. The court granted the company leave to amend its complaint with 21 days. In addition, the company filed an appeal with the Washington State Pollution Control Hearings Board.
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. Washington Supreme Court Invalidated Regulation of Indirect Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Association of Washington Business v. Indigenous Environmental Network v.
However, the court denied him the right to have a jury rule on the key issue of whether these prior offenses occurred on different occasions. The courtruled that a jury had to decide this issue unanimously under a standard of beyond reasonable doubt. Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C.
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