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
A newly revised NorthCarolina juvenile justice law will take effect Sunday, aiming to address gaps in handling serious offenses by minors. This represents a significant change from the 2019 Raise the Age law , which allowed most 16- and 17-year-olds to remain under juvenile court jurisdiction regardless of the severity of the charges.
Two prominent voting rights advocacy groups sued Republican state leadership in NorthCarolina over the state’s redistricting plans. The Republican majority redrew state legislative and congressional districts in October, which Common Cause says was to “severely diminish the voting power of Black voters in NorthCarolina.”
Harper after the latest NorthCarolina Supreme Courtdecision in the partisan gerrymandering case?” Harper after the latest NorthCarolina Supreme Courtdecision in the partisan gerrymandering case?” “What happens to Moore v. ” The post “What happens to Moore v.
The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in Moore v. The case concerns NorthCarolina’s congressional district map, created by the Republican-controlled legislature last year. The court denied an application for an emergency stay in March but ultimately agreed last June to take up the case.
Share At oral arguments earlier this week the Supreme Court was skeptical of the Food and Drug Administrations effort to block a NorthCarolina-based company from challenging the denial of its application to market e-cigarettes in the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, based in Louisiana.
The US Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals declined Tuesday to rehear with the full Eighth Circuit panel of judges a prior appeals courtdecision curtailing private organizations’ ability to sue under section two of the Voting Rights Act for alleged racial gerrymandering in redistricting decisions.
“How an upcoming Supreme Court case could upend 2024 election laws, lawsuits; At issue in the case out of NorthCarolina is whether rules for federal elections set by state legislatures can be reviewed by state courts; But a decision in the case could have far greater impacts”: John Fritze of USA Today has this report.
Toyota and Subaru urged the NorthCarolina Supreme Court to review an appeals court'sdecision that left in place a slew of "impossible" discovery obligations, saying they are "unjustly" being held responsible for violations they did not commit and face "a likelihood of crushing" sanctions.
Two recent decisions by the NorthCarolina Supreme Court, State v. Those serving de facto life sentences for crimes they committed as minors can now file motions in Superior Court asking for sentencing relief, potentially getting them out of prison decades early. Kelliher and State v. That means N.C.
Sheldon Whitehouse continued his effort this week to highlight what he views as problematic behavior by the Supreme Court. Tuesday’s hearing came six weeks after Whitehouse convened a hearing on efforts of large political donors to influence the Supreme Court. Federal Election Commission and Shelby County v.
University of NorthCarolina , the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the college admissions programs of Harvard University and the University of NorthCarolina. The Court held that the raced-based policies violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. In Students for Fair Admissions v.
Share In a major election-law decision, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that although the Constitution gives state legislatures the power to regulate federal elections, state courts can supervise the legislature’s exercise of that power. Supreme Court last year, challenging the state supreme court’sdecision.
Board of Trustees of NorthCarolina State University , which was unfortunately not reviewed by the Supreme Court. Many objected to the claims of ‘lack of collegiality’ and bad ‘temperament’ raised against figures like Justice Sotomayor when she was nominated for the Court. of Trustees. ”
The US Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in Moore v. The theory stipulates that state legislatures retain exclusive authority over the administration of elections; therefore, state courts are not allowed to intervene, even if the law in question violates the state constitution.
The Court of Appeals of NorthCarolina ruled Thursday that people who are or have been in a dating relationship with a same-sex partner are equally protected against domestic violence as persons in opposite-sex relationships placed in a similar situation. While relying on the Supreme Courtdecision in Bostock v.
Share The Supreme Court on Wednesday signaled that it may not be ready to adopt a sweeping interpretation of the Constitution, known as the “independent state legislature” theory, that would give state legislatures broad power to regulate federal elections without interference from state courts. The dispute before the court in Moore v.
NorthCarolina reproductive rights groups Monday filed a motion seeking to temporarily enjoin a ban on advanced healthcare professionals providing medication abortions. The motion alleges that clinics in NorthCarolina have expanded service availability from one day per week to three days per week since Roe was overturned.
A three-judge panel of the NorthCarolinaCourt of Appeals published a pair of opinions Tuesday holding that two people can be charged with murder for brutalizing a child 25 years ago — even though they had already been convicted of child abuse for the same act of violence in the late ‘90s. Supreme Court case, Blockburger v.
NorthCarolina State Conference of the NAACP addresses the ability of NorthCarolina legislators to defend the state’s voter-ID law from lawsuits under the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. Both the district court and the U.S. The en banc U.S.
Share The Supreme Court will kick off its November argument session with the highest-profile cases of that session: challenges to the consideration of race in the admissions process at Harvard and the University of NorthCarolina. University of NorthCarolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. 11, to Nov.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. The Supreme Court has returned from its summer break and gotten down to business. The court agreed to review a dozen petitions from that conference. Several of them are sequels to earlier high courtdecisions.
The report first provides a comprehensive display of how states have changed their abortion policies since June 2022 when the Supreme Courtdecision in Dobbs v. The report comes as abortion bans are being struck down in many states, including Nebraska , NorthCarolina , and South Carolina. Wade precedent.
As the Supreme Court begins to look at a liability case of two physicians already found guilty of pill peddling hundreds of thousands of opioids, doctors are becoming increasingly reluctant to prescribe opioids for pain treatment for fear of being criminally charged in the future , according to an analysis by Bloomberg Law.
They hoped the Supreme Court would strike down the death penalty because of its demonstrated racial discrimination and other inequities. The court issued a cryptic and unusual “per curiam” decision – one which is a given in the name of the court rather than any specific judges. What they got instead was something less.
Share The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Tuesday in a clash over whether a NorthCarolina-based company can challenge the Food and Drug Administrations denial of its application to market e-cigarettes in the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, based in Louisiana. The company, R.J.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. At this Friday’s conference, the Supreme Court will vote to grant the last cases that will be argued this term (barring expedited briefing on some emergency matter). University of NorthCarolina , 21-707.
University of NorthCarolina. Unlike the Harvard University case , in which the same petitioner, Students for Fair Admissions, is asking the Supreme Court to reverse a decision by the U.S. Less well noticed was a curious procedural feature of the second case, Students for Fair Admissions v.
On Friday, the Supreme Court agreed to review a potentially blockbuster religion clause case in Oklahoma Charter School Board v. The lower court ruled that such funding of a religious school is unconstitutional. He also opposed review by the Supreme Court, warning thatthe school intends to serve the evangelizing mission of the church.
A government lawyer who argued at the Supreme Court more than anyone else in the 20th century. As the year comes to a close, SCOTUSblog looks back at some of the individuals who died in 2020 after living lives that brought them – at different times and for different reasons – to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Supreme Court will review a Colorado Supreme Courtdecision disqualifying Donald Trump from appearing on the state’s 2024 ballot on grounds he violated section 3 of the federal Constitution’s 14th amendment by engaging in insurrection. Combined, the seven amici have almost 100 years of state supreme court experience.
Circuit Court of Appeals found that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) failed to adequately analyze the climate change and environmental justice impacts of two liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals on the Brownsville Shipping Channel in Texas and two pipelines that would carry LNG to one of the terminals. 20-1045 (D.C.
We are awaiting the potential blockbuster ruling of the Supreme Court in the Harvard and NorthCarolina college admissions cases. After decades of conflicting and confusing rulings on the use of race as a factor for admissions, the Court could be close to rejecting the practice. Second, courts change.
In a series of tweets this week, Professor Heidi Li Feldman has denounced “lawless” and “actively rogue” Supreme Court justices and professors who disagree with her views on the Constitution. With an actively rogue Supreme Court, U.S. A recent poll found that 65 percent of students feel that they cannot speak freely on campuses.
Numerous groups attack the viability standard that the court adopted in Roe v. Many amici focus on the principle of stare decisis – and urge the court not to follow it in this case. They say Roe and Casey are not worthy of the deference that the court typically affords to its prior decisions. The viability framework.
Share This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, challenges to President Donald Trump’s 50% tariff on Turkish steel, the University of NorthCarolina’s use of race in admissions, and Maine’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for health care workers. University of NorthCarolina.
So Chemerinsky, one of the nation’s leading authorities on constitutional law, decided to write a book focusing on how the Supreme Court has (or has not) addressed the challenge of policing throughout its judicial history. One, ‘Is public pressure in this area of life going to change the Supreme Court?” And I think the answer is no.
Below is my column in the Hill on the Supreme Court accepting two cases dealing with racial preferences in college admissions. Here is the column: Last year, I wrote about the Supreme Court’s “train whistle” docket with cases on abortion, guns, immigration, and other issues barreling down the track. University of NorthCarolina.
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