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
Since 1970, when the Second Circuit ruled it unconstitutional to try an immigrant who spoke no English for murder without giving him an interpreter, the need for greater language access in the courts has only increased. Only 37 states require courtroom interpreters to be certified, according to data from NCAJ.
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the U.S. The court therefore vacated and remanded the ACE Rule—which repealed the 2015 Clean Power Plan rule and in its place adopted a replacement rule that relied only on heat-rate improvements at individual plants. Circuit also rejected two arguments by coal companies against the ACE Rule.
In a split decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that young people and other plaintiffs asserting a claim against the federal government for infringement of a Fifth Amendment due process right to a “ climate system capable of sustaining human life” did not have Article III standing. One reason the petitioners asked the D.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