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
Hochman fielded several questions about why the court should abandon a doctrine that the court has recognized for nearly a century. Morgan Ratner argued for the federal government, which filed its own friend-of-the-court brief but supported neither party. The post Doctrinal “dinosaur” or staredecisis?
Latty Distinguished Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center for Innovation Policy at Duke Law In a flurry of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has continued its skepticism of administrative agencies. Consider first staredecisis and the Court’s overruling of Chevron deference (i.e. no standing requirement).
Thing is, these days law and the decisions courts hand down are very much like that. People go to one court, don't get what they want so they go to another court asking for, basically, the same thing. Of course, this brings us to our word of the month: STAREDECISIS. Schempp , 374 U.S.
We argue that the Supreme Court got it wrong in Allen v. Cooper , the Supreme Court effectively qualified this warning by adding an exception in favor of “sovereign” pirates. The Allen Court largely based its decision upon a perceived historic kinship between patents and copyrights, concluding that if not patent, then not copyright.
Wilkins and the government fought in the lower courts over whether the suit, filed many years after the general public use began, was timely. For many years the court loosely referred to problems as “jurisdictional” without intending the strict consequences that follow under the modern conception of judicial authority.
Share This Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Minerva Surgical Inc. Federal courts have applied this doctrine since 1880, and the Supreme Court implicitly approved of the doctrine in 1924 in Westinghouse Electric. Applying the doctrine of assignor estoppel, however, both the district court and the U.S.
The Supreme Court of India allowed a petition by Bilkis Bano on Monday against the premature release of convicts involved in the 2002 Gujarat communal riots. The court concluded that the writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution by Bano is maintainable.
Talevski , to be argued Tuesday, returns the court to the question of when federal law is subject to private enforcement. The court will consider whether to overrule a line of precedent and to hold that private individuals cannot use 42 U.S.C. The district court dismissed the action, but the U.S. of Marion County v.
24, 2020, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia , a case in which the petitioners and several amici are asking the Court to either (1) overrule Employment Division v. It remains in effect at the federal level, but the court held in City of Boerne v. Share On Feb.
In June 2020, the Supreme Court issued a summary reversal – meaning it decided the case without merits briefing or oral argument – in Andrus v. In an unsigned opinion, the court ruled that Terence Andrus had demonstrated that his lawyer provided deficient performance at sentencing for failing to investigate or introduce mitigating evidence.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. The Supreme Court granted review on a case raising the question whether Andy Warhol paintings made using a copyrighted photograph were so “transformative” as to be a non-infringing “fair use.” Case in point: Texas v.
Share The Supreme Court on Tuesday narrowed the doctrine of patent assignor estoppel, which prohibits an inventor from assigning a patent to someone and then later contending in litigation that the patent is invalid. By a vote of 5-4, the court rejected calls to completely abandon the doctrine. The ruling in Minerva Surgical Inc.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes , the Supreme Court today holds immunity under Government Code section 830.6 , that generally protects California public entities and employees from liability for injuries “caused by the plan or design of a construction of, or an improvement to, public property,” is not as broad as government defendants want.
Supreme Court struck down the Chevron doctrine in its recent decision in Relentless v. Facts of the Case The Supreme Court granted certiorari in the two cases to address whether Chevron U.S.A. Under Chevron’s two-step analysis, a reviewing court must first assess “whether Congress has directly spoken to the precise question at issue.”
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. This week they’re replaced by three new relists, all involving government petitions in one way or another. Our first relist this week is the government’s petition in Securities and Exchange Commission v.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. It’s now June — the home stretch of the Supreme Court’s term, and yet there are still 33 cases still undecided. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed. We have just one new relist this week.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. The Supreme Court’s sprint to the end of the term continues. The court granted last week ’s one new relist, Wilkins v. This week’s conference marks the second of the court’s last four scheduled conferences.
George’s petition asserted that the board’s 1977 decision had rested on a “clear and unmistakable error” because the board had failed to correctly apply the “presumption of sound condition” required by a different provision of the statute governing veterans’ benefits.
The Supreme Court of Nigeria and the Judicature The Nigerian Supreme Court is necessary for the legal system’s stability, coherence, and sustainable evolution. [2] The Supreme Court of Nigeria and the Judicature The Nigerian Supreme Court is necessary for the legal system’s stability, coherence, and sustainable evolution. [2]
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. The court denied cert on Monday. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, filed an opinion dissenting from the court’s denial of summary vacatur.
In the year 2020, the Nigerian Court of Appeal delivered at least three decisions on foreign choice of court agreements. [1] In the first two decisions delivered in the year 2020, the Nigerian Court of Appeal gave full contractual effect to the parties’ foreign choice of court agreement. [2]
Share It has been nearly 40 years since the Supreme Court indicated in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council that courts should defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and the U.S. Applying Chevron , both the U.S.
Two spectrums exist among Supreme Court justices, particularly those who have served since the New Deal ushered in the modern America. These pragmatists consider the real-world consequences of the court’s decisions and value staredecisis and narrow rulings. Think of Marshall and William Brennan in death-penalty cases.
Share On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will consider whether federal trademark law applies to trademark infringement that takes place outside the United States. The question for the court is whether the law reaches infringing conduct outside the United States. In Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc. Bulova Watch Co.
The Supreme Court on Friday eliminated the constitutional right to obtain an abortion, casting aside 49 years of precedent that began with Roe v. In one of the most anticipated rulings in decades, the court overturned Roe , which first declared a constitutional right to abortion in 1973, and Planned Parenthood v.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday issued orders from the justices’ private conference last week. After granting four petitions for review on Friday afternoon, the court – as expected – did not add any new cases to its docket for the 2022-23 term. A state appeals court ruled that Anthony had not received a fair trial.
20-1394 (Supreme Court 2021). This is a core civil procedure case pending before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has now issued a Call for the Views of the Solicitor General (CVSG)–seeking the government’s input on whether to hear the case. Patreon, Inc. See, Kessler v. Eldred , 206 U.S. 285 (1907).
Nigerian legal practitioners have had to provide legal advice and represent clients before trial and appellate courts as well as arbitral tribunals on disputes involving private international law questions within the context of Nigerian law.
The arguments before the Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Would this newly-comprised Roberts Court now contemplate leaving to the vote of state legislatures our rights to be admitted to the practice of law or to not be discriminated against in other respects as women, because of our Constitution’s “silence” or “neutrality”?
Share The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Wednesday in a case involving the deference that courts should give to federal agencies’ interpretations of the laws that they administer. Justice John Paul Stevens set out a two-part test for courts to review an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers.
DeJoy , the Supreme Court will consider whether to overturn a nearly 50-year-old precedent on how employers must accommodate their employees’ religious practices. In 1977, the Supreme Court ruled in Trans World Airlines v. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, which upheld that decision. On Tuesday in Groff v.
4] However, on November 2, 2023, it was announced that Major League Baseball had settled all three lawsuits with the minor league teams, avoiding the possible Supreme Court challenge, and sending the question of the validity of its long-held antitrust exemption back to the bullpen. [5] New York Yankees, Inc., National Basketball Assn.
The new balance of power on the court was on display before the term officially began, when the justices rejected a request to block enforcement of S.B. The court’s third liberal, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, also dissented, though she did not join Roberts’ opinion.). An abortion prelude. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. The fall of Roe.
Numerous groups attack the viability standard that the court adopted in Roe v. Against staredecisis. Many amici focus on the principle of staredecisis – and urge the court not to follow it in this case. Amicus briefs supporting Mississippi. The viability framework. Wade and Planned Parenthood v.
Last week, I had the honor of addressing the judges and staff of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. also spoke at the conference and I was in attendance when he made his comments defending the legitimacy of the Court. To her credit, Marcus has opposed such court packing calls ). Chief Justice John G.
Share When he ran for president in 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump promised to nominate Supreme Court justices who would vote to end the constitutional right to an abortion. If the court were to overturn Roe and Casey , access to abortion in America would shrink dramatically and immediately. Katie Barlow).
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.
Share Justice Stephen Breyer, a devoted pragmatist and the senior member of the Supreme Court’s liberal wing, will retire from the court at the end of the 2021-22 term, NBC News reported on Wednesday. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit. appeals court judge named Ruth Bader Ginsburg to fill White’s seat.
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