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
Nebraska and Department of Education v. The issue of standing, while more of a theoretical dispute than the legal merits of Biden’s student-loan forgiveness program, could be the focus of the court’s decision. ” The legal merits of the cases turn on the separation of powers between branches of government.
Voters across Nevada, Connecticut, Michigan, Arizona, Nebraska and Ohio Tuesday voted on whether to expand or restrict voter access to election procedures. Some of the issues addressed in the proposed ballot initiatives and constitutional amendments paralleled issues in the over 100 lawsuits filed leading up to Election Day.
Nebraska bring to an end a nearly year-long saga in which Biden attempted to forgive up to $20,000 in federal student loans for current and former US college students. Nebraska , Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority. The court’s decisions in Department of Education v. Brown and Biden v. In a 6-3 decision in Biden v.
It is the first major sporting event New Yorkers can bet on since the state legislature legalized online sports betting last month. The press release cites a barrage of misleading advertisements that have flooded the state since legalization, including those for “risk-free bets” and “$1,000 welcome offers.”
The declaration from HRC comes almost a year after a UN expert said that LGBTQ+ rights in the US were being “deliberately undermined” by state governments. Laws are not limited to those states, however, with Texas , North Dakota , South Dakota , Nebraska and others recently passing bills that target LGBTQ+ people.
They allege that the regulation violates the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution, which prohibits the government from taking property without “just compensation.” The post US Supreme Court hears arguments on California agricultural union organizing law appeared first on JURIST - News - Legal News & Commentary.
The special shield creates an additional layer of protection that goes beyond qualified immunity, which is already available to public employees at all levels of government. Besides Minnesota, the area includes Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Texas.
By February 1 , TV stations in Kansas , Nebraska , and Oklahoma and radio stations in New York and New Jersey must file their license renewal applications through the FCC’s Licensing and Management System (LMS) on Form 2100, Schedule 303-S.
to be “paid back”) out of any recovery, and then to take some hefty percentage—often 60% or more of whatever is remaining, particularly in litigations deemed high-risk (like patent litigation), though there are no rules governing how much funders can ask for. (It 24] At the Federal level, the U.S.
Various disclosure obligations apply if the programming does in fact come from a foreign government entity. Always review these dates with your legal and technical advisors, and note other dates not listed here that may be relevant to your operations. .
With the reopening of the Federal government (at least for the moment), regulatory deadlines should begin to flow in a more normal course. Be sure to stay in touch with your legal counsel to make sure that you do not miss any dates that may be particularly relevant to your station.
Representing Tyler, lawyer Christina Martin argued that the county had violated the Constitution’s takings clause, which bars the government from taking private property for public use without adequately compensating the property owners. Katyal insisted that the home-forfeiture scheme was not a “moneymaker for the government.”
Her parents, Angela Rodriguez and Adan Rodriguez, sued Lasting Hope and Benton’s employer, University of Nebraska Medical Center Physicians, but the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the action due to a lack of any legal duty to warn or protect the girlfriend. We have discussed decisions extending Tarasoff.
11 attacks that allows the federal government to make changes to student-loan programs to respond to national emergencies. Six states, led by Nebraska, went to federal court in Missouri to challenge the program. District Judge Henry Autrey threw the case out, holding that the states do not have a legal right to sue, known as standing.
Nebraska and Department of Education v. million members — teachers and paraprofessionals, health care workers, higher education staff and faculty, and government workers. Share This article is part of a symposium on the upcoming arguments in Biden v. A preview of the cases is here. The AFT represents more than 1.7
Nebraska and Department of Education v. A brief submitted on behalf of legal scholars, including me, focused on whether the secretary of education had authority to embark on debt cancellation. Further, any government action may produce benefits and costs for third parties. A preview of the cases is here. Jonathan D.
Nebraska , 600 U.S. _ (2023), the U.S. According to the Court, the state of Missouri had standing to sue because the plan would cost MOHELA, a nonprofit government corporation created by Missouri to participate in the student loan market, an estimated $44 million a year in fees. In Biden v.
5] For the reasons discussed below, more firms – and their legal and other advisers– should follow them. 9] The proposed legislation in California is both legally solid and helpful for making climate progress. Academic readers of this blog should too! 2] See, e.g., Jacqueline M. Vallette and Kathryne M.
The landmark 5-4 ruling also concluded that the Kansas law governing the practice did not constitute double jeopardy since it merely authorized “civil” rather than “criminal” commitments. Taken together with Kansas v. For all these reasons, civil commitment must be abolished.
Both were legally and factually wrong. It is not just citizens but jurists and legal experts too who remain divided. Carhart struck down a partial-birth abortion law in Nebraska. Biden may magnify those problems by pledging a “whole-of-government response” to the court’s order. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)
Nebraska , a divided court ruled that the Biden administration had overstepped its authority when it announced the debt relief program, which relied on the HEROES Act, a law passed in the wake of the Sept. A federal appeals court in Denver allowed the government to implement most of the plan, while a different appeals court in St.
The Republican-led “anti-ESG” (environmental, social, governance) movement over the last two years has largely been a legislative effort, comprised primarily of state-level bills that attempt to halt the consideration of climate risk and other commonplace factors in investment decisions connected with government funds, contracts, and pensions.
The $400 billion program will remain on hold in the meantime due to lower-court rulings that have blocked the government from implementing it. 11 attacks that allows the federal government to make changes to student-loan programs to respond to national emergencies. Biden announced the program in August.
Louisiana filed suit in the US District Court for its Western District, leading a cohort comprising Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and West Virginia. The pause on the program has proven controversial.
But the court’s decision could also have a much broader legal impact, affecting when and how states can go to court to challenge federal policies and how courts should interpret other laws giving powers to federal agencies. Nebraska and was filed by six states with Republican attorneys general.
7 on whether the mandates can remain in place while challenges to their legality continue in the lower courts. The states argue that the provision on which the government relies is a “housekeeping statute” that does not give HHS the broad power that the government claims.
Following the West Virginia decision, analysis of the MQD has proliferated as legal scholars grapple with the doctrine’s lack of definition. Nebraska , invalidating the Biden Administration’s student loan forgiveness program. On June 30, 2023, the Supreme Court applied the major questions doctrine in Biden v.
But the court’s decision could also have a legal impact well beyond this case, as the justices weigh issues such as when states can go to court to contest federal policies and how courts should interpret laws giving power to federal agencies. Nebraska , was filed by six states with Republican attorneys general. The first case, Biden v.
But beneath the straightforward legal question lies a revealing pattern of inconsistency from some of the Courts conservatives. Elon Musk and his DOGE crew went into USAID and halted nearly all payments, which created an interesting legal problem that had been mostly theoretical prior to the current administration. First was Biden v.
Meanwhile, measures to protect or expand abortion access on Election Day failed in Florida, Nebraska and South Dakota, and nearly 20 other states have banned or severely restricted abortion since the 2022 overturn of Roe v.
Our involvement in this case, Nebraska v. EPA (concerning light- and medium-duty vehicle emission standards), that bring the unique perspective of cities and other local governments before the courts. In Nebraska v. EPA (concerning power plant emissions standards) and Kentucky v.
Ultimately, the SEC will have to anticipate these types of legal challenges in finalizing a durable rule. Other legal challenges have also arisen. But no matter what the SEC does, it is likely to face a protracted legal battle when the rule is finally promulgated. Two recent cases of note have affirmed the use of the MQD.
Acting alone, Justice Amy Coney Barrett turned down two requests from opponents of the program to block it, without even seeking a response from the federal government. 11 attacks that allows the federal government to make changes to student-loan programs to respond to national emergencies. 24, 2022.
Nebraska , characterizing the decision as a straightforward interpretation of federal law. But before the court could reach that question, it had to determine whether any of the challengers had a legal right to sue, known as standing. Nebraska , the court ruled unanimously in Department of Education v.
Jackson overturned decades of precedent to declare that the right to abortion cannot be found in the Constitution, turning the question of abortion’s legality over to the states. Nebraska, Department of Education v. Last summer, Dobbs v. Milligan and Moore v. Harvard ), religious and LGBTQ+ rights ( 303 Creative LLC v.
Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup, here. Welcome to what captivates, haunts, inspires, and surprises me every week in the world of legal ethics. It was another week filled with legal ethics news, so lets dive right into the headlines but be sure to keep scrolling down for the special First Monday content.
During a nearly 28-year career on the court, Breyer shunned rigid approaches to legal interpretation, often seeking functional rulings with an eye toward real-world consequences. Religion was another area in which Breyer, who is Jewish, sought to reach a solution that worked, even if it did not necessarily hew closely to legal orthodoxy.
Nebraska and Department of Education v. Elizabeth Slattery is a senior legal fellow at Pacific Legal Foundation , a nonprofit legal organization that defends Americans’ individual liberty and constitutional rights. Department of Education (brought by my colleagues at Pacific Legal Foundation).
Government research and independent assessments (see, e.g., here and here ) contradict President Trumps findings about insufficient energy supply and grid unreliability. Nebraska that emergency authority does not empower the President to take actions free from statutory limitations. 4531(a)(1). 7545(c)(4)(C)(ii)(III).
In the 17 years following her graduation from law school, Jackson held a variety of legal jobs. Carhart , for example, the court – in an opinion by Breyer – struck down a Nebraska law that banned so-called “partial birth” abortions, while in Santa Fe Independent School District v. In Stenberg v. On appeal, 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