Luxist Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Champion v. Ames - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champion_v._Ames

    Dissent. Fuller, joined by Brewer, Shiras, Peckham. Champion v. Ames, 188 U.S. 321 (1903), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that trafficking lottery tickets constituted interstate commerce that could be regulated by the U.S. Congress under the Commerce Clause.

  3. Brandon Teena - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Teena

    Lotter next petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States for a review of his case. The Supreme Court declined to review Lotter's case, denying his petition for writ of certiorari on March 19, 2012, and a further petition for rehearing on April 23, 2012, [26] [27] leaving his conviction to stand. On January 22, 2018, Lotter was denied a ...

  4. Cohens v. Virginia - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohens_v._virginia

    Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264 (1821), is a landmark case by the Supreme Court of the United States that is most notable for the Court's assertion of its power to review state supreme court decisions in criminal law matters if defendants claim that their constitutional rights have been violated. [1]

  5. California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Cabazon_Band...

    Superseded by. Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (1988) California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202 (1987), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the development of Native American gaming. The Supreme Court's decision effectively overturned the existing laws restricting gaming/gambling on U.S. Indian reservations.

  6. Shelby County v. Holder - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelby_County_v._Holder

    Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013), is a landmark decision [1] of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the constitutionality of two provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: Section 5, which requires certain states and local governments to obtain federal preclearance before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices; and subsection (b) of Section 4 ...

  7. Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

    Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) McConnell v. FEC (2003) (in part) Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The court held 5–4 that the freedom of ...

  8. Weeks v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weeks_v._United_States

    Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914) was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that the warrantless seizure of items from a private residence constitutes a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. [1] It also prevented local officers from securing evidence by means prohibited under the ...

  9. Colleges confirm advocates’ worst fears after Supreme Court ...

    www.aol.com/colleges-confirm-advocates-worst...

    September 5, 2024 at 6:00 AM. Colleges are confirming fears held since the Supreme Court decision against affirmative action, with multiple schools reporting significant declines in Black and ...