Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Senators polarized over meaning of Supreme Court ruling. The chairman, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., called the decision “a game-changing act of judicial fiat that puts all future presidents above ...
Smith faces a Thursday deadline to file his opening brief about how the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity applies to the former president's criminal case. Smith had sought the judge ...
The court stayed its decision until a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court. On January 5, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court granted Trump's petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of the Colorado Supreme Court ruling in Anderson v. Griswold on an accelerated pace; oral arguments were held on February 8, 2024.
On February 12, 2024, Trump appealed to the United States Supreme Court to request a stay of the 2020 election interference trial while he sought an en banc hearing from the D.C. Circuit Court. [38] In response, Smith filed his own brief on February 14, 2024, urging the Supreme Court to deny Trump's request and citing the urgency of the pending ...
XIV; Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023), is a landmark decision [1][2][3][4] of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that race-based affirmative action programs in college admissions processes violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. [5]
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Friday that nearly 100,000 residents can receive full ballots without citizenship proof, swiftly resolving a clerical blunder that questioned whether they could ...
In 2024, citing the Supreme Court's ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Air Force refused to comply with an EPA order that they develop a cleanup plan for drinking water around Tucson, Arizona, after the region's groundwater was contaminated by PFAS runoff from nearby Air Force bases. [26]
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States.It ruled that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms—unconnected with service in a militia—for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home, and that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and ...