Constitutional Law Reporter

MAY 21, 2024

Louis, Missouri , 601 U.S. _ (2024), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that an employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must show that the transfer brought about some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment, but that harm need not be significant. City of St.

Court 52

Court Statute Constitutional Law Drafting 52

Constitutional Law Reporter

AUGUST 2, 2023

Supreme Court struck down the Biden Administration’s student loan forgiveness program. The district court denied the States’ motion for a preliminary injunction and dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction after determining none of the States had standing to bring the lawsuit. In Biden v. Nebraska , 600 U.S. _ (2023), the U.S.

Court 52

Court Education Constitutional Law Drafting 52

JURIST

MAY 27, 2024

But the Convention came together to declare that equal rights, including rights for women and LGBTQ+ people, should be a fundamental value of American constitutional law. In my second dispatch from this Convention, I spoke with the amendment’s sponsor, Crispin South, a Choctaw law student at ASU and a delegate representing Oklahoma.

Government 197

Government Laws Court Construction 197

JonathanTurley

JUNE 27, 2022

Jackson Women’s Health Organization, six Supreme Court justices noted that the nation was grappling with this deeply divisive issue in 1973 but that “Roe abruptly ended that political process.” The court has now declared that the future of abortion will rest with 330 million Americans rather than nine justices. How much has changed.

Court 43

Court Legal Legal Laws 43

SCOTUSBlog

NOVEMBER 30, 2021

Numerous groups attack the viability standard that the court adopted in Roe v. Many amici focus on the principle of stare decisis – and urge the court not to follow it in this case. They say Roe and Casey are not worthy of the deference that the court typically affords to its prior decisions. The viability framework.

Stare Decisis 134

Stare Decisis Court Laws Legal 134

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

AUGUST 4, 2021

Washington Supreme Court Said Climate Activist Was Entitled to Present Necessity Defense Based on Evidence that Legal Alternatives Were Not “Truly Reasonable”. The Supreme Court reversed an intermediate appellate court’s decision affirming a superior court determination that the defendant could not present a necessity defense.

Court 40

Court Litigation Litigating Government 40