Constitutional Law Court Missouri Statute 
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.
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.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Constitutional Law Reporter
FEBRUARY 1, 2022
Supreme Court issued decisions in two closely-watched cases involving vaccine mandates imposed by the Biden Administration. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration , the Court held that the vaccine-or-testing rule established by the U.S. Such decisions should fall on Congress, according to the Court.
Constitutional Law Reporter
JANUARY 31, 2022
The Supreme Court’s January sitting started off with the late addition of two cases challenging vaccine mandates imposed by the Biden Administration. The central issue before the Court in both cases is whether the vaccine mandates should be allowed to move forward while the legal challenges work their way through the lower courts.
JonathanTurley
DECEMBER 6, 2023
There are 33 states with retraction statutes. Missouri does not appear to have a formal retraction law, but it is still considered a necessary step. The use of the headdress could be treated by a court as opinion since many denounce such images as cultural appropriation. The letter notifies Carron J. In New York Times v.
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.
JonathanTurley
SEPTEMBER 6, 2021
Below is my column in The Hill on reaction to the refusal of the Supreme Court to enjoin the Texas abortion law. The order of the Court expressly did not reach the merits and certainly did not, as claimed, overturn Roe v. The Texas law is not even the greatest threat to Roe. 1 to demand emergency court intervention.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content