Constitutional Law Reporter
FEBRUARY 28, 2024
Given that the United States, as a sovereign, is generally immune from suits seeking money damages unless Congress chooses to waive that immunity, the Court’s “clear statement” rule allows a suit against the government only when “the language of the statute” is “unmistakably clear” in allowing it. government.
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 20, 2023
Both Reed and Texas agree, Kavanaugh observed, that the statute of limitations for his claim is two years. The question before the Supreme Court is when the clock on that two-year statute of limitations began to run. This article was originally published at Howe on the Court.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Constitutional Law Reporter
JUNE 1, 2023
Supreme Court held that death row inmate Rodney Reed did not wait too long to seek DNA testing of the evidence in his case. According to the Court majority, when a prisoner pursues state post-conviction DNA testing through the state-provided litigation process, the statute of limitations for a 42 U.S.C.
Conflict of Laws
MAY 31, 2021
However, the defendant/appellant challenged the jurisdiction of the Kastina State High Court to hear the case on the basis that the contract in issue was concluded in Yobe State, where it claimed the cause of action arose, which it argued was outside the jurisdiction of Kastina State. This is a discussion for another day. [1]
Constitutional Law Reporter
APRIL 10, 2024
In reaching its decision, the Court emphasized that Section 1983 provides a cause of action against “[e]very person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or us- age, of any State ” deprives someone of a federal constitutional or statutory right.
Constitutional Law Reporter
AUGUST 28, 2023
Mallory also cited that Pennsylvania requires out-of-state companies that register to do business in the Commonwealth to agree to appear in its courts on “any cause of action” against them. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court sided with Norfolk Southern, holding that the Pennsylvania law violated Due Process.
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 19, 2022
Arizona is one of the most significant Supreme Court decisions in American criminal procedure. But, in addition to its in-trial effects, Miranda also operates pre-statement and out-of-court. Dickerson put the kibosh on an unconstitutional federal statute that, effectively, sought to overrule Miranda. Share Miranda v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content