Remove Compensatory Damages Remove Court Rules Remove Government Remove Statute
article thumbnail

Supreme Court will consider major case on power of federal regulatory agencies

SCOTUSBlog

Natural Resources Defense Council , the Supreme Court ruled that courts should defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute as long as that interpretation is reasonable. On Monday, the Supreme Court agreed to reconsider its ruling in Chevron. Share Nearly 40 years ago, in Chevron v.

article thumbnail

Argument analysis: Justices weigh mootness after change in government policy in cases seeking nominal damages

SCOTUSBlog

Justice Neil Gorsuch suggested to Waggoner that most lawsuits would still be able to go forward even if a request for nominal damages, standing alone, was not enough to keep a case alive. solicitor general who argued on behalf of the federal government in support of the students.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Australia High Court Delivers Major Blow to Free Speech In Defamation Ruling

JonathanTurley

Despite this history, a new decision out of the High Court is still shocking in its implications for further attacks on free speech. The court ruled that newspapers and television stations that post articles on social media sites like Facebook are liable for other third party comments on those posts. punitive damages.

Tort 34
article thumbnail

Justices add one religious-rights case to docket but turn down another

SCOTUSBlog

Montana Department of Revenue , the Supreme Court ruled that although states are not required to subsidize private education, states that choose to do so cannot exclude religious schools from receiving funding simply because they are religious. Supreme Court. A new case on public funding and religious education.

article thumbnail

February 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The court also rejected EPA’s contention that the major questions doctrine applied because the Clean Power Plan regulated the electric grid and not air pollution. Circuit also rejected two arguments by coal companies against the ACE Rule. The magistrate judge concluded that the suit was barred by the statute of limitations.