Remove Constitutional Law Remove Court Decisions Remove Georgia Remove Laws
article thumbnail

SCOTUS Rules Double Jeopardy Bans Retrial of Defendant Found Non-Guilty by Reason of Insanity

Constitutional Law Reporter

Georgia , 601 U.S. _ (2024), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the State of Georgia can’t retry a defendant acquitted of murder by reason of insanity. The court vacated both the malice-murder and felony-murder verdicts pursuant to Georgia’s so-called repugnancy doctrine, and authorized retrial. Supreme Court.

Felony 59
article thumbnail

The art of justice: Re-examining landmark Supreme Court cases through expressionist paintings

SCOTUSBlog

Share Tired of reading jargon-filled law review articles with hundreds of footnotes? The perfect antidote is Painting Constitutional Law: Xavier Cortada’s Images of Constitutional Rights , edited by Professors M.C. Cortada’s painting reminds us that Gideon’s petition started a constitutional debate that is still ongoing.

Court 122
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

Justices will clarify how death-row prisoners can contest a state’s method of execution

SCOTUSBlog

In the past 20 years, the court has announced substantive constitutional law, pleading requirements, and timeliness rules that make it harder to win such arguments. 1983 , the iconic civil rights statute permitting plaintiffs (including prisoners) to sue state officers for infringing constitutional rights.

article thumbnail

Federal Court Rules In Favor Of Journalist Contesting Georgia’s Anti-BDS Law

JonathanTurley

We have been discussing the state laws requiring contractors and employees to swear that they do not support the the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (“BDS”) movement against Israel. I have long maintained that the law is unconstitutional as a limitation of free speech and associational rights. 50-5-85(b). ” O.C.G.A.

article thumbnail

Divided Supreme Court Limits Review of Factual Issues in Immigration Cases

Constitutional Law Reporter

1255 , which would have made Patel and his wife lawful permanent residents. The Eleventh Circuit held that it lacked jurisdiction to consider his claim, citing that Federal law prohibits judicial review of “any judgment regarding the granting of relief” under §1255. No court may even hear the case. Not anymore.

article thumbnail

So You Say You Want a Revolution? You Can Count Me Out

JonathanTurley

After major rulings on gun rights, abortion and climate change, Democratic leaders and pundits declared the court to be “illegitimate.” Madison in 1803, when the court ruled that it must be the final arbiter of what the law means. However, putting aside the basis for the decision, it helped stabilize our system.