Remove Constitutional Law Remove Court Decisions Remove Statute Remove Texas
article thumbnail

SCOTUS Sides With Death Row Inmate in DNA-Testing Case

Constitutional Law Reporter

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. 1983 procedural due process claim begins to run at the end of the state-court litigation. Reed then sued in federal court under 42 U.S.C.

Statute 52
article thumbnail

Delaware Loses Bid to Keep Uncashed MoneyGram Checks

Constitutional Law Reporter

MoneyGram applied the common-law escheatment practices outlined in Texas v. Therefore, if the common law were to apply to the Disputed Instruments, then the abandoned proceeds would escheat inequitably solely to the State of incorporation, just like the money orders expressly referenced in the statute.”

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

Supreme Court Rules States Can’t Challenge Federal Immigration Policy

Constitutional Law Reporter

Texas , 599 U.S. _ (2023), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to challenge a Biden Administration immigration enforcement policy. The Constitution affords federal courts considerable power, but it does not establish ‘government by lawsuit,’” Gorsuch wrote. In United States v.

article thumbnail

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

JonathanTurley

50-5-85’s inclusion of “other actions that are intended to limit commercial relations with Israel” makes the statute impermissibly vague. In a 2-1 panel decision, the court also found that the was overly broad. In so ruling, the appellate court reversed a January 2019 district court decision.

article thumbnail

August 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The intermediate appellate court held that the defendant was not entitled to present the defense because he had “reasonable legal alternatives” to trespass and obstruction even if those alternatives were not effective. The defendants also argued that the states failed to state a separation of powers claim or a non-delegation claim.

Court 40
article thumbnail

We read all the amicus briefs in Dobbs so you don’t have to

SCOTUSBlog

Three physicians and the Catholic Association Foundation write that advances in science have “painted an intimate portrait of the fetus and its humanity” and therefore the court’s viability framework is outdated. Many amici focus on the principle of stare decisis – and urge the court not to follow it in this case.