Remove Court Decisions Remove Court Rules Remove Litigating Remove Tort
article thumbnail

China Adopts Restrictive Theory of Foreign State Immunity

Conflict of Laws

Supreme Court has held that issuing foreign government bonds is a commercial activity, even if done for a sovereign purpose. It is unclear if Chinese courts applying the FSIL will reach the same conclusion. As discussed further below, the addition of “rulings” (??) but not to “rulings.”

article thumbnail

Trump’s steel tariffs, UNC affirmative action, and Maine’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate

SCOTUSBlog

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed, ruling that the 50% tariff was part of an ongoing plan of action that Trump had properly initiated earlier. In early November, the district court ruled that UNC’s use of race in admissions was consistent with Supreme Court precedents. United States. Haystings v.

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

October 2019 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. Minnesota Supreme Court Declined to Review Claims Regarding Environmental Review for Oil Pipeline. CLIMATE LITIGATION CHART.

Court 40
article thumbnail

June 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. climate litigation charts. She also was persuaded that Congress had ratified the lower appellate court decisions holding that there was a narrower scope of review.

Court 42
article thumbnail

Trumpunity: Sunstein Calls For Broader Use Of Defamation Lawsuit To Curtail “Fake News”

JonathanTurley

The threat to the free press is obvious and was the basis for foundational court decisions. The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision over 50 years ago in New York Times v. Like “disinformation,” it is heavily laden with subjectivity.

Laws 43