SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 23, 2021
Wolf principally argued that stare decisis justifies maintaining the doctrine. Chief Justice John Roberts suggested that “it’s not the strongest stare decisis argument” in light of Supreme Court decisions characterizing the doctrine as a failure. The post Doctrinal “dinosaur” or stare decisis?
JURIST
JUNE 17, 2022
The decision overturns a 2018 ruling which held there is a fundamental right to abortion in Iowa. Planned Parenthood sued to challenge a 2020 law which requires a 24 hour waiting period before an abortion. After a lower court ruled the law was unconstitutional, Iowa appealed to the state supreme court.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The Crime Report
MAY 18, 2021
That not only amounts to a reversal of a precedent set earlier by the Court, but is an “alarming” step back in protecting juveniles, say Arthur Ago and Rochelle Swartz of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. The court is fooling no one,”” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in her dissent.
The Crime Report
DECEMBER 5, 2023
Andrus’ case cries out for intervention, and it is particularly vital that this Court act when necessary to protect against defiance of its precedents. The Court, however, denies certiorari. I would summarily reverse, and I respectfully dissent from the Court’s failure to do so.” agree with the dissenting judges below.
Patently O
DECEMBER 11, 2022
This means that issues decided at the district or administrative court level can be binding on all other courts: district courts, administrative courts, appellate courts, and even the Supreme Court. District court decisions are not binding precedent because they are at the bottom.
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 20, 2022
Some older Supreme Court decisions support that theory of consent. Some courts read [Supreme Court precedent] as effectively foreclosing [this consent-by-registration theory of jurisdiction], while others insist it remains viable.”. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit affirmed. Next up is Kelly v. United States.
Conflict of Laws
MARCH 10, 2021
Its argument, inter alia , was that by virtue of Article 12 and 13 of their agreement, the Nigerian court had no jurisdiction in this case. GOVERNING LAW: The Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, USA without regard to the principle of conflicts of any jurisdiction.”.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
73 
Let's personalize your content