Court Rules Criminal Law Government Statute 
SCOTUSBlog
JUNE 28, 2022
The opinion is a victory for physicians prescribing innovative treatments that they believe serve legitimate medical purposes, and it should assuage concerns about a ruling that could have chilled more doctors from prescribing needed pain treatments. None of this is to say that the court has let pill mill doctors off the hook.
JonathanTurley
NOVEMBER 14, 2021
At trial, however, prosecutor Thomas Binger at points seemed to be learning the governing law from Rittenhouse. However, the most damaging moment came outside of the presence of the jury when the judge drilled down on the law. It is also hard to instruct a jury on an ambiguous statute. I have a legal education.”
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Conflict of Laws
JUNE 17, 2022
The Court ruled that since neither panel was conferred governmental authority, § 1782 discovery would be inappropriate in both instances. Justice Barrett, writing for a unanimous Court, adopted a textual approach to the question.
SCOTUSBlog
MAY 23, 2022
Although the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Martinez v. Ryan permitted defendants to raise such claims for the first time in federal court, on Monday the court ruled 6-3 that they cannot develop evidence to support those claims.
SCOTUSBlog
FEBRUARY 24, 2022
United States , which examines whether the federal government can bring criminal charges in federal court against a defendant previously found guilty in a Court of Indian Offenses for an offense stemming from the same act.
JonathanTurley
APRIL 21, 2021
1 (1985), when the court addressed the Fourth Amendment protections afforded a fleeing suspect and held that an officer may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless “the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.” In Graham v.
JonathanTurley
MAY 12, 2021
.” The language of the statute in my view is unconstitutional due to its sweeping criminalization of any “curse or abuse” that could “provoke a breach of the peace.” ” However, the appellate panel corrected noted that such laws are narrowly construed in light of controlling precedent.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
96 
Let's personalize your content