Sentences with phrase «federal court case law»

First, our amazing librarians conducted a great deal of painstaking research to identify all known sources of reported U.S. state and federal court case law.

Not exact matches

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments for two cases that will decide whether your business is equivalent to a person, and whether companies can also seek exemptions from federal law based on religious beliefs.

That was a big deal, legally speaking, because gender stereotyping was key to one of the biggest Supreme Court cases upholding federal anti-discrimination laws, involving a woman's inability to make partner at the former accounting firm Price Waterhouse.

But as law professor Eugene Volokh notes, the First Amendment argument is a strong one, and the Supreme Court would likely hear the case since it involves striking down a federal statute.

In a recent court case, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Department of Justice is prohibited from using federal funds to prosecute businesses who operate within state laws regarding medical marijcourt case, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Department of Justice is prohibited from using federal funds to prosecute businesses who operate within state laws regarding medical marijCourt of Appeals ruled that the Department of Justice is prohibited from using federal funds to prosecute businesses who operate within state laws regarding medical marijuana.

(Chicago constructed this story from thousands of pages of federal court records, police reports, and court testimony from related cases, as well as from official government reports and dozens of interviews with federal and local law enforcement officials and attorneys for some of the defendants; through a spokesman, prosecutors in the Zambada case declined comment.)

A spokeswoman declined to answer a series of direct questions from CNBC about his case, instead providing a statement from Acting Assistant Attorney General Caroline D. Ciraolo of the Justice Department's Tax Division: «Bradley Birkenfeld was afforded due process of law and sentenced by a federal district court after full consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances, including his admission that he advised wealthy UBS clients on how to conceal their assets from the U.S. government,» she said.

The amendment would require Oklahoma courts to «rely on federal and state law when deciding cases» and «forbids courts from considering or using» either international law or Islamic religious law, known as Sharia, which the amendment defined as being based on the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed.

That wasn't even Olson's case, but with assists from a federal district court judge who came out as being in a same - sex relationship only after ruling and retiring, and elected officials who chose to forgo their traditional duty to vigorously defend state law, Olson and Boies did succeed in disenfranchising millions of Californians on a procedural technicality.

In the federal employment anti-discrimination laws, a specific exception exists for religious bodies that discriminate on the basis of religion, and a couple of years ago, in the Hosanna - Tabor case, the Supreme Court held that the Constitution allows religious bodies to discriminate with respect to the employment of ministers.

The justices on the current Court will do the real work of jurisprudence if they draw on the briefs, take the time to set forth the evidence, and show why the state or the federal government has a compelling case for casting around infants in the womb the full protection of the law.

According to the standard account of the matter, the power of judicial review — that is, the authority of the federal judiciary to invalidate acts of Congress and the President when they are deemed to be unconstitutional — came to be entrenched in our law by the acceptance, tacit or otherwise, of the Supreme Court's ruling in the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison.

The district court dismissed the case, stating that it could only be brought under federal law.

Companies with fewer than 50 employees are not likely to be subject to federal laws that govern how employers handle leave for family and medical reasons, bereavement, military leave, jury duty, court cases and voting.

Rosa Aliberti Rosa has worked on diverse labor and employment law matters, including wage and hour cases; workplace investigations; severance, employment, and non-compete agreements; has drafted and responded to discrimination complaints before government agencies, including the U.S. EEOC and NYS Division of Human Rights; and, has assisted in federal and state court litigations.

He litigated major law reform and class action cases in the federal court of appeals and Supreme Court on Social Security, Medicaid, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, SNAP / Food Stamps and other public benefits issues, and the rights of children born out of wedcourt of appeals and Supreme Court on Social Security, Medicaid, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, SNAP / Food Stamps and other public benefits issues, and the rights of children born out of wedCourt on Social Security, Medicaid, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, SNAP / Food Stamps and other public benefits issues, and the rights of children born out of wedlock.

If a state law or local law is thought to be in violation of a federal law or the federal Constitution, it can be challenged in court as such by someone who is deemed by the court to have standing to bring the case.

Manhattan federal prosecutors told the judge who sentenced Dean and Adam Skelos last week that the government won't push for them to go to prison until at least three - plus months after the U.S. Supreme Court rules in a pending case on anti-corruption laws.

The bill could only be made law pending the outcome of a Supreme Court case that is determining the legality of placing wagers on the outcomes of sporting events, potentially overturning a federal prohibition.

It's ABSURD to suggest that ANY U.S. court (at the federal or state level) is going to suddenly ignore over 200 years of American legal precedent and decide a case based on Islamic law.

In a case that could have wide - ranging national significance for gay rights, a federal appeals court in New York ruled that a landmark civil rights law bars employers from discriminating against their workers based on sexual orientation.

· Amend The Penal Law To Prohibit Undisclosed Self - Dealing By Public Officials: To address the Supreme Court's decision in Skilling, which severely hampered the federal government's ability to prosecute cases involving deprivation of «honest services» by public officials, New York State should enact a felony - level crime of «Undisclosed Self - Dealing» to target public officials who further their own financial self - interest while purporting to be acting on behalf of their constituents or government employer.

Former state Assemblyman William Boyland Jr. has asked a federal appeals panel to set him free because last year's Supreme Court decision narrowed the reach of federal anti-corruption laws in a case involving former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell.

Hanna joins former Utah governor and presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, HP CEO Meg Whitman and ex-Vice President Dick Cheney in signing the amicus, which is being filed with the Supreme Court as justices prepare to take on several court cases challenging same - sex marriage laws, including the controversial Proposition 8 measure in California and the federal Defense of MarriageCourt as justices prepare to take on several court cases challenging same - sex marriage laws, including the controversial Proposition 8 measure in California and the federal Defense of Marriagecourt cases challenging same - sex marriage laws, including the controversial Proposition 8 measure in California and the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

The U.S. Justice Department has filed court papers in a New York case arguing that a major federal civil rights law does not protect employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation, taking a stand against a decision reached under President Barack Obama.

«Right now, the way they're in the law isn't actually the strongest and we rest a lot on court cases and we want to make sure that now matter what happens on the federal level ever, no matter what happens anywhere else, New York has the strongest, clearest protections as it relates to reproductive protections and right now, oddly, those provisions are in the criminal code.

But McDonnell was actually only the latest in a series of Supreme Court cases over the last two decades that have dramatically narrowed federal corruption laws.

The turn in court comes after Ms. James had previously called on the city's lawyers represent, pro bono, children facing deportation cases in the federal government's surge docket, and had promised to do so herself after a refresher on family and immigration law.

Instead of fighting to repeal the entire set of stricter gun laws, a bi-partisan group of lawmakers has introduced legislation to chip away at parts of the Safe Act that have proved hard to enforce, been rejected by a federal court, and, in one case, has not been implemented yet.

have «federal question» jurisdiction, which means that federal courts will hear cases that involve issues touching on the Constitution or other federal laws.

A prominent component of relevant case law is the Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which ruled unconstitutional certain restrictions on corporate campaign spending during elections.

All three cases involved a common issue — a new definition by the Supreme Court requiring a formal exercise of government power rather than just a meeting or phone call to prove a quid pro quo bribery scheme under the federal law prohibiting «honest services fraud.»

The Brennan Center for Justice, Citizens Union, Common Cause New York, the League of Women Voters of New York City, and New York Public Interest Research Group submitted a friend - of - the - court brief this week, urging the federal district court hearing the case to uphold the law.

Courts have generally held that due to this dual nature tribes have immunity from federal civil cases, most of the time, and are not subject to laws of States the reservation is on.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld, whose law firm is defending former Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno in federal court, said in a Talk 1300 - AM radio interview this morning that the case should be tossed out, saying that retrying him smacked of double jeopardy.

As such, any cases that are brought to Federal Judiciary will be tried by lower Federal judges (circuit courts I assume) and then the circuit court decision on the case will be the law of the land until (at some point in indeterminate future) SCOTUS is re-constituted and overturns one of those decisions.

«Having regard to the settled position of the law as expoused by our courts in not less than five cases wherein the suspension of legislators by legislative houses was annulled and set aside, the Senate should withdraw the appeal filed against the judgment of the Federal High Court in the case of Senator Omo - Agege.

But the mayor appears to have benefited from a high burden of proof for federal corruption cases — made higher by a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision — and from the legal advice of his campaign attorney, who structured the Senate contributions to conform to the letter, if not the spirit, of state fundraising laws.

Attorneys on both sides have argued that prior rulings by New York's Court of Appeals, which lay the foundation for the state laws that apply in the federal case, break in their favor.

«If we allow this case in this instance, not only will the federal court be making new law that is contrary to New York law, but it would be opening the floodgates (to) thousands and thousands and thousands, millions of plaintiffs who have been exposed, (but) who have no present injury.»

«It's been mischaracterized as an expansion of abortion rights which is not true,» said Hochul, who says the aim of the bill is to make sure New York's 1970 abortion laws are updated and are consistent with the current federal protections, in case the U.S. Supreme Court ever reverses Roe v. Wade.

But NYPD lawyer Oleg Chernyavsky said even with an additional local law, people would still have to bring their cases to state or federal court — something they already have the ability to do.

UC announced yesterday that it is the first research institution to seek to «intervene,» or become a party in the case, in which the government is appealing a lower court's ruling that National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding to study human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) violates federal law.

A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that a Virginia high school discriminated against a transgender teen by forbidding him from using the boys» restroom — a case that might have implications for a controversial North Carolina law.

February 24, 2017 — Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court have or will soon hear cases involving the appropriate scope of services guaranteed by federal special - education law, government aid to religious institutions providing educational services, and restroom access for transgender students.

The high court will also use an employment - discrimination case from the private sector to clarify whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the main federal job - discrimination law, covers retaliation by employers against former employees as well as job applicants...

That's why a group of parents and students in Connecticut, with support from the nonprofit students» rights organization Students Matter, filed a case last month in federal court challenging their state's laws «that knowingly and actively prevent students from accessing even minimally acceptable public school options.»

By granting review of its third case in two years involving the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the U.S. Supreme Court has signaled a renewed interest in resolving legal conflicts arising under the federal law that governs services provided to nearly 6.7 million schoolchildren in special education.

These amicus briefs — one filed in the U. S. Supreme Court in two California cases, the other in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit dealing with a Kentucky case — ask the courts to reconsider rulings that misinterpret the main federal special education law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

«It is important for the U.S. Supreme Court to take this case, as the Ninth Circuit opinion ignores 20 years of precedents on special education law and represents yet another example of a federal agency exceeding its authority over educational decision making,» NSBA Executive Director Thomas J. Gentzel said.