Sentences with phrase «rights federal court cases»

Not exact matches

On Ash Whitaker's second to last day of high school, he learned that he had won a major civil rights case at a federal appeals court.

In the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case, the Supreme Court ruled 5 - 4 that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to own guns — at a federal level — and in 2010 the court said that protection applies at a local level as Court ruled 5 - 4 that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to own guns — at a federal level — and in 2010 the court said that protection applies at a local level as court said that protection applies at a local level as well.

This decision probably shouldn't have been a surprise, because it basically said that the court's 2010 decision in the Citizens United case, upholding the right of corporations to spend money in federal elections, applies to the states as well.

«Based on the advice of counsel, I will assert my 5th Amendment rights in connection with all proceedings in this case due to the ongoing criminal investigation by the FBI and U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York,» Cohen wrote in the filing in Los Angeles federal court.

Prior to joining Amnesty, Nan worked as a staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, where she litigated cases in federal court.

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.

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, in a federal district court in Washington, D.C., the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a brief requesting that a federal judge not dismiss a case of litigation against senior CIA and military officials for the 2011 targeted killing of Anwar al - Awlaki (a suspected al - Qaeda leader) and his 16 - year - old son, both U.S. citizens.

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.

He has fought cases in front of state and federal courts and before the National Labor Relations Board, the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission, and the Division of Human Rights.

RIP Edith Windsor, the gay - rights activist whose landmark U.S. Supreme Court case struck down the Defense of Marriage Act in 2013 and granted same - sex married couples federal recognition for the first time and rights to myriad federal benefits, who died today in Manhattan at the age of 88.

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.

Their first meeting, and interactions with Edie Windsor, the plaintiff in the landmark 2013 civil rights case in which the Supreme Court held that restricting U.S. federal interpretation of «marriage» and «spouse» can apply only to opposite - sex unions was unconstitutional.

«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 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 right now, oddly, those provisions are in the criminal code.

The Eliezer Eliot Quiñones case, however, is now in Federal Court because three 32nd SD (BX) voters allege that their voting rights were infringed upon by harmful administrative actions taken by the Commissioners of the NYC Board of Elections.

The ECOWAS Community Court of Justice dismissed a preliminary objection filed by the Federal Government of Nigeria challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear a case of breach of fundamental human rights filed by Nnamdi Court of Justice dismissed a preliminary objection filed by the Federal Government of Nigeria challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear a case of breach of fundamental human rights filed by Nnamdi court to hear a case of breach of fundamental human rights filed by Nnamdi Kanu.

«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.

EFCC Clears the Air on Kafarati The attention of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has been drawn to media reports on the decision of Justice Abdul Kafarati of the Federal High Court, Abuja to decline ruling in the fundamental human rights enforcement case brought before him by Senate President, Bukola Saraki.

While an audience watched Edgerton and Ruth Negga's portrayal of Richard and Mildred Loving, the biracial couple whose landmark civil rights case saw the U.S. Supreme Court end all racial restrictions on marriage in 1967, a legal fight is being waged between the U.S. federal government and the state of North Carolina over equal rights for transgender Americans, and gay marriage continues to be a divisive issue.

In addition, the Court announced during the closing days of its 1988 - 89 term that it will weigh state restrictions on the right of teenagers to have abortions, and will hear a pair of cases that could determine whether states must pay retroactive income - tax refunds to federal retirees.

Federal courts typically refuse to create new substantive rights, and in a 1989 case, DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, the Supreme Court «recognized that the [Constitution's] Due Process Clauses generally confer no affirmative right to governmental aid, even where such aid may be necessary to secure life, liberty, or property interests.»

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...

It is thus significant that the number of cases reaching state and federal appellate courts has surged back up to levels attained during the early 1970s when civil rights cases had a central place on the national political agenda (see Figure 1).

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.»

1912: NEA endorses Women's Suffrage 1919: NEA members in New Jersey lead the way to the nation's first state pension; by 1945, every state had a pension plan in effect 1941: NEA successfully lobbied Congress for special funding for public schools near military bases 1945: NEA lobbied for the G.I. Bill of Rights to help returning soldiers continue their education 1958: NEA helps gain passage of the National Defense Education Act 1964: NEA lobbies to pass the Civil Rights Act 1968: NEA leads an effort to establish the Bilingual Education Act 1974: NEA backs a case heard before the U.S. Supreme Court that proposes to make unlawful the firing of pregnant teachers or forced maternity leave 1984: NEA fights for and wins passage of a federal retirement equity law that provides the means to end sex discrimination against women in retirement funds 2000s: NEA has lobbied for changes to the No Child Left Behind Act 2009: NEA delegates to the Representative Assembly pass a resolution that opposes the discriminatory treatment of same - sex couple

This included a discussion of many cases, settlements, Federal Court Complaints and rulings issued by the US Dept of Justice and the Office of Civil Rights.

Earlier this month, a state court in Massachusetts ruled that the case could go forward, despite the Trump Justice Department's claim that the federal Higher Education Act pre-empted the state's right to sue the servicer, which is under contract to the federal government.

Any legal suit, action or proceeding arising out of, or related to, these Terms of Use or the Website shall be instituted exclusively in the federal courts of the United States or the courts of the State of California in each case located in the City of Irvine and County of Orange although we retain the right to bring any suit, action or proceeding against you for breach of these Terms of Use in your country of residence or any other relevant country.

The question of whether corporations have constitutional rights is central to the Supreme Court's recent campaign finance case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Federal Court Affirms Constitutional Rights of Kids and Denies Motions of Government and Fossil Fuel Industry in Youth's Landmark Climate Change Case

The case was appealed at the Federal Court by the Canadian Human Rights Commission and Justice Richard Mosley had to respond to three issues raised by the Commission:

However, the Court of Appeal in this case seems to have gone beyond prior jurisprudence in its attempt to limit the rights granted to ICBC, drawing conclusions that appear out of line with other jurisprudence from the Federal Court.

In 2013, a couple of months after these decisions were issued, the German Federal Constitutional Court took the opportunity in a fundamental rights case to mention the Fransson judgment to openly warn legal operators (the CJEU included) that the CJEU's doctrine «must not be read in a way that would view it as an apparent ultra vires act or as if it endangered the protection and enforcement of the fundamental rights in the Member States» (Judgment of the First Senate of 24 April 2013 — 1 BvR 1215/07 — para. 91).

He has litigated disability rights cases in both state and federal courts in California.

He regularly represents municipalities and municipal officials and employees in the state and federal courts in cases involving civil rights, personal injury / death, permit / regulatory compliance and / or enforcement, and access to government proceedings and records.

Petitioners have placed primary reliance on their contentions, first raised in the state courts, that judicial enforcement of the restrictive agreements in these cases has violated rights guaranteed to petitioners by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution and Acts of Congress passed pursuant to that Amendment.

The Court's reference (Tsilhqot» in at para 136) to R v Marshall, [1999] 3 SCR 533 as support for the proposition that interjurisdictional immunity does not apply where provincial legislation conflicts with treaty rights is also puzzling, as the applicability of provincial law was not at issue in that case — Marshall involved a prosecution under federal legislation, the Fisheries Act.

With years of experience representing individuals and corporations charged with crimes in state and federal court throughout Georgia, he fights to ensure that your rights are protected and that your case results in a successful disposition.

2012) the Court of Appeals held that the state and federal statutes for determining child custody jurisdiction in multi-state disputes are applicable to adoption cases that require a termination of parental rights (TPR).

Right now, the case is pending rehearing before a federal appeals court following a favorable ruling for the fisherman.

If a state court is chosen the respondent has the absolute right to remove the case to the federal court.

Mr. Mattix has been extensively involved in the defense of wrongful discharge and discrimination cases and has represented clients in state and federal court and before the Montana Human Rights Bureau and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

If an issue affects a right protected by the United States Constitution, or some other federal law (death sentence cases), it can be appealed from the state supreme court to the United States Supreme Ccourt to the United States Supreme CourtCourt.

He has represented clients in litigated cases in both state and federal court and before the Montana Human Rights Bureau.

About St. John, Bowling, Lawrence & Quagliana, LLP St. John, Bowling, Lawrence & Quagliana, LLP, representing RRHA in this case, is a litigation firm that has past experience in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 public housing litigation and represents clients in Virginia state and federal courts in matters including civil rights law, business law, eminent domain, criminal defense, college and university disciplinary proceedings, government representation, estate planning and real estate matters.

* Canadian Criminal Cases — 1898 to present * Dominion Law Reports — 1912 to present * Labour Arbitration Cases — 1948 to present * Land Compensation Reports — 1971 to present * Ontario Municipal Board Reports — 1972 to present * Alberta Decisions, Civil Cases — 1979 to 2007 * Alberta Decisions, Criminal Cases — 1979 to 2007 * All - Canada Weekly Summaries — 1977 to present * British Columbia Decisions, Civil Cases — 1977 to present * British Columbia Decisions, Criminal Cases — 1977 to 2007 * British Columbia Labour Arbitration Decisions — 1982 to present * British Columbia Labour Relations Board Decisions — 1979 to present * Canadian Labour Arbitration Summaries — 1986 to present * Charter of Rights Decisions * — 1961 to 2007 (* includes Bill of Rights) * Federal Court of Appeal Decisions — 1980 to 1999 * Manitoba Decisions, Civil Cases — 1978 to 1999 * Manitoba Decisions, Criminal Cases — 1978 to 1999 * Saskatchewan Decisions, Civil Cases — 1980 to 2007 * Saskatchewan Decisions, Criminal Cases — 1980 to 2007 * Supreme Court of Canada Decisions — 1978 to present * Weekly Criminal Bulletin — 1977 to present

This case was followed shortly thereafter by an immigration law case in the Federal Court which occurred in July 2005, 2005 FC 1050, at para 10 ``... That evidence included a variety of items such as newspaper articles, an e-mail «blog» and a report by a human rights organization...» (e-mail «blog» in quotations in original source).

[73] In this case, Canadian Transit — established as a federal corporation under the federal Special Act to pursue federal objects and invoking a federal provision allowing the Federal Court to make declarations concerning federal works and undertakings — has asked the Federal Court what exactly its rights are...federal corporation under the federal Special Act to pursue federal objects and invoking a federal provision allowing the Federal Court to make declarations concerning federal works and undertakings — has asked the Federal Court what exactly its rights are...federal Special Act to pursue federal objects and invoking a federal provision allowing the Federal Court to make declarations concerning federal works and undertakings — has asked the Federal Court what exactly its rights are...federal objects and invoking a federal provision allowing the Federal Court to make declarations concerning federal works and undertakings — has asked the Federal Court what exactly its rights are...federal provision allowing the Federal Court to make declarations concerning federal works and undertakings — has asked the Federal Court what exactly its rights are...Federal Court to make declarations concerning federal works and undertakings — has asked the Federal Court what exactly its rights are...federal works and undertakings — has asked the Federal Court what exactly its rights are...Federal Court what exactly its rights are... [more]

A former Tennessee lawyer who sued for the right to marry his laptop won't be able to pursue his case in Kentucky federal court, but he will get another chance in Utah federal court.

Our lawyers spend a significant amount of time in labor and employment litigation, which includes the defense of employment discrimination and wrongful discharge cases in federal and state courts, arbitration proceedings, the defense of individual employment contract actions, and proceedings before various state and federal administrative agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board, United States, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania Departments of Labor, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, New Jersey Division on Civil Rights, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, and OSHA.