Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
When the state refused, the Tribe filed suit, [32] as allowed by the statute, against both the state of Florida and the governor, Lawton Chiles. The District Court declined to dismiss the case, [ 33 ] but the Eleventh Circuit reversed, [ 34 ] holding that the Eleventh Amendment barred the suit, and that the doctrine of Ex parte Young could not ...
In law, ex parte (/ ɛ k s ˈ p ɑːr t eɪ,-iː /) is a Latin term meaning literally "from/out of the party/faction [1] of" (name of party/faction, often omitted), thus signifying "on behalf of (name)". An ex parte decision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the dispute to be present.
Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents, 528 U.S. 62 (2000), was a US Supreme Court case that determined that the US Congress's enforcement powers under the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution did not extend to the abrogation of state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment over complaints of discrimination that is rationally based on age.
In Ex parte Fonda (1886), the Court denied leave to file an original habeas petition, citing Royall. [44] In Ex parte Ayers (1887), the Court denied a state-prisoner petition on the merits, finding that the state tax law did not violate the Contracts Clause. [45]
Moody and Paxton were challenges to two state statutes – enacted in Florida and Texas, respectively – that sought to limit this moderation. In July 2024, the justices vacated the lower-court decisions in both cases due to both courts failing to perform a full First Amendment assessment of the laws, and remanded them for further consideration.
Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) When state officers are charged with violating federal law, they cannot set up the state's federal constitutional sovereign immunity to defeat suits for prospective relief. Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251 (1918) Congress has no power under the Commerce Clause to regulate labor conditions. (Overruled by ...
Waller was subsequently charged by the State of Florida for grand larceny, which was based on the same acts with which he was charged against by the City of St. Petersburg. He moved for a writ of prohibition in the Florida Supreme Court to prevent a second trial in the circuit court, due to his claim that a second trial would constitute double ...
In law, inter partes (Law Latin for 'between the parties' [1]) is a legal term that can be distinguished from in rem, which refers to a legal action whose jurisdiction is based on the control of property, or ex parte, which refers to a legal action that is by a single party.