Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Republic v. Skidmore, Dallam 581 (1844).Concerning headwright certificates issued to families residing in Texas on the date independence was declared. [1]Herbert v. Moore, Dallam 592 (1844).
[7] Both the District Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of the Inclusive Communities Project, holding that disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. [8] The Texas Department of Housing and Community then appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. [9]
Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court decision holding that the accused cannot be subjected to actual imprisonment unless provided with counsel. Gideon v. Wainwright made the right to counsel provided in the Sixth Amendment applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday is hearing arguments on whether laws proposed by Texas and Florida to ban social media companies from removing content are constitutional. Here's everything you ...
He noted that the attorney general relied on a Texas Supreme Court case that did not address voter registration forms. More: AG Ken Paxton threatens to sue Bexar, Harris counties over voter ...
A Texas appeals court has overturned Crystal Mason's five-year prison sentence for illegally casting a ballot that wasn't even counted in 2016. Mason — a Black woman — cast a provisional ...
Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, 576 U.S. 200 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that license plates are government speech and are consequently more easily regulated/subjected to content restrictions than private speech under the First Amendment.
Pointer's case was part of a series that defined how the Sixth Amendment applied to defendants in state courts. The Supreme Court took this case to decide if failure to appoint an attorney to represent Pointer at the preliminary hearing unconstitutionally denied him the assistance of counsel as it had then-recently decided in Gideon v.