enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Kelo v. City of New London - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

    Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), [1] was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held, 5–4, that the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development does not violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

  3. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan

    The denial by the Supreme Court did not include a vote count, but Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the solitary opinion on the case, agreeing that denial was appropriate per New York Times Co., but stating that he believed that decision of New York Times Co. was made wrongly. Thomas wrote "If the Constitution does not require public figures to ...

  4. Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_v._Inter_Tribal...

    Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., 570 U.S. 1 (2013), is a 2012-term United States Supreme Court case revolving around Arizona's unique voter registration requirements, including the necessity of providing documentary proof of citizenship. In a 7–2 decision, the Supreme Court held that Arizona's registration requirements were unlawful ...

  5. United States v. Carolene Products Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Carolene...

    Carolene Products is best known for its Footnote Four, which is considered to be "the most famous footnote in constitutional law." [1] [2] Although the Court had applied minimal scrutiny (rational basis review) to the economic regulation in this case, Footnote Four reserved for other types of cases other, stricter standards of review.

  6. Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

    Bennett (2011) in which the Supreme Court outlawed public funding by states for candidates who were unable to compete with the corporate donations gained by their opponents. [43] While the long-term legacy of this case remains to be seen, an early study by one political scientist has concluded that Citizens United worked in favor of the ...

  7. Opinion: The Supreme Court should have known better how its ...

    www.aol.com/news/opinion-supreme-court-known...

    The court, it seems, has no problem openly worrying about how its rulings are publicly perceived when it wants to, writes Steve Vladeck.

  8. The Supreme Court’s ‘Chevron’ ruling is an existential threat ...

    www.aol.com/finance/supreme-court-chevron-ruling...

    The Supreme Court's decision last month to overturn a decades-old decision that gave regulators more leeway to set rules will harm innovation and threaten U.S. economic vitality, according to ...

  9. Berman v. Parker - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berman_v._Parker

    Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26 (1954), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that interpreted the Takings Clause ("nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation") of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.