Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court of the State of Ohio is the highest court in the U.S. state of Ohio, with final authority over interpretations of Ohio law and the Ohio Constitution. The court has seven members, a chief justice and six associate justices, who are elected at large by the voters of Ohio for six-year terms. The court has a total of 1,550 other ...
The Ohio Supreme Court should step in on behalf of voters and order a rewrite of ballot language for a fall redistricting measure that “may be the most biased, inaccurate, deceptive, and ...
"The fact that the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Ohio concludes the relevant statute does not grant me authority to review the title does not change my determination that it is ...
McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 514 U.S. 334 (1995), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an Ohio statute prohibiting anonymous campaign literature is unconstitutional because it violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects the freedom of speech.
Attorney General Dave Yost approved the summary for the proposed amendment after the Ohio Supreme Court ordered the review in late October following Yost’s rejection based on the title.
Ohio's legal system is based on common law, which is interpreted by case law through the decisions of the Supreme Court, District Courts of Appeals, and trial courts, which are published in the Ohio Official Reports. Counties, townships, and municipalities may also promulgate local ordinances. In addition, there are also several sources of ...
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. [1] The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The Ohio Supreme Court should step in on behalf of voters and order a rewrite of ballot language for a fall redistricting measure that “may be the most biased, inaccurate, deceptive, and unconstitutional" the state has ever seen, argues a lawsuit filed late Monday.