Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Rehnquist Court was the period in the history of the Supreme Court of the United States during which William Rehnquist served as Chief Justice.Rehnquist succeeded Warren E. Burger as Chief Justice after the latter's retirement, and Rehnquist held this position until his death in 2005, at which point John Roberts was nominated and confirmed as Rehnquist's replacement.
This is a partial chronological list of cases decided by the United States Supreme Court during the Rehnquist Court, the tenure of Chief Justice William Rehnquist from September 26, 1986, through September 3, 2005. The cases are listed chronologically based on the date that the Supreme Court decided the case.
Hughes Court (February 24, 1930 – June 30, 1941) Stone Court (July 3, 1941 – April 22, 1946) Vinson Court (June 24, 1946 – September 8, 1953) Warren Court (October 5, 1953 – June 23, 1969) Burger Court (June 23, 1969 – September 26, 1986) Rehnquist Court (September 26, 1986 – September 3, 2005) Roberts Court (September 29, 2005 ...
The graphical timeline below lists the justices of the Supreme Court of the United States by court composition. As Supreme Court historians categorize eras in the court's history by the name of the presiding chief justice, [ 2 ] the timeline is divided into sections, according to who was chief justice at the time.
The 2004 term of the Supreme Court of the United States began October 4, 2004, and concluded October 3, 2005. This was the thirty-third and final term of Chief Justice William Rehnquist's tenure on the Court and the nineteenth term as Chief Justice; Rehnquist died on September 3, 2005.
It includes United States Supreme Court cases that can also be found in the parent category, or in diffusing subcategories of the parent. Cases of the Supreme Court of the United States decided by the Rehnquist Court , the period during the tenure of Chief Justice William Rehnquist (1986–2005).
1. Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that the Education Act does not permit the assessment of borrower defenses to repayment before default, in administrative proceedings, or on a group basis. 2. Whether the court of appeals erred in ordering the district court to enter preliminary relief on a universal basis. January 10, 2025
But the Court today has done so, not only by inventing a novel and extravagant constitutional doctrine to take the victory away from traditional forces, but even by verbally disparaging as bigotry adherence to traditional attitudes. In Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the Supreme Court overruled Bowers. Rehnquist again dissented, along with Scalia and ...