Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This is a list of cases before the United States Supreme Court that the Court has agreed to hear and has not yet decided. [1] [2] [3] Future argument dates are in parentheses; arguments in these cases have been scheduled, but have not, and potentially may not, take place.
Court documents said that a photo of maqluba, a popular Levantine rice dish, was found on Brunson's phone. The court documents described maqluba as a "Gulenist delicacy". [ 33 ] The Asheville Citizen-Times says that it mentions that Brunson's daughter, who was raised in Turkey, had sent the offending video of the maqluba to his iPhone, which ...
The post mentions a “Brunson Decision” as its evidence for Trump’s early return to the White House. The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has not made this decision. In 2023 ...
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 Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday in a case that could reduce the scope of one of the nation’s bedrock environmental laws. The case deals with the National Environmental Policy Act ...
The court stayed its decision until a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court. On January 5, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court granted Trump's petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of the Colorado Supreme Court ruling in Anderson v. Griswold on an accelerated pace; oral arguments were held on February 8, 2024.
But he said that could prove self-defeating in the long run, because Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett wouldn’t reward Trump for taking a rebellious stance ...
Bronston v. United States, 409 U.S. 352 (1973), is a seminal [1] [2] United States Supreme Court decision strictly construing the federal perjury statute. Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote for a unanimous Court that responses to questions made under oath that relayed truthful information in and of themselves but were intended to mislead or evade the examiner could not be prosecuted.