Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832), was a landmark case in which the United States Supreme Court vacated the conviction of Samuel Worcester and held that the Georgia criminal statute that prohibited non-Native Americans from being present on Native American lands without a license from the state was unconstitutional.
Age and voting rights in state elections Massachusetts v. Laird: 400 U.S. 886 (1970) Court declined to hear a case related to the constitutionality of the Vietnam War: Baird v. State Bar of Arizona: 401 U.S. 1 (1971) states cannot ban people from legal practice due to Communist party membership In re Stolar: 401 U.S. 23 (1971)
Even though he was a captain, Stewart later spoke out against the campaign, trying to share what he believed really happened in Nicaragua and clear up false ideas people had in the U.S. [28] Stewart recorded detailed recollections of the battle scenes and his personal interactions with William Walker, providing valuable insight into the campaign.
In 1972, the Supreme Court ruled in Furman v. Georgia that capital punishment was unconstitutional. Rigby and Seguin argue that this led to an increase in the illegal lynchings of African-Americans. [7] In 1976 the Supreme Court decision in Gregg v. Georgia [194] upheld the death penalty and overturned Furman v. Georgia. Rigby and Seguin argue ...
People v. Trump Court New York Supreme Court Full case name The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump Submitted March 30, 2023 Started April 15, 2024 Decided May 30, 2024 Verdict Guilty on all counts Charge First-degree falsifying business records (34 counts) Citation IND-71543-23 Case history Subsequent action Sentence of unconditional discharge Court membership Judge sitting ...
New York v. Trump is a civil investigation and lawsuit by the office of the New York Attorney General (AG) alleging that individuals and business entities within the Trump Organization engaged in financial fraud by presenting vastly disparate property values to potential lenders and tax officials, in violation of New York Executive Law § 63(12).
An illegal act by an officeholder constitutes political corruption only if the act is directly related to their official duties, is done under color of law or involves trading in influence. The activities that constitute illegal corruption differ depending on the country or jurisdiction.