Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927), is a US Supreme Court case, concerning the due process of judicial disqualification. [1] The court struck down an Ohio law that financially rewarded public officials for successfully prosecuting cases related to Prohibition.
The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.Usually considered one of the most consequential amendments, it addresses citizenship rights and equal protection under the law and was proposed in response to issues related to formerly enslaved Americans following the American Civil War.
Case history; Prior: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio: Holding; The students' suspension from a public school without a hearing violated the due process right protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Indiana University law professor Gerard Magliocca, an expert on the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban,” testifies at former President Donald Trump’s disqualification trial in Colorado ...
Anderson, had upheld Trump’s disqualification per Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, but the high court baldly rejected that: “Because the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States ...
Ohio ratified the Fourteenth Amendment on January 4, 1867, but Bingham continued to explain its extension of citizenship during the fall election season. [13] The Fourteenth Amendment has vastly expanded civil rights protections and has come to be cited in more litigation than any other amendment to the Constitution. [ 14 ]
Congress.gov, accessed Oct. 23, Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office Thank you for supporting our journalism. You can subscribe to our print edition, ad-free app or ...
Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400 (1991), was a United States Supreme Court case that re-examined the Batson Challenge. [1] Established by Batson v.Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), the Batson Challenge [2] prohibits jury selectors from using peremptory challenges on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, and sex.