enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Miller v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._California

    Miller v. California , 413 U.S. 15 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court clarifying the legal definition of obscenity as material that lacks "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value". [ 1 ]

  3. Miller test - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test

    The Miller test was developed in the 1973 case Miller v.California. [3] It has three parts: Whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards", would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,

  4. United States v. Miller (1976) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller_(1976)

    The Supreme Court remanded Miller's case back to the Fifth Circuit. Justice William J. Brennan Jr. dissented, identifying that a similar case, Burrows v. Superior Court, [5] had been decided in the California Supreme Court that ruled that bank records were protected under the Fourth Amendment, in a manner consistent with California Bankers Ass'n v.

  5. California budget deal: Here’s who won and who lost in $300 ...

    www.aol.com/news/california-budget-deal-won-lost...

    For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us

  6. Some California congressional races are too close to call ...

    www.aol.com/california-congressional-races-too...

    Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Sacramento, won re-election in California’s 7th Congressional District, the Associated Press projected. Matsui, a member of Congress since 2005, faced Republican Tom Silva ...

  7. United States v. Miller - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

    United States v. Miller , 307 U.S. 174 (1939), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that involved a Second Amendment to the United States Constitution challenge to the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).

  8. Citigroup whistleblower denied share of $400 million penalty

    www.aol.com/news/citigroup-whistleblower-denied...

    A federal appeals court on Tuesday said a Citigroup vice president was not entitled to a share of a $400 million civil fine that the bank agreed to pay in October 2020 over its risk management ...

  9. Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnes_v._Glen_Theatre,_Inc.

    Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc. , 501 U.S. 560 (1991), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the First Amendment and the ability of the government to outlaw certain forms of expressive conduct.