Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case establishing that a sitting President of the United States has no immunity from civil law litigation, in federal court, for acts done before taking office and unrelated to the office. [1]
In 1988 and 1991 The National Law Journal named Clinton one of the 100 most influential lawyers in the United States. During law school, Clinton had worked as a staff attorney at the Children's Defense Fund and as a consultant to the Carnegie Council on Children. Clinton graduated from law school in 1973.
William Jefferson Clinton (né Blythe; born August 19, 1946) is an American lawyer and politician who served as the 42nd president of the United States from 1993 to 2001. A member of the Democratic Party, he previously served as the attorney general of Arkansas from 1977 to 1979 and as the governor of Arkansas from 1979 to 1981, and again from 1983 to 1992.
Clinton lost some key battleground states like Florida and Pennsylvania by fewer votes than third-party candidates got. In Florida, the former secretary of state lost by just shy of 120,000 votes ...
In October 1998, Clinton's attorneys tentatively offered $700,000 to settle the case, which was then the $800,000 which Jones' lawyers sought. [7] Clinton later agreed to an out-of-court settlement and paid Jones $850,000. [8] Bennett said the president made the settlement only so he could end the lawsuit for good and move on with his life. [9]
Fallout for lawyers who assisted Donald Trump in his efforts to overturn the 2020 election is coming into focus this week, as one ex-lawyer for Trump will find if he may lose his law license and ...
Eastman's comeuppance came a day after McDaniel's unceremonious exit, when a California State Bar judge recommended the attorney lose his law license for helping devise a cockamamie scheme to keep ...
[3] [4] Clinton declined to appeal the civil contempt of court ruling, citing financial problems, [3] but still maintained that his testimony complied with Wright's earlier definition of sexual relations. [3] In 2001, his license to practice law was suspended in Arkansas for five years and later by the United States Supreme Court. [5]