Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Held that state taxpayers do not have standing to challenge to state tax laws in federal court. 9–0 Massachusetts v. EPA: 2007: States have standing to sue the EPA to enforce their views of federal law, in this case, the view that carbon dioxide was an air pollutant under the Clean Air Act. Cited Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co. as precedent ...
Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman, 455 U.S. 363 (1982), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an organization may sue in its own right if it has been directly injured, for example through a "drain on the organization's resources", and that so-called "testers", individuals who sought to determine if a company was in violation of the law, may have standing in their ...
HUD v. Rucker, 535 U.S. 125 (2002), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held Congress's authorization of evictions of tenants from public housing where a tenant's invitee into the housing engaged in drug-related activity and the tenant did not know about it was constitutional.
Last week, Rocket Mortgage filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development over what Rocket Mortgage sees as the misuse of the Fair Housing Act. Rocket Mortgage says ...
Filed against the CHA, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and HUD Secretary Marcia Fudge, the lawsuit alleged the deal to lease 23 acres of vacant CHA land in Roosevelt Square ...
Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court case that addressed the law regarding standing to sue and mootness. The Court held that the plaintiff residents in the area of South Carolina's North Tyger River had standing to sue an industrial polluter, against whom ...
There have been calls for HUD to use disparate impact as a measure of housing discrimination. HUD's disparate impact rule was strengthened in 2013 and upheld in a court case in 2015. However, in 2020, HUD issued its final disparate impact rule, which shifted the burden of proof of discrimination to the victims of housing discrimination. [18]
Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727 (1972), is a Supreme Court of the United States case on the issue of standing under the Administrative Procedure Act.The Court rejected a lawsuit by the Sierra Club seeking to block the development of a ski resort at Mineral King valley in the Sierra Nevada Mountains because the club had not alleged any injury.