Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
As the two-year legislative session nears an end, DeWine could sign House Bill 74, which would now give the attorney general the right to review and certify the title of an amendment.
Katz have qualified), and that the Patent Remedy Clarification Act did not have a sufficient basis to meet Fourteenth Amendment requirements. Although most courts have refused to enforce the CRCA, one district court upheld the Act in 2017 and the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals should rule on an appeal from that decision in mid to late 2018.
Ohio v. Robinette, 519 U.S. 33 (1996), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Fourth Amendment does not require police officers to inform a motorist at the end of a traffic stop that they are free to go before seeking permission to search the motorist's car.
Case Citation Year Vote Classification Subject Matter Opinions Statute Interpreted Summary; New York Times Co. v. Tasini: 533 U.S. 483: 2001: 7–2: Substantive: Collective works
Jul. 7—Issue 1, up for a statewide vote on Aug. 8, proposes making it harder to pass a constitutional amendment and making it harder for citizen-initiated amendments to get on the ballot in the ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
The CASE Act, along with the Trademark Modernization Act and the Protecting Lawful Streaming Act introduced by Senator Thom Tillis that would make commercial streaming of certain types of copyrighted content qualify as a felony crime, were passed as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 on December 21, 2020. [18]
United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding the use of an electronic surveillance device. [1] The defendants argued that the use of this device was a Fourth Amendment violation.