Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Bond v. United States, 572 U.S. 844 (2014), follows up on the Supreme Court's 2011 case of the same name in which it had reversed the Third Circuit and concluded that both individuals and states can bring a Tenth Amendment challenge to federal law. The case was remanded to the Third Circuit, for a decision on the merits, which again ruled ...
Bond v. United States , 564 U.S. 211 (2011), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that individuals, just like states , may have standing to raise Tenth Amendment challenges to a federal law.
United States may refer to two distinct cases: Bond v. United States (2000), a United States Supreme Court decision involving the Fourth Amendment; The next two are the same case. In 2011 the Supreme Court decided Bond had standing to bring a suit before a Federal Court. The subsequent decision of the lower court, after the suit was heard, came ...
Bond v United States, 529 U.S. 334 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court Fourth Amendment case that applied the ruling of Minnesota v. Dickerson to luggage, which held that police may not physically manipulate items without a warrant without violating the Fourth Amendment. [ 1 ]
United States 294 U.S. 330 (1935): The owner of a $10,000 Liberty Bond sued in the Court of Claims for an additional $7,000 representing the dollar's devaluation. Again, the Court of Claims submitted a question of whether it could consider a claim beyond the face value of the bond.
Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884) – Court held that even though Elk was born in the United States, he was not a citizen because he owed allegiance to his tribe when he was born rather than to the U.S. and therefore was not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States when he was born.
A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked part of a Georgia law that restricts organizations from helping people pay bail so they can be released while their criminal cases are pending. U.S ...
Bond sued in federal court, but the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia upheld the House, with a three-judge panel concluding 2–1 that Bond's remarks exceeded criticism of national policy and that he could not in good faith take an oath to support the state and federal constitutions.