Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Texas, 601 U.S. 285 (2024), was a case that the Supreme Court of the United States decided on April 16, 2024. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] The case dealt with the Supreme Court's takings clause jurisprudence . Because the case touched on whether or not the 5th Amendment is self-executing, the case had implications for Trump v.
In 2021, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals issued an 8–1 decision, holding that the Texas Attorney General does not have unilateral authority to prosecute election code violations. [25] All three incumbent Judges up for re-election were part of the majority decision.
The court did not dismiss the case, but the ruling did ensure the 45th president would not face trial in the case before the November 2024 election. In a 6-3 decision, the court sent the matter ...
[11] [12] The court ordered the Texas governor to call a special meeting of legislators to redraw the maps in a timely manner, but the state instead turned to the U.S. Supreme Court to appeal the opinion, as well as to freeze the Texas federal district court's order to redraw the maps due to nearness of the 2018 elections. In a 5–4 decision ...
Texas v. Pennsylvania, 592 U.S. ___ (2020), was a lawsuit filed at the United States Supreme Court contesting the administration of the 2020 presidential election in four states in which Joe Biden defeated then-incumbent president Donald Trump.
Based in the Democratic stronghold of El Paso, the court hears cases from 17 counties in far west Texas. In the 3rd Court of Appeals, four Democrat justices were elected. In one race, one ...
Last year, the Texas state Legislature passed a law that shuttered the county’s new unified election administrator’s office, opened in 2020, and once again divided election responsibilities ...
[7] Both the District Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of the Inclusive Communities Project, holding that disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. [8] The Texas Department of Housing and Community then appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. [9]