Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Hamilton v. Regents of the University of California, 293 U.S. 245 (1934), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the "right of California to force its university students to take classes in military training" and reiterated that "[i]nstruction in military science is not instruction in the practice or tenets of a religion."
Brutus took the position that the Constitution should adopt the English system in toto (with minor modifications); Hamilton defended the present system. Several scholars believe that the case of Rutgers v. Waddington "was a template for the interpretive approach he [Hamilton] adopted in Federalist 78." [1] [2] [3]
The California Supreme Court ruling curtails the ability of public employees in the state to seek help from the courts in labor disputes.
Bica, 424 U.S. 351 (1976), was a case decided by the US Supreme Court on February 25, 1976, that challenged Section 2805(a) of the California Labor Code. [ 1 ] This case was monumental in defining the relationship between federal and state powers on immigration policy, as well as illustrating the ways in which state governments can fit into the ...
United States v. Hamilton, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 17 (1795), was a United States Supreme Court case in which a defendant committed on a charge of treason was released on bail, despite having been imprisoned upon a warrant of committal by a district court judge. [1]
The appellate court relied on a 1962 Supreme Court decision that said the Eighth Amendment prevented criminalizing someone’s status — in Martin v. Boise, the status of homelessness. The 1962 ...
Theane Evangelis, a lawyer for Uber, in an emailed statement maintained that the California court's ruling was incorrect, and said the Supreme Court could decide the issue in a future case ...
Swidler & Berlin v. United States, 524 U.S. 399 (1998), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the death of an attorney's client does not terminate attorney–client privilege with respect to records of confidential communications between the attorney and the client.