Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Case history; Prior: Roe v. Anderson, 966 F. Supp. 977 (E.D. Cal. 1997); affirmed, 134 F.3d 1400 (9th Cir. 1998); cert. granted, 524 U.S. 982 (1998).: Holding; California statute limiting new residents' benefits for the first year they live in the state is an unconstitutional discrimination and violation of their right to travel.
City of Los Angeles v. Patel, 576 U.S. 409 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a Los Angeles law, Municipal Code § 41.49, requiring hotel operators to retain records about guests for a 90-day period, is facially unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution because it does not allow for pre-compliance review.
All lawyer admissions are done through recommendations of the State Bar, which then must be ratified by the Supreme Court, and attorney discipline is delegated to the State Bar Court of California (although suspensions longer than three years must be independently decided upon by the Court). California's bar is the largest in the U.S. with ...
The Earl Warren Building located at 350 McAllister Street in San Francisco, California is the headquarters of the Supreme Court of California. [2] The building was completed in 1922, and is named for 30th governor of California and 14th Chief Justice of the United States, Earl Warren. [1]
WASHINGTON − The Supreme Court on Monday declined to decide whether Asian Americans and white students can challenge a school's admissions policy as discriminatory even if those racial groups ...
Sheetz v. County of El Dorado (Docket No. 22-1074) is a United States Supreme Court case regarding permit exactions under the Takings Clause.The Supreme Court held, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, that fees for land-use permits must be closely related and roughly proportional to the effects of the land use – the test established by Nollan v.
Now, the CSA hopes to elevate its appeal to the South Carolina Supreme Court. The organization filed a petition Aug. 7 asking for the state’s highest court to consider taking on the case.
Federal district court judge Edward Davila said that while NetChoice had made a compelling argument about the potential impact on free speech of intensive age verification requirements to use ...